SUMMER MOVIE PREVIEW- PART 3: JULY

The summer box office usually gets a sudden boom in July, following June, which tends to lean a little towards slightly less established properties.  The Independence Day weekend is famously reliable for making blockbusters, and mid-July has often been when one of the biggest, if not the biggest (depending on how early May went) films of the summer may come out, with the right film earning through into the slow down point of August.

July 3
DESPICABLE ME 2  (ANIMATED/FAMILY)  Voices of:  Steve Carell, Kristen Wiig, Russell Brand, Benjamin Bratt, Steve Coogan
PG for rude humor and mild action.
The sequel to animation studio Illumination Entertainment's 2010 surprise hit debut has about an average chance of matching the "quality" of the original, given the nature of the type of sequel, plus Illumination's couple films since which have been less warmly received.  Personally, I only thought the original was "okay", and I definitely think the Minions are overrated, with their irritating gibberish which just sounds like an adult gabbling to get attention.
See it?:  Maybe- For families, the options are pretty slim, so the "worth seeing" factor is far more lenient, so yes for families, but might be a bit embarrassing for anyone over 12 without a little tag-along to shift the blame toward.

THE LONE RANGER  (ACTION-ADVENTURE/WESTERN)  Starring:  Johnny Depp, Armie Hammer, Helena Bonham Carter, William Fichtner, Tom Wilkinson 
PG-13 for sequences of intense action and violence, and some suggestive material.
Disney has reunited the team behind their most successful franchise, Pirates of the Caribbean; with writers Ted Elliot and Terry Rossio, producer Jerry Bruckheimer, director Gore Verbinski (who directed three, but not the most recent) and star Johnny Depp; for a big budget potential franchise starter based on the classic radio/television character, by attempting to revamp the struggling western-adventure genre in a way similar to what they did for the pirate-swashbuckler.
See it?:  Yes, with caution.  I'm split on this, because my gut says that it looks incredibly awesome and fun, while my brain points out that for the past few years, Disney's big-budget live action movies have been bland and disappointing, and Depp has been struggling as a leading man, when he's better used as a character actor.  Either way, I say yes, if only to be sure.

July 12
GROWN UPS 2  (COMEDY)  Starring:  Adam Sandler, Kevin James, Chris Rock, David Spade, Salma Hayek
PG-13 for crude and suggestive content, language and some male rear nudity. 
Adam Sandler's obligatory annual appearance at the box office this year is a sequel to his 2010 turkey about a group of old friends (played by an all-star assortment of Happy Madison buffoons) who take part in a feature-length series of immature hijinks.
See it?:  No.  If for whatever inexplicable reason you're actually an Adam Sandler fan, I guess you might just as well, but the fact that the preview shows a CGI deer peeing on Sandler, should be reason enough not to see it.  On the other hand, Rob Schneider couldn't make it to this round, and he's the worst of the worst.


PACIFIC RIM  (SCI-FI/ACTION)  Starring:  Idris Elba, Charlie Hunnam, Charlie Day, Ron Perlman
PG-13 for sequences of intense sci-fi action and violence throughout, and brief language. 
A premium example of Hollywood high concept filmmaking at its best, this big budget sci-fi/action film from the writer/director of the Hellboy films and PAN'S LABYRINTH is about giant robots fighting giant monsters.  More specifically, tremendous, Godzilla-esque creatures called kaiju (Japanese for "strange beast", and the genre in which Godzilla films are included in Japan) invade human world from beneath the sea, and the humans retaliate by building giant robot suits called Jaegers (German for "hunter") to fight back.
See it?:  Yes.  It may sound brain dead and look like a TRANSFORMERS imitator, but not only is there a definite entertainment factor here, but Guillermo del Toro as director and co-writer is as good as a guarantee that it will be an abnormally sophisticated type of outrageous sci-fi action.

July 17
TURBO  (ANIMATED/FAMILY)  Voices of:  Ryan Reynolds, Paul Giamatti, Maya Rudolph, Michael Pena, Michelle Rodriguex, Luis Guzman
PG for  some mild action and thematic elements.
DreamWorks Animation is trying to bring in some new properties this year after a strong concentration of sequels and spin-offs lately, so following up March's THE CROODS, is this action-comedy about a snail who dreams of racing and becomes the fastest snail alive after an accident results in nitrous oxide fusing with his DNA.  The advertising suggests a hybrid of the Fast & Furious franchise, RATATOUILLE and CARS.
See It?:  Yes, with possible stipulations.  Another family movie that get leniency for being family-friendly, it probably will still depend most on it appeal to children (especially boys, ages five to ten), while DreamWorks will probably throw in a smattering of pop culture references and such ilk to appeal to older audiences.

July 19
THE CONJURING  (HORROR/THRILLER)  Starring:  Patrick Wilson, Vera Farmiga, Joey King
R for sequences of disturbing violence and terror.
Based on allegedly true events, James Wan's newest fear-fest tells the story of a 1970s haunting of a Rhode Island home, and the investigation by supernatural investigators Ed and Loraine Warren (Patrick Wilson and Vera Farmiga, respectively), most famous for their controversial involvement with the "Amityville Horror" case.  It has been proudly touted by the filmmakers as being rated R simply for being, "just so scary," after the MPAA informed them that there simply wasn't anything in particular that could be removed in order to get a PG-13 rating.
See it?:  Reportedly, test audience responses were highly positive, thus encouraging the Warner Bros. to move it's early 2013 release date to the summer season (hardly a regular time to release a horror film), and although Wan's direction is sometimes shaky, he clearly has strong potential, as seen in movies like SAW and INSIDIOUS.  If you're a horror fan, then you'll almost certainly want to check it out; if you're easily spooked, then it might be too much; for movie fans like myself, I'm interested, but I'm not sure about seeing a horror film in the summer.  Either way, it's probably better as a rental.

R.I.P.D.  (ACTION/COMEDY/FANTASY)  Starring:  Ryan Reynolds, Jeff Bridges, Kevin Bacon, Mary-Louise Parker
PG-13 for violence, sci-fi/fantasy action, some sensuality, and language including sex references.
The title acronym stands for "Rest in Peace Depatment"; an afterlife law enforcement agency that recruits deceased law officers to track down and apprehend rogue spirits and demons and such who breach the veil between life and the afterlife.  With Jeff Bridges playing his over-the-top schtick as the crusty veteran and Ryan Reynolds as a new recruit, the advertising so far has been suggestive of something very similar to the Men in Black films, while also mixing in some strong HELLBOY and BEETLE JUICE elements.
See It?:  Maybe.  It doesn't really look like it could be argued for a case of 'required viewing', but it will probably be light, fun, insubstantial fluff.

RED 2  (ACTION/COMEDY)  Starring:  Bruce Willis, Helen Mirren, John Malkovich, Anthony Hopkins, Catherine Zeta-Jones
PG-13 for pervasive action and violence including frenetic gunplay, and for some language and drug material.
RED was a surprise hit in Fall 2010, based on a DC Comic that apparently no one outside of the business of comics had heard of, and now, Summit Studios (best known for THE TWILIGHT SAGA) is hoping to bring their geriatric ass-kickers up to the franchise level.  In this follow-up, Agent Frank Moses (Bruce Willis), Status: Retired, Extremely Dangerous; is pulled back into action once again, this time thanks to a Cold War-era project that's come back to light in a dangerous way.  Joining the returning cast of the first film (including Helen Mirren and John Malkovich) are Catherine Zeta-Jones, G.I. JOE's Byung-hun Lee and Anthony Hopkins. 
See It?:  The first RED was fun but unremarkable, and this one looks far more bombastic and frenetic, but the previews also suggest a very strong comedic tone (the new director, Dean Parisot, made GALAXY QUEST), so maybe watch for the reviews on this one, then act accordingly.

Review: Disney's THE LONE RANGER

THE LONE RANGER  (WESTERN/ACTION)
Three out of Four Stars
Directed by Gore Verbinski
Starring: Johnny Depp, Armie Hammer, William Fitchner, Ruth Wilson, Tom Wilkinson, Helena Bonham Carter, Barry Pepper, James Badge Dale
PG-13 for sequences of intense action and violence, and some suggestive material.
Verdict: The creative team behind Disney's super-lucrative Pirates of the Caribbean franchise gets back together with hopes of doing the same for the adventure-western genre as they did for the pirate-swashbuckler, and the results are around the same level (maybe a tad under), bringing along many of the same strengths, including some of the best action set-pieces of the summer, but also with similar weaknesses, such as script and tonal inconsistencies.  The obligatory origin setups weigh down the film where a leaner plot and more fun would be preferable, but it's a delightful summer thrill ride and a sequel would be very welcome indeed.

You May Enjoy THE LONE RANGER if you liked:

THE MASK OF ZORRO (1998)

PIRATES OF THE CARIBBEAN: AT WORLD'S END (2007)

RANGO (2011)

JOHN CARTER (2012)

Walt Disney Pictures' THE LONE RANGER is a mess.  It's littered with odd plot elements that lead nowhere, the tone is inconsistent and at two-and-a-half hours long, it could have easily been trimmed up to something leaner and more efficient.  But, damn it, it's also really fun. deliriously fun at times even.
The film is based on, or rather, inspired by the classic radio character, The Lone Ranger, who has also starred in his own serial, a television series and a couple films previously.  The title character is John Reid (Armie Hammer), a lawyer in a family of lawmen, traveling west to the frontier where his brother, Dan (James Badge Dale), Dan is carrying on in their father's footsteps as a Texas Ranger.  The railroad is building through the territory, with the progress being overseen by Latham Cole (Tom Wilkinson, who seeks to bring law and progress to the Wild West.  The scourge of the territory is Butch Cavendish (William Fitchner), a sadistic outlaw with a penchant for cannibalising his victims and a personal vendetta for Dan, so when his hideout is located, Dan and John, who's just been deputized, take a posse out to either kill (Dan's preference) or arrest (John's preference) Butch.  Thanks to treacherous machinations within their group though, they're sprung upon and John sees his brother brutally murdered.  When Tonto, a Comanche spirit warrior who's "mind is broken", wanders upon the remains of the posse, he prepares the bodies for burial but is informed by the "Spirit Horse" that John is a "Spirit Walker," chosen to assist Tonto on a quest for justice. 

The buddy cop genre- late 19th Century.

The fact that Disney hopes this will be a new franchise on the level of Pirates of the Caribbean is obvious and unmitigated, and the team behind the first three of those films, including director Gore Verbinski, producer Jerry Bruckheimer, writers Ted Elliot and Terry Rossio and of course, star Johnny Depp are all together again for THE LONE RANGER.  Naturally, this makes those films a bit of a measuring stick to judge this film by, but I have an unpopular opinion toward those films in that I loved them more than most people, and the much-maligned, bloated PIRATES OF THE CARIBBEAN: AT WORLD'S END was probably my favorite of them, so my comparisons in that regard may not be consistent with the sensibilities of a majority.  Regardless, I recognize that THE LONE RANGER has a great many problems.  It's second major movie of the summer to have had a well-publicized production riddled with misfortune, delays and out-of-control budget inflation, following the surprisingly successful WORLD WAR Z, but I don't think there's as much evidence of revisions in THE LONE RANGER, but part of that may just have to do with how bizarre the movie is anyway.  The sense of humor here is similar to that in AT WORLD'S END, with an odd and hallucinogenic approach to comedy that gleefully damns reason and relevance, such as a largely inconsequential but recurring "nature out of balance" element.  Around the time that Disney actually shut down production after the flop of JOHN CARTER in Spring 2012, news got out that there was a supernatural subplot involving werewolves in THE LONE RANGER; during budget revisions, that was (thankfully) written out (although there are clearly apparent elements lingering here and there), but there are light supernatural elements, but nothing so prominent as in Pirates of the Caribbean, and most of it played for comedy or otherwise disregarded.

John Ford's Country

Despite the budget revisions, after the film was headed toward an estimated $250 million cost, the final tally is believed to have wound up at about as much, and it really isn't too hard to see how that all came about.  While Disney might have done just as well or better with a less bombastic route, THE LONE RANGER is a model of excess, with extensive and destructive action sequences that could have easily been wound down some, and some that may just have well not been there at all.  By the time the relevant plot even comes around, the film has spent about 30 minutes, including a prolonged train heist/wreck sequence, and that's not even the "big" train wreck action scene.
Yet, despite all the chastising that I feel compelled to lay out, I enjoyed it immensely.  Perhaps I should be cautious, because I did enjoy PIRATES OF THE CARIBBEAN: ON STRANGER TIDES (with which Verbinski was not affiliated) the first time around but just felt embarrassed in subsequent viewings, but I think that THE LONE RANGER is more on par with 1995's WATERWORLD (I do mean that in the best way possible), but not quite so idiotic.  My feelings about it all are rather in contrast to my feelings on MAN OF STEEL, which was a not-so-bad movie but so disappointing nonetheless, while THE LONE RANGER is hot mess that's just too fun to condemn.  I think it's a shame that we get so few old-fashioned adventure films anymore, so I appreciate that Disney is still trying, but they could be so much better with more prudence, i.e., with less expense on visual effects and pyrotechnics, and more attention to script development and action choreography.
Speaking of action choreography, THE LONE RANGER does have some of the most entertaining and kinetic action set-pieces of the summer, much welcome after the overly destructive and monotonous action in MAN OF STEEL.  The climactic sequence between two speeding locomotives put an idiotic grin on my face as a swelling rendition of The William Tell Overture booms on the soundtrack.  I'll admit, as fun as that was, it was inconsistent with what seemed to be the tone of the film, but then again, the intended tone is almost impossible to pinpoint.  We're talking about a film that has old-fashioned heroics, mysticism, cannibalism, cartoony gags, a cross-dressing bandit, a one-legged prostitute, monstrous desert rabbits, a mocking "Hi-yo Silver!" moment but sincere and fully-invested use of William Tell Overture, and all this wrapped up in a framing story where the geriatric Tonto recounts his tale (Depp's makeup is excellent).
When the film goes dark, it is surprisingly dark, and although Disney cautiously entered PG-13 territory only ten years ago with PIRATES OF THE CARIBBEAN, THE LONE RANGER now strains the rating with violence that, while given more leniency thanks to genre elements, has at least a couple of genuinely sick moments and more blood than the typical PG-13 action film (even if that's not saying all that much).  They also get kind of sexy, in a primarily comic fashion, in a whorehouse scene, filled with kinky sight gags and one-liners.

"Madness?  This...is...DISNEY!"

With its massive budget and numerous other issues, the success of Disney's latest is highly in question stateside, but with a PIRATES OF THE CARIBBEAN crew and Depp starring, it will likely fare better than JOHN CARTER.  Either way, today's films rely most strongly on the international market, and although it's been a long time since a big budget western last came along, Depp's involvement and the promise of high octane and inventive action bode well for business overseas.  I would love to see a follow up to THE LONE RANGER, but with the stipulation that it be leaner, meaner and altogether more efficient.  The consistent problem area for these big budget Disney adventures seems to be the scripts, but Elliot and Rossio clearly have great ideas for these genres, so if they wrote the story treatments and a more reliable writer wrote the screenplay, this could develop into something just as fun, but more durable.  As always though, I reserve the right to change my mind with future viewings, but for now, I'll be one of the few defenders.  I'm like the Lone Ranger of the movies or something.

Review: WORLD WAR Z

WORLD WAR Z
Two out of Four Stars
Directed by Marc Forster
Starring: Brad Pitt, Mireille Enos, Daniella Kurtesz, James Badge Dale
PG-13 for intense frightening zombie sequences, violence and disturbing images.
Verdict: Brad Pitt's Marc Forster-directed zombie epic finally reveals itself after a famously tumultuous production, and the result is scattershot, with a cripplingly inconsistent story flow and the basic pitfalls of making zombie terror for a PG-13 rating (while also showing ingenuity for getting such ideas across), but there are also undeniably astonishing sights of zombie apocalyptic mayhem and destruction on an incredibly massive scale and Forster's direction provides great moments of nerve-wracking intensity.

WORLD WAR Z is a strange beast and was always destined to be.  Writing the first draft of the screenplay, writer J. Michael Straczynski described the book on which the film is derived as, "[reading] like a UN Report."  The book, World War Z: An Oral History of the Zombie War, written by Max Brooks (son of comedy filmmaker Mel Brooks), is intended as exactly that; it is a pseudo-historical account, comprised of personal accounts of a zombie apocalypse.
Zombie movies are traditionally low-budget affairs, rarely with budgets upwards of $30 million.  The first major zombie film was George A. Romero's NIGHT OF THE LIVING DEAD (1968), made on a shoestring budget, and his 1978 follow-up, DAWN OF THE DEAD was produced on the modern equivalent of about $1.7 million.  Zack Snyder's 2004 remake of DAWN OF THE DEAD, which can be partially-credited with reinvigorating the zombie sub-genre, was made for about $26 million and was a major hit with a worldwide gross of $102 million.  WORLD WAR Z was greenlit with a budget of $125 million, a very large budget for a zombie film to begin with, but over the course of a very troubled production, including extensive re-writes and re-shoots, the estimated tally reached around $190 million.  At best, it might have been able to make back its budget.
By the time I went to see it though, WORLD WAR Z had already far exceeded expectations with a $66 million opening weekend gross, even up against MONSTERS UNIVERSITY and the second week for MAN OF STEEL.  Critics had even been favorable to it overall, so I was favorably interested myself, however, having seen it now, I cannot fully recommend it.  I'm not very partial to the zombie genre though, and that information may be useful to a reader investigating whether or not to spend the time and money.  I love SHAUN OF THE DEAD, and I enjoyed ZOMBIELAND, and on a moderate level, the original NIGHT OF THE LIVING DEAD and 28 DAYS LATER, but I'm pretty indifferent to the rest.  The zombie genre generally functions as a justifiable scenario for gory carnage (you get the human gore and such, but the stipulation that the zombies are soulless and technically not "human"), but in the finer cases, with socio-political commentary, but for WORLD WAR Z to fit the desired PG-13 rating, gory carnage must be replaced with something less direct, namely, suspense, that being the intention at least.
Unlike this past February's zombie rom-com, WARM BODIES, though, WORLD WAR Z has the benefit of a widely-scoped aesthetic, which justifies a less intimate type of violence, and when it sticks with this advantage, the thrills are awesome.  The loose plot, follows former (as of recent) U.N. investigator Gerry Lane (Brad Pitt) as he traverses the globe in the midst of a worldwide zombie epidemic to locate the source of the virus.  Early into the film, as the epidemic first makes itself known, there are astonishing and intense scenes of city-scale destruction as legions of zombies swarm the streets, indiscriminately feasting on the uninfected and wreaking havoc in their bustling numbers.  These scenes clearly use CG zombies rather than live actors in makeup, but in some ways, it works to make them seem more unnerving.  The more intimate scenes much more troublesome for this PG-13 zombie thriller though; as director Marc Forster tries hard to convey the strongest idea of ghastly horror without actually showing it, the effect comes off as coy and distracting.  The zombies who do appear as actors in makeup are gruesome enough, but, and maybe it's just me, but the sounds that they make (most notably in these closeup cases) are like inhaling while vocalizing, and it's like fingernails on a chalkboard to me.
The greatest weakness of the film is definitely in its plot structure though, and in a film so convoluted in the creation of its story process, it's not very apparent where exactly things have gone wrong, though it can probably be attributed to something in the rewriting stage.  There isn't a lot of story; it really is just Pitt's paper-thin character traveling the world between a small several locations, talking to people about the virus and then bolting once zombies break into whatever stronghold he's in at the time.  It's insubstantial and messy, and at times, more than a little convenient.  Furthermore, the conclusion borders on being too dumb, even for a summer blockbuster.  There are a few scenes involving Lane's family, being kept on an aquatic Army base of sorts, and with little going on there either, but they keep reminding us that they are there too.
To his credit, Pitt still makes an alright leading man, even when his character has minimal scripted personality, background or particular character traits to speak of.  But even Pitt can't bear the weight of a would-be epic all by himself.

Review: MONSTERS UNIVERSITY

MONSTERS UNIVERSITY  (FAMILY/ANIMATED)
Two and a Half out of Four Stars
Directed by Dan Scanlon
Voices of:  Billy Crystal, John Goodman, Helen Mirren, Peter Sohn, Joel Murray, Steve Buscemi, Nathan Fillion
Rated G (scary moments, mostly mild)
Verdict:  Technologically stellar and gorgeously rendered, Pixar's latest work is merely watchable if unimpressive in just about every other department, with surprisingly thin characterization, an airy formula and a shortage of humor.  Regardless, it is fine family entertainment; likely to delight children and watchable enough for the older audiences escorting them, even if it won't last long after you leave the theater and may not be worth going to for the viewers who remember seeing the original in a theater, that is unless you can find someone under ten to tag along.

Pixar, the studio that is "all about story", is not what they once were.  Their newest film, MONSTERS UNIVERSITY, which returns to the world of MONSTERS INC. when the scaring team of Mike Wazowski (v. Billy Crystal) and James "Sulley" Sullivan (v. John Goodman) first met in college, is their most formulaic film to date by far, albeit not their weakest film.  While it's far more watchable than the obnoxious toy commercial that was CARS 2, the characterizations are nonetheless strikingly thin, the laugh rate is low and often cheap and the overall product feels hollow and airy.
Being a Pixar film, their since-tarnished reputation of greatness makes one prone to be overly harsh, so it is important to emphasize that it's still a largely positive film, especially for its main demographic of families and children.  While MONSTERS INC. was one of the more innocent films of Pixar's "Golden Age", MONSTERS UNIVERSITY is actually juvenile, but will delight those under the age of ten, while being watchable and even somewhat entertaining for their older escorts.  However, unlike top-notch family entertainment ought to, it probably doesn't offer enough for most of those older viewers who might be tempted to brave the children-dominated crowd without one of their own.
After the more Sulley-centric original, Mike takes the spotlight in MONSTERS UNIVERSITY, which opens at his childhood, when he first witnesses the going-ons at Monsters Incorporated's Scare Floor and is inspired to devote his life to becoming a Scarer.  Through years of hard work and devoted studying, Mike is admitted into Monsters University's prestigious Scare Program.  Despite his hard-pressed devotion, Mike finds himself shown up by Sullivan, the son of a legendary scarer, who coasts by on his family name and natural ability.  After they get in a conflict during a testing session, Mike and Sulley are ejected from the Scaring Program by the hard-boiled Dean Hardscrabble (v. Helen Mirren).  With the approaching campus Scare Games, Mike sees his last chance to become a scarer, but competitors must be in a fraternity, so he joins the only frat accepting anyone:  Oozma Kappa, a traditional assortment of misfits who've also been kicked out of the Scaring Program.  Short on one member, and Sullivan having nothing to lose, he joins the Oozmas, to the chagrin of Mike, but as the Oozma's best hope.  Further upping the stakes is Mike's bet with Hardscrabble, that if the Oozmas win the Scare Games, she'll re-admit them into the Scare Program, but if they lose, Mike and Sulley will leave the school.
Strong points first; the CG rendering is magnificent, beautiful, and it ought to be, considering how long they've been at it.  It honestly looks like a true, real world environment, and a lot of the set designs are very stimulating.  The film's use of technology is definitely its greatest point of recommendation.  Occasionally, there are some really fun visual surprises, especially a Scare Games challenge that takes place in a library.
Entertainment-wise, it has enormous value for younger audiences, with plenty of colorful, soft-edged characters and visual humor; for older audiences, the it is very watchable, although it is less likely to engage them for the very same simplicity which makes it so ideal for children.  There are plenty of nods to classic (and far more R-rated) college comedies, and those who were children when MONSTERS INC. was released twelve years ago might have fun picking up on the occasional nods and origins to various elements and characters from that film. 
And even for all the simplicity in the prequel to Pixar's arguably most innocent film, there's also a couple of refreshing themes that are touched upon, if lightly, that many children's films avoid at ridiculous costs.
Now, the negatives; most prominent is the film's heavy reliance on formula.  The story rarely, and hardly ever, deviates from its formula of one measure REVENGE OF THE NERDS, one measure ANIMAL HOUSE and half a measure of THE DEFIANT ONES, all watered down to suit a family audience in a way that has been seen too many times before.
The humor is surprisingly infrequent for Pixar, and the success rate of the gags is disappointingly low as well, often due to an eye roll-inducing cheapness.  Where the film's humor works best is when it plays it weird, such as the Gonzo of Oozma Kappa, Art (v. Charlie Day), who delivers some surprisingly funny and bizarre quips in response to unlikely situations.
For a film that works so successfully on a visual level, most of the new monster designs are sadly bland and uncreative, relying largely on a few basic shapes in a set of colors.  Of course, there are a few exceptions, such as the creepy Hardscrabble who looks the part of a hybrid between a dragon and a centipede, and Art, who resembles a purple, furry arc with a face in the middle.
I think the biggest disappointment here is the weakness of the characterizations.  MONSTERS INC. wasn't the richest of Pixar's best, but the characters were well-layered and filled out.  These characters, including the ones returning, feel incidental, with little more than a minor bit of soul-probing late in the film.  Added to this is the film's pacing and generic plot leave the film with a hollow, airy feeling, like a lacking of substance.
Then again, the hollowness allows the film a breezy sense of being, so while you may not take away much, it isn't boring.  So go out and take the family; it's as good or better than most of the slim pickings of family films out there; not because everyone else is still behind Pixar; but because either due to the competition's progress, or Pixar's apparent lack of focus, the field is more leveled these days; but MONSTERS UNIVERSITY is familiar, comfortable and harmless.

Short Film: THE BLUE UMBRELLA, Directed by Saschka Unseld
Three out of Four Stars

The animated short film playing with MONSTERS UNIVERSITY, as per Pixar tradition, is a mildly charming fantasy about a romance between a pair of umbrellas in the city.  Again, the technology is the true star here, as the short film is primarily a showcase for incredible "ultra-photorealistic" computer rendering.  The fantasy/romance angle feels slightly reminiscent of PAPERMAN, the short film that played with last year's WRECK-IT RALPH, but falls far short of that standard.  On the other hand, it's pleasant and sweet, with some excellent eye candy.

Review: BEFORE MIDNIGHT

BEFORE MIDNIGHT  (ROMANTIC DRAMA)
*Four out of Four Stars*
Directed by Richard Linklater
Starring: Ethan Hawke, Julie Delpy
R for sexual content/nudity and language.
Verdict:  Jesse's and Celine's love story comes to its third chapter almost 20 years after it first began (in both the film and real time), as their relationship is strained under the pressure of middle age, parent and spouse responsibilities and unrealized ideals.  Darker and more ambitious than its predecessors, it is no less fulfilling, beautiful, intelligent and emotional; continuing one of the greatest romances to ever grace the screen.

It's been nearly twenty years since a young American man named Jesse (Ethan Hawke) approached a young Parisian woman named Celine (Julie Delpy) aboard a train traveling through Austria and convinced her to spend a night with him getting to know one another in Vienna in the summer of 1994, in the 1995 release, BEFORE SUNRISE.  They promised to meet again in six months, but nine years later, in 2004's BEFORE SUNSET, we learned that the meeting never happened when one was unable to show, but Jesse wrote a fictionalized account of it in a novel, and Celine showed up at one of his book signings in a Paris bookshop, after which we learned that he now had a son and a disintegrating marriage, and she was trapped in a string of bad relationships and frustrating realizations.  The last time we saw them, the couple was sitting in Celine's apartment in Paris, and Jesse had chosen to miss his flight.
If you're familiar with and have seen those films, I don't need to convince you to see BEFORE MIDNIGHT; I only need to say that it does not disappoint at all.  If you haven't seen BEFORE SUNRISE or BEFORE SUNSET, you should; they are "must-see" films if the term ever described a movie, but in fact, you do not have to have seen them to see BEFORE MIDNIGHT.  Those first two film, in relation to this third, could be considered backstory; interesting, but unnecessary to understand the plot or the characters.
But as was the way before, there really isn't much "plot" to BEFORE MIDNIGHT, but the characters are in full force, completely carrying the whole weight of the film by themselves as they pretty much converse their way through the entire film.  It picks up another nine years after BEFORE SUNSET, and Jesse has long ago left his broken marriage and is on the worst of terms with his ex-wife, but remains close (as much as possible) with his now-teenage son, who's leaving after spending the summer just as the film opens.  Jesse is now in a committed long-term relationship with Celine, with twin daughters, and the whole family is vacationing in Greece.  Celine is environmental activist, but with feelings of futility so she's now considering a government position.  Whereas the previous films had a sense of urgency driven by choices that demand making, MIDNIGHT finds Jesse and Celine having made their choices now living the consequences, for better or worse.
When they were young, they spoke of romantic ideals and intellectual thinking; there was a lot of romantic projection, but dreams have since come true, including the parts that they hadn't considered when they were young.  Both have aged into their forties, with all the insecurities that accompany that time of life, and this film's showcase piece is an explosive argument that their feature-length conversation descends into in a hotel room which was intended to be the setting for a night of romance.  Not to spoil anything, but it isn't a depressing film either, and as they did before, it closes out with warm-hearted hope, but this time even in the face of real-world adversity.

Now on the third chapter after eighteen and a half years, this criminally-underseen independent romantic saga has lost nothing; using dialogue in ways that have been lost to the rest of cinema, to express powerful and fascinating ideas and emotions in a strikingly honest, forward and consistent manner.  Richard Linklater, who directed the film, co-wrote the film with his stars, as with the previous installments; an highly ingenius innovation that allows Delpy and Hawke to have a strong input to their respective characters, making them far more consistent and honest and introspective than the average movie character, while Linklater provides a consistent vision that binds the elements together.
BEFORE MIDNIGHT is a completely no-holds-barred pulpit of human confession, feeling and open pondering; more raw and bare than almost any other film you're likely to see this year.  More cleanly tied off than its predecessors, it doesn't exactly demand for a follow-up, but by the time another nine years have passed, if the team gets back together for a 2022 release, I see no reason why a fourth installment in the romantic journeyings of Celine and Jesse wouldn't be an enormously welcome development.  As it stands for now, BEFORE MIDNIGHT is the best film of the year thus far.

Movie Dads and What We've Learned From Them

Happy Fathers' Day!  To commemorate the busiest time of the year for the necktie industry, we've gathered together a list of some notable movie dads, the best and the worst, and the greatest life lessons they've had to offer, whatever their merit:

• Giuseppe Conlon from IN THE NAME OF THE FATHER (played by Pete Postlethwaite)

Father Ranking: 9/10- Maybe overly stern at times, but unwaveringly devoted and authoratative.
Defining Paternal Moment:

Mentoring his rebellious son, Gerry (Daniel Day-Lewis), within prison walls, to be a responsible adult.

Fatherly Quote:

Giuseppe:  I want you to have some respect.

Gerry:  For who?

Giuseppe:  For yourself.

 

• Atticus Finch from TO KILL A MOCKINGBIRD (played by Gregory Peck)

Father Ranking: 10/10- A single father in the Depression, setting a too-perfect example and sharing more proverbs than the Bible.

Great Paternal Moment:  Raising diversity-embracing children in Depression-era Alabama.

Fatherly Quote:  "There's a lot of ugly things in this world, son. I wish I could keep 'em all away from you. That's never possible."

 

• Royal Tenenbaum from THE ROYAL TENENBAUMS (played by Gene Hackman)

Father Ranking: 3/10-  Hilariously self-absorbed and widely insensitive, his brood has grown up with a vast assortment of mental, emotional and social handicaps.  Still, he makes an effort, albeit dishonest, late in the game.
Great Paternal Moment:
Faking cancer to get his family to love him.
Fatherly Quote:
"Anybody interested in grabbing a couple of burgers and hittin' the cemetery?"

• Bob Parr/Mr. Incredible from THE INCREDIBLES (voiced by Craig T. Nelson)

Father Ranking: 6/10- Granted, we get to know him best during a period of mid-life crisis, so he's somewhat distracted from his responisbilities, but he tries hard and shares bad guy-killing opportunities with the offspring, so it balances out.
Great Paternal Moment:
Intervening!
Fatherly Quote:
Bob aka Mr. Incredible:  The important thing is that your mother and I are a team, united against the forces of...
Helen aka Mrs. Incredible aka Mrs. Incredible:  Pigheadedness?
Bob aka Mr. Incredible:  I was gonna say evil.

 

• Mr. Banks from MARY POPPINS (played by David Tomlinson)

Father Ranking:  7/10- Again, this is largely a story about him learning to be a better father than he has been, but even while he's often misguided, his interest is strongly devoted to his family.
Great Paternal Moment: 
"You know, begging your pardon, but the one my heart goes out to is your father. There he is in that cold, heartless bank day after day, hemmed in by mounds of cold, heartless money. I don't like to see any living thing caged up."  -Bert the Chimney Sweep
Fatherly Quote:
"My dear, never confuse efficiency with a liver complaint."

• Jim Baker from SIXTEEN CANDLES (played by Paul Dooley)

Father Ranking: 7/10-  Obviously not perfect, but utimately, Samantha's only redeemable family member.
Great Paternal Moment:  Remembering his daughter's sixteenth birthday, albiet a couple hours after the fact.
Fatherly Quote:  "Why do you think you're a dork? I don't think you're a dork. I don't think Mom thinks you're a dork."

• Marlin from FINDING NEMO (voiced by Albert Brooks)

Father Ranking: 9/10-  Neurotic, but justifiably so, he's a single dad learning to take the occasional leap of faith.
Great Paternal Moment: 
Traversing the ocean with accompaniment of a mentally-handicapped Blue Tang to rescue his gimpy son from and Australian dentist's fish tank.
Fatherly Quote:
"I have to find my son!  I have to tell him how old sea turtles are!" 

• Dill Penderghast from EASY A (played by Stanley Tucci)

Father Ranking: 9/10-  A breath of fresh air, showing sincerity and wisdom through a veil of cornball wit and theatrics.

Great Paternal Moment:

Being accepting of his daughter's homosexual boyfriend and planning the right time to tell his black son that he was adopted.

Fatherly Quote:

"I'd take a bullet for you, you know that. Right between the eyes. I would slit my throat rather than say something to someone that you didn't want me to say."

• Noah Levenstein from AMERICAN PIE (played by Eugene Levy)

Father Ranking: 7/10- An buffoon with awkward and often inappropriate teaching moments, but earnest and genuinely trying.
Great Paternal Moment: 
Buying a vast assortment of lurid periodicals for a father-son talk.
Fatherly Quote: 
"We'll just tell your mom that...we ate it all." [in regards to a particularly embarrassing pie]

• Vito Corleone from THE GODFATHER and THE GODFATHER PART II (played by Marlon Brando and Robert DeNiro (respectively))

Father Ranking: 10/10- Though his business practices are obviously shady, his devotion to family is unparalleled, and as a family man, he is approachable and wise.

Great Parental Moment:  Teaching Michael when and who to kill after he becomes Godfather.
Fatherly Quote: 
"A man who doesn't spend time with his family can never be a real man."-THE GODFATHER
"To you, she's beautiful. For me, there's only my wife and son." -THE GODFATHER PART II

• Mufasa from THE LION KING (voiced by James Earl Jones)

Father Ranking: 10/10-  The ultra-dad; protective, providing, textbook wise and an overall badass.
Great Paternal Moment: 
Just everything, although dying in the process of protecting his son, and later arriving as a ghost with some very timely advice are particularly of note.
Fatherly Quote:  
"Being brave doesn't mean you go looking for trouble."
 

• Darth Vader from the STAR WARS films (played by David Prowse/voiced by James Earl Jones)

Father Ranking: 7/10-  His methods seem overly harsh and there have been some long stretches of abandonment, but goes to extreme meausres to find his kid after realizing that he didn't kill the baby when he killed his pregnant wife, plus he kills his only friend for picking on his son.
Great Paternal Moment: 
Chopping off his son's hand for disobeying his teachers' instructions, not to mention offering him a co-rulership of the freaking universe.
Fatherly Quote:
"I am your father."

Review: THIS IS THE END

THIS IS THE END  (COMEDY/HORROR)
Three and a Half out of Four Stars
Directed by Seth Rogen & Evan Goldberg
Starring:  Seth Rogen, Jay Baruchel, James Franco, Craig Robinson, Danny McBride, Jonah Hill, Emma Watson, Michael Cera
R for crude and sexual content throughout, brief graphic nudity, pervasive language, drug use and some violence.
Verdict:  It's an idea so simple and hysterically funny that it's a wonder that nobody thought of it before, but also played more directly and unapologetic than what might have seemed acceptable.  Bizarre, extremely gross and achingly funny; it isn't for all tastes, but it is brilliant in the stupidest way.

THIS IS THE END is the funniest film to come along in recent memory and also one of the most disgusting.  The concept is so funny and so simple; it's a wonder that no one thought of it before, but the idea isn't what really makes it, I guess.  What really pulls this film together is Seth Rogen's and Evan Goldberg's (the writing team behind SUPERBAD) directorial debut and writing that is so unapologetic and ballsy in the midst of a story so extreme, where most filmmakers would more likely look for some way to avoid the natural, but dangerously ridiculous flow.
It is a hilarious realization of the scenario which all conservative small town congregations have been talking about for years: the destruction of vain, hedonistic Hollywood in the midst of the Rapture as described in the Book of Revelation.  With an impressive cast of big Hollywood names (with a particular slant toward comedic actors) playing exaggerated versions of their real-life selves, Jay Baruchel and Rogen take the leads, with Baruchel arriving in Los Angeles from Canada to hang out with fellow Canuck, Rogen, for the weekend.  Hoping to spend the whole weekend playing 3D video games while smoking marijuana, Baruchel's plans are upset when Rogen insists that they all go hang out with his Hollywood friends at a housewarming party for James Franco.  Baruchel is uncomfortable with the Hollywood community (Emma Watson and Craig Robinson suggest that he may be a hipster, what with not liking FORREST GUMP), but he goes along reluctantly.  During the party in Franco's enormous, fortress-like mansion, the ground begins to shake, this first being dismissed as another California earthquake, but then some people are lifted into the sky by beams of blue light and enormous, fiery sinkholes form in the ground.  After the initial catastrophe kills off (or otherwise drags to Hell) most of Franco's house guests, Franco, Rogen, Baruchel, Robinson, Jonah Hill and Danny McBride hole up in the mansion, struggling to survive the Apocalypse and each other's company.
The story is very loose; basically the apocalypse starts and celebrities struggle to survive, while a little bit goes on with Rogen's and Baruchel's strained relationship; but this is obviously for the best as it allows for the attention to focus on the gags, which a fired rapidly and with a better than average success rate.  The base concept of celebrities playing themselves is alone one of the absolute funniest elements of the film, with Franco as the weirdo artiste who keeps a collection of props in his basement, Hill as the condescendingly kind guy and comedian with the credibility of an Oscar nomination, and so on.  Emma Watson (Hermione from the Harry Potter films) and Michael Cera in particular are scene-stealers, with Cera playing as a hard-edged, cocaine-addicted sexual deviant, and Watson, who spends some brief time with the guys in the mansion before she overhears them debating over the six guys locked up with one girl issue.  McBride, not the most likable comedian, is perfectly suited to the antagonist role, the biggest douchebag in Hollywood.
Just in case you didn't notice yet though, THIS IS THE END will not appeal to everyone's tastes, although that fact has a lot to do with makes it so great for those it does agree with.  In addition to featuring a great deal of the most disgusting and ridiculous sex-related jokes ever on screen and a wide assortment of politically-incorrect elements, the Apocalypse provides opportunities for a hefty amount of extreme gory deaths.  Honestly though, while making the stomach churn, it will also make your abdominal muscles quite sore from the bounteous laugh-out-loud moments.
The way it takes on the most ridiculous elements of its Apocalyptic concept is most refreshing, making no apologies for the Biblical proportions and the third act is beautifully bold and surprising.  As far as comedies go, THIS IS THE END is everything you could want and more, and there's too many lines that deserve quoting that you can't remember them all.  A comedy with balls this size (in more ways than one) only comes along every so many years.