Shawn Eastridge's Fantastically Spectacular Favorite Movies of 2014 Part 1: The Honorable Mentions and the Not-Sa-Goods

Greetings, fellow programs! Another year has come and gone and 2014 was full of some really spectacular flicks. As I attempted to make a list of my top ten favorites, I realized I was shoving so many great movies aside and decided to expand to fifteen. But even fifteen wasn't enough to recognize all the great movies I saw this year. So in a historic moment in Oh, How Spiffing's history, I've decided to expand my Favorite Movies of the Year list to TWENTY. Yes, folks, you read that right, TWENTY movies that delighted, excited, and ignited my soul and emotions like no other.

I'll be unveiling that list over the next few days, but for now let's start with the Honorable Mentions. These are films I enjoyed, but not quite enough to include them on my 'Best of' list.

Just a heads up, even though I managed to see nearly all the movies I wanted to see this year, there are still quite a few I missed. Those are as follows:

• American Sniper
• Begin Again
• Citzenfour
• Frank
• Inherent Vice
• The Interview
• Life Itself
• Love is Strange
• A Most Violent Year
• Neighbors
• Nightcrawler
• The Raid 2: Berandal
• Selma
• The Skeleton Twins
• Unbroken
• Under the Skin
• Whiplash
• Wild

As we move into the awards season, you can bet your sweet booty I'll be catching up on all the ones I missed and expect to see a revised list of my favorite films of the year closer to the 2015 Oscar ceremony.

Now, without further delay, let's get started!

HONORABLE MENTIONS, 2014!

BIG HERO 6

Not quite on par with the best animated films of 2014, but an enjoyable addition nonetheless. Big Hero 6 is fun and benefits greatly from the adorable Baymax. It also serves as further proof that the best animators and storytellers have jumped ship at PIXAR and moved to Disney’s primary animation studio.

THE FAULT IN OUR STARS 

Seeing as how I'm not quite the target audience for this one, I was pleasantly surprised to find The Fault in Our Stars a consistently funny and moving work. Shailene Woodley and Ansel Elgort are both fantastic.

GODZILLA 

Godzilla suffers from a lack of compelling story or characters, but when has that ever not been the case for this franchise? Director Gareth Edwards manages to pull through thanks to some stunning visuals and superior monster-mashing sequences.

THE HUNGER GAMES: MOCKINGJAY – PART 1

This one suffers from weak source material and the unnecessary splitting of said source material into two parts, which only further emphasizes the novel's shortcomings. Still, director Francis Lawrence manages to craft some great sequences and the cast is outstanding, as always.

THE MAZE RUNNER

Even though The Maze Runner was written before The Hunger Games, the film adaptation can't help but feel like a Hunger Games knockoff. Still, it's solid Young Adult fare and manages to be exciting despite its derivative nature.

MUPPETS MOST WANTED

I’m not sure why this was so ignored/panned by critics; in some ways it’s even better than 2011’s The Muppets. It feels more like a classic Muppet movie and it’s very, very funny.

WHAT IF

When Harry Met Sally-lite. What If is mostly forgettable, but still funny and charming. Daniel Radcliffe is the natural standout here as he continues to prove himself as one of our finest young actors.

So, that's that for the Honorable Mentions. Let's transition into something a little less fun (or more fun, depending on your point of view). Here are the worst movies I saw that were released in 2014.

THE WORST MOVIES OF 2014
(That I've seen, at least)

THE AMAZING SPIDER-MAN 2

The Amazing Spider-Man 2 is the Batman Forever of the Spider-Man franchise. That’s both a good and bad thing, I suppose. Good because it means this trainwreck offers up consistent, unintentional laughs. Bad because, well, no one wants to be compared to Batman Forever. Now that they’ve crashed and burned the Spidey franchise, perhaps Sony can get a creative team that actually cares about the character. Or, you know, go ahead and surrender the franchise to Marvel Studios.

DUMB AND DUMBER TO

One of the most depressing filmgoing experiences I’ve ever had. No one involved in the making of this film seems to care at all about what they’re doing. Cynical, spiteful, and painfully unfunny, Dumb and Dumber To is without question one of the worst movies ever made and totally unworthy of its predecessor’s name.

GOD'S NOT DEAD

Insulting on almost every level, from filmmaking to spiritual. God’s Not Dead assumes that if you don't believe in God you must be a terrible human being. Its arguments for the existence of God are unconvincing and it contains a neverending supply of storytelling clichés. There are so many superfluous subplots and characters that have nothing to do with the main storyline and they are all painfully boring. On the plus side, you've got Kevin Sorbo acting like a James Bond villain and almost non-stop laughs. I've never been so close to converting to atheism.

THE HOBBIT: THE BATTLE OF FIVE ARMIES 

Can you find Bilbo in the picture above? I’ll give you a second. Did you find him? Where was he? Buried somewhere in the midst of characters we couldn’t care less about? That pretty much describes the entire Hobbit trilogy and The Battle of Five Armies is arguably the worst of the bunch. It proves once and for all that the decision to split Tolkien’s carefree adventure novel into three dull-beyond-all-reason films was made solely in the hopes of making more money. Its one advantage over its predecessors is that it’s so blatantly stupid and, therefore, the easiest to laugh at.

LEFT BEHIND 

I didn’t think it was possible, but this Vic Armstrong-helmed ‘remake’ is even worse than the Left Behind movie starring Kirk Cameron. Next to nothing happens in its entire two-hour (?!) runtime and, worst of all, Nicolas Cage seems to be barely awake through the whole thing. They don’t even let him have a trademark freakout in an attempt to save this travesty and that may be the worst sin of all.

WHEN THE GAME STANDS TALL

When the Game Stands Tall isn't quite sure what it's about, so it decides to try and be about multiple things and fails at all of them. The screenplay is riddled with all the same cliches you've seen in a dozen other sports films, but thanks to bland performances and direction, they're even more apparent here. So, so lame.

And that's that for Part 1: The Honorable Mentions and Not-Sa-Goods of 2014! Part 2 is on its way, so keep your eyes peeled. See you soon!

The Hobbit: The Battle of Five Hours

But they were all of them deceived, for another trilogy was made. In the lands of New Zealand, in the fires of Warner Bros./New Line Cinema, the Dark Lord Peter Jackson forged, in secret, a master cleanse. And into this trilogy he poured his cruelty, his malice, and his will to CGI all life - One Trilogy to Bore Them All.

It’s hard to believe it’s been eleven years since the release of the final chapter of Peter Jackson’s masterful adaptation of The Lord of the Rings. To this day, the midnight showing of The Return of the King stands as the single greatest movie-going experience I have ever had. Seriously, it was like a sporting event – people were cheering and applauding through practically the entire film. If someone had approached me immediately after that viewing and told me that eleven years later a Hobbit movie would be released and I wouldn’t care less about it, I would never have believed them. How could I? The Lord of the Rings Trilogy is a masterpiece! Peter Jackson is a genius!

My, how times have changed.

Way back in the day when news was announced that The Hobbit would be split into three films, I was confused, but optimistic. I trusted Jackson and, despite the fact that the source material didn’t seem to merit three films, I put my faith in his judgment. Then An Unexpected Journey was released and all hope was lost. The film was a dreadful bore. Its nearly three-hour running length, made up of repetitive, video game style action sequences and non-existent character development, was mind numbing and further emphasized what a poor decision it was to split this story into three 3-hour length films. Its only saving grace was poor Martin Freeman, who did his utmost to portray the title character with all the zest and charm Bilbo Baggins deserves, despite being shoved to the side to play second fiddle to characters and events that weren’t even in the book.

A year later The Desolation of Smaug arrived. It still contained all the same problems as its predecessor, but it benefited from Jackson seeming to remember that entertainment should be, you know, entertaining. There were a couple of action sequences that actually managed to thrill – that barrel chase sequence, for one - but it still wasn’t enough to save the entire film from dullness or that complete ‘Eff You!’ of an ending. At the very least it wasn’t an outright travesty. It was certainly better than its predecessor, but only marginally so.

Now we come to it at last – the great battle of our time. At least, that’s what Peter Jackson would like for you to believe. Seriously, whose decision was it to try and push The Battle of Five Armies as ‘The Defining Chapter of the Middle-Earth Saga?’ Last time I checked, the ‘Defining Chapter of the Middle-Earth Saga’ was The Lord of the Rings. The Hobbit was never intended as anything more than a simple adventure story and its cinematic interpretation would have benefited greatly if it had followed suit. Instead, against all better judgment and/or logic, Jackson and co. decided to expand and bloat the charming tale of Bilbo Baggins’ adventures beyond recognition into something vastly unpleasant. And somehow, The Battle of Five Armies manages to be the worst part of this bloated trilogy.

After an enjoyable opening sequence (which is actually the missing ending of the last movie), things go downhill in splendid fashion. There are a lot of dull preparations for the Big Battle. We’re treated to superfluous subplots involving Bard, the hero of Laketown, (Played with admirable nobility by Luke Evans) and Legolas’s dad Thranduil (Played like a sleepwalker by Lee Pace) trying to convince the Dwarves to share Erebor’s treasure. Thorin (Played like a pouty five-year-old by Richard Armitage) is being altogether unpleasant due to a nasty bout of ‘dragon sickness’ (?). He refuses to play nice and spends a good chunk of the movie acting like a brooding brat before having a baffling, drawn out acid trip that brings him back to his senses.

But before Thorin can make up for all his nasty behavior, the Elves arrive with a massive army, joined by the citizens of Laketown, and engage in battle with a Dwarven army. Then a massive Orc army shows up to ruin all the fun and the armies engage in what can only be described as one of the most impressive video game sequences of all time.

In the meantime, Gandalf is having the time of his life being held in a cage by the Necromancer, a.k.a. The Lord of the Rings himself, Sauron. In one of the early comedic sequences of the film, Gandalf is rescued by some of our friends from the original trilogy: Galadriel, who has a full-on creepy girl from The Ring freakout moment, Elrond, who gets to relive his glory days of martial arts mayhem from The Matrix, and Saruman, who further emphasizes that Christopher Lee can still kick ass, as long as he’s played by a CG stunt double.

And absolutely nothing is at stake. Nothing. At the end of the day, all anyone in this movie wants is gold and they will fight to the death for it. If a character doesn’t want gold, they get the immense pleasure of watching the madness unfold from the sidelines.

And as I’m sitting there in the movie theater, watching these CG armies clash into each other over and over again, all I can think about is how much I miss the Peter Jackson who made one of the greatest trilogies of all time, and how little I care about anything that’s happening or any of the characters because this time around he has given me exactly no reason to do so. There is so little of significance happening here and yet it goes on and on and on as if it’s the most meaningful thing ever committed to celluloid. It’s painful.

And then in the midst of all this is Bilbo Baggins, who was supposed to be the main character of this story. Martin Freeman brings every ounce of charm to the screen he can muster; he’s these films’ one saving grace. But, as is tradition for this trilogy, Bilbo is shoved aside to make room for never-ending CG battles and subplots/characters that were of little importance in the novel. The fact that the last 10 minutes, which focus exclusively on Bilbo, are the film’s best says a lot about how wrong this whole enterprise went. Of course, we have to make room for that romantic subplot involving Tauriel, Legolas, and hunky Dwarf Kili. Who cares about Bilbo Baggins when you can watch these three pine over each other forever and ever, amen? Seriously though, whose idea was this? This love triangle has been one of the most absurd additions to these films and here it reaches levels of hilariousness I couldn’t possibly have imagined:

“If this is love…please take it from me,” cries Tauriel. “Why does it hurt so much?”

“Because it’s real,” answers Thranduil in typical deadpan fashion.

Cue the laugh track.

Really, the only advantages this final Hobbit film has over the other two in the trilogy are these:

1. It has a shorter run time. (Yet somehow feels like the longest of the three)
2. It’s blatantly stupid on a level that neither of the other Hobbit movies were. This makes it much easier to laugh at and that alone deserves to be commended.

Other than that, it’s financially-focused filmmaking at its most depressing. With The Lord of the Rings, Peter Jackson aimed to please by going for our hearts and minds. With The Hobbit, his aim is just as true, only this time he’s shooting for our wallets. And, in that regard alone, he succeeds.

FINAL RATING: 2/5

The Hunger Games: Mockingjay Part 1 really emphasizes the Part 1 over anything else

Before we get started, let me level with you on my opinions regarding The Hunger Games series. That way, you’ll know where we stand right from the get-go and, hopefully, no one gets hurt. Sound good? Cool.

I really enjoyed the first Hunger Games book. I read it in less than twenty-four hours and then immediately headed to the local theater to see the movie version. It was a worthy adaptation and I thoroughly enjoyed it. Despite liking both the book and the movie, I wasn’t much interested in continuing the series. It just didn’t grab me in the same way that The Lord of the Rings or Harry Potter did, but at the very least it was leagues better than those god-awful Twilight books/movies.

Eventually I got around to reading Catching Fire, which left me feeling not very...caught...on fire. It wasn't much more than a rehash of the first book’s events and Suzanne Collins’s prose just isn’t compelling enough to distract from the lack of fresh ideas. I went out to see the film adaptation of the book last year and was pleasantly surprised. Not only was it a major improvement over its source material, but it was leagues better than its predecessor. For once, I was actually excited about the franchise and the direction it was taking, despite the frustrating news that the final book would be arbitrarily split into two films.

I knew the third book was the most divisive amongst the series’ fans, but I was still willing to give it a shot. I moderately enjoyed the first half of the book, finding it more interesting than Catching Fire mainly due to the fact that it wasn’t just a rehash of the first book. Sadly, Mockingjay’s climax and ending had to go and ruin everything. It’s the very definition of underwhelming and, without spoiling particulars, is deeply unsatisfying in regards to the outcome of its plot and characters. Nevertheless, I was so impressed with the work that director Francis Lawrence, aided by his spectacular cast and crew, did with Catching Fire that I held out hope the film adaptation would improve on the mediocre nature of its source material.

So, good news first: Mockingjay Part 1 is without a doubt a major improvement over the book. Part of this is due to the fact that we don’t have to deal with Collins’ mind-numbing first-person narrative style writing, which makes Katniss come across as nothing more than an empty shell of a girl who has no idea who she wants to date more – the hunky Gale or the thoughtful Peeta. Seriously, we’re in the midst of a massive rebellion and all this girl can think about is which boy she likes more? So much for strong female characters. Thankfully, the screenplay forgoes the love triangle nonsense of the book. It’s mentioned only in passing and put to rest as quickly as possible. There’s not much question as to who Katniss really loves, so we don’t have to put up with all of her BS moaning about it.

Mockingjay’s screenplay sorely misses the talents of screenwriters Simon Beaufoy (Slumdog Millionaire; 127 Hours) and Michael Arndt (Little Miss Sunshine; Toy Story 3), both of whom were far more than Catching Fire’s source material deserved. Series newcomers Peter Craig (The Town) and Danny Strong (Lee Daniels’ The Butler), do a decent job of adapting the novel, making due with what they have. If the proceedings feel a bit less charming and a bit more straightforward this time 'round, it’s mostly due to the novel’s content more than anything else.

Truth be told, the best moments of the film are moments that aren’t even heavily featured in the book – a rebellious attack on a large dam set to Jennifer Lawrence’s haunting performance of ‘The Hanging Tree;’ a thrilling covert rescue mission sequence, which was only mentioned in passing in the book.

Despite the solid quality of the screenplay, there were a couple of baffling ‘on-the-nose’ moments – in one instance a character in a video broadcast shouts, “They’re coming for you! You’ve got to get out of there!” Immediately after the video shuts off, a character responds with, “It’s a warning. They’re coming for us,” as if it’s news to anybody. Not sure why that wasn’t left on the cutting room floor.

At this point, it’s no surprise that the cast is the shining beacon of this franchise. They elevate the material to heights way beyond the quality of the source material. Jennifer Lawrence gives another spectacular performance, instilling Katniss with a level of humanity and depth that was barely present in the novels. It's a shame her character becomes so passive this time around (And sadly, if the movie stays true to the novel, she won't have much more to do in Part 2). Liam Hemsworth is given a bit more to work with as Gale this time around and Josh Hutcherson, though barely present for most of the film’s running time, makes a major impact.

The supporting cast here is one of the finest seen in any film, let alone a big budget franchise. Everyone delivers quality work – Donald Sutherland returns as the ruthless President Snow, Woody Harrelson continues the ongoing charmfest that is his performance as Haymitch and Philip Seymour Hoffman reminds us of how much we’ll miss his remarkable abilities as an actor. New cast addition Julianne Moore manages to fit right in with these talents, but sadly isn’t given much more to do beyond a one-note characterization.

The film’s biggest drawback, outside of the inherent weaknesses of its source material, is the inexplicable decision to stretch the proceedings out over the course of two films. Mockingjay barely holds enough material for a single film, let alone two. Obviously, the suits at Lionsgate looked at The Hobbit, Harry Potter, and Twilight and saw the benefits of making people pay twice to see a single movie (or in The Hobbit's case even three times), but it’s such a shame they went the quantity over quality route considering how strong the franchise has been up to this point. It doesn’t entirely ruin the film, but it really emphasizes the Part 1 nature of the whole thing. It feels incomplete and it undermines the quality. This could have been a really strong ending for the trilogy, but instead we’re being served a haphazard mishmash.

Will Part 2 justify the split? I doubt it. The book’s 2nd half and ultimate outcome are incredibly weak and despite this franchise’s track record I seriously doubt the filmmakers will be able to rise above its shortcomings. For the time being, Mockingjay Part 1 offers serviceable entertainment for the franchise’s fans, but is a definite step back for the series overall.

FINAL RATING: 3.5/5

I Watched Dumb & Dumber To So You Wouldn't Have Too.

Before we get started, allow me a moment to address the elephant in the room: Yes, I’m aware I have not posted reviews for the biggest releases of the past month: Interstellar or Big Hero 6. Why haven’t I posted them? As of the composition of this particular review I have still not seen them. Which leads us to the next question: “You willingly chose to see Dumb and Dumber To over Interstellar or Big Hero 6? Or even Foxcatcher?? Or even Whiplash?!?!”

I understand how this might look and I realize it may reduce whatever credibility I have as a film critic or blogger or whatever you want to call me, but please let me try to explain.

When it comes to the anals, *AHEM* excuse me, annals of low-brow comedies, Dumb & Dumber rests on the highest tier. It’s a comedy classic. Yes, it’s incredibly stupid, but there’s intelligence behind the humor, which is elevated to all kinds of heights by the spectacular performances of Jim Carrey and Jeff Daniels as Lloyd Christmas and Harry Dunne respectively. It’s also got quite a bit of heart. I happened upon this comedic goldmine when I was 14, which is pretty much the perfect age to see it. To this day I consider it to be one of the funniest movies ever made.

Let’s flash forward, shall we?

I’m twice the age I was when I first saw Dumb & Dumber and the Farrelly Brothers have seen fit to unleash a long overdue sequel. I was excited to see Jim Carrey and Jeff Daniels donning their signature hairdos and wardrobes in photos posted all over various social media outlets. My head screamed, “DANGER,” but my heart was filled with joy. I hoped beyond hope that the Farrellys would somehow regain the spark of comedic genius that gave us the original film. Through every underwhelming trailer and TV spot release, I held fast to my slowly dying belief that Dumb & Dumber To would, at the very least, contain a smidgen of the appeal that made the first one such a magical experience.

Sadly, this long overdue sequel contains exactly none of the charm of its predecessor. It’s cynical, mean-spirited and, most disappointing of all, not particularly funny. Truth be told, it’s not even much of an improvement over 2003’s Dumb and Dumberer: When Harry Met Lloyd. And when you can’t even top a cheap knockoff of your own film, it might be time to rethink your career. Watching Carrey and Daniels reprise these roles isn’t without its moments of delight, but it’s mostly just sad. They both seem to playing caricatures of their younger selves and, though they must be commended for throwing themselves back into these roles with great gusto, the whole enterprise feels incredibly depressing and desperate. I’ll admit I had a few chuckles, but the jokes very rarely hit their mark. They tend to go for the most obvious punchline, the most awkwardly offensive, or, even more frequently, the laziest. 'Lazy' is probably the best word to describe Dumb & Dumber To. The whole plot is recycled from the first film and so many of the jokes are taken practically verbatim.

There’s no way a 20-years-later Dumb & Dumber sequel could ever have lived up to its predecessor, but it’s like the Farrellys didn’t even bother trying. The whole thing reeks of cash cow stank at its most vile and it’s really sad considering that with a bit more care this could have been something really fun. Or, I don't know, maybe asking for the filmmakers to actually care about what they're doing is a bit too much.

If you really love the first film, do yourself a favor and re-watch it for free on Netflix instant streaming instead of going out to support this garbage. You’ll thank me later. I promise.

FINAL RATING: 1.5/5

**EDIT** As my diligent friend Arik pointed out, you're not technically watching Dumb & Dumber for free on Netflix since you have to pay for it. However, if you don't have Netflix, come on over to my place and we'll watch it for free together! It'll be a glorious occasion!

Take a bow, Birdman. You've earned it.

Every year, there are a small handful of films that remind you exactly why you fell in love with the medium in the first place. Last year that list included the likes of 12 Years a Slave, Before Midnight, Gravity, and Her, amongst others. This year we have Boyhood, Captain America: Winter Soldier, Chef, The Grand Budapest Hotel, and now you can add Alejandro González Iñárritu’s Birdman to the list; and, truth be told, Birdman could be the very best of the bunch. It is a masterful cinematic experience in every sense. Every element is top-notch, from the screenplay to the performances to Iñárritu’s guiding hand. It serves as a reaffirmation of what makes cinematic storytelling so special and is a gift to lovers of the artform.

And speaking of artforms, that’s exactly what Birdman is all about. It celebrates the artist’s inexplicable drive to create using the plights of Riggan Thomson (Michael Keaton) as a representation of the struggles every hard-working artist has faced at one point or another. Riggan is desperate to escape the shadow of his Hollywood career in which he was the star of the enormously successful ‘Birdman’ film series. To prove himself as a true ‘artiste,’ he’s taken it upon himself to direct and star in a Broadway adaptation of Raymond Carver’s 'What We Talk About When We Talk About Love.' Along the way, he’ll have to find a way to bond with his daughter, who’s fresh from drug rehab (Emma Stone), while appeasing the two actresses in his play: his somewhat-of-a-girlfriend Laura, who’s claiming she’s pregnant with his kid (Andrea Riseborough) and the aspiring Broadway star Lesly (Naomi Watts). He’ll also have to deal with the mad devotion and all-around insanity of method actor extraordinaire Mike Shiner (Edward Norton), all the while fending off the skeptics in the press who are determined to ruin his foray into ‘serious’ acting and his many fans who just want him to do another 'Birdman' flick.

The screenplay by Alejandro González Iñárritu, Nicolás Giacobone, Alexander Dinelaris, Armando Bo is equal parts introspective, beautiful, disturbing, and tragic. It’s also frequently hysterical. There is so much going on, so many tones and characters, so many different storylines to juggle, that you expect the whole enterprise to either collapse under its own weight or derail in splendid fashion, Thanks to Iñárritu’s direction, it does neither and never feels anything less than a totally exhilarating viewing experience. The entire film is staged as a one shot sequence. The discerning eye will notice where the cuts are employed, but no one can deny how seamless the effect is thanks to the incredible direction and editing. Iñárritu has clearly been inspired by his best bud Alfonso Cuaron’s technique, even employing Cuaron’s go-to Director of Photography Emmanuel Lubezki. Lubezki continues to solidify his place as one of the finest cinematographers working in the trade and his work here is frequently stunning. Antonio Sanchez’s score thumps and jives and bounces all around like its own character, always complimenting, never detracting. It’s one of the best soundtracks of the year.

Sometimes films that revel in their technical triumphs end up favoring the technique over the story and characters, but with Birdman, Iñárritu has struck a perfect balance between these elements. This is due, in no small part, to the remarkable cast he’s assembled. Everyone here, from the major roles all the way down to the most minor, delivers some of the best work I’ve ever seen from them. Michael Keaton is the obvious stand out as tortured actor Riggan Thomson. This could be the best performance of his entire career. I can’t say for sure; I’ve never seen Mr. Mom or Multiplicity. Obviously it’s not too difficult to see the parallels between Keaton’s career and that of the character he’s playing. It’s unquestionably one of the best performances of the year and it’s sure to garner some much-deserved awards attention. Edward Norton gives a superb, madcap performance as Riggan’s ‘nemesis’ Mike Shiner. Norton has a ball with the character. If you’re already in love with Norton’s work, you’re only going to discover more reasons to love him here. Emma Stone gives yet another exquisite performance as Riggan’s daughter Sam. She continues to prove herself as an amazing talent, going beyond her standard adorable, wise-cracking persona to deliver something much more profound. It would be rather lovely to see her get some awards attention when the season rolls around. Naomi Watts and Andrea Riseborough are gorgeous and work wonders in their supporting roles; Zach Galifianakis is yet another welcome addition, meeting the high standards set by the rest of the cast. Amy Ryan as Riggan’s ex-wife Sylvia may not have much screen time, but she leaves an indelible impression.

Birdman is a masterpiece. It really is and despite its exhaustively spectacular technical side, it still manages to come across as unassuming and modest. I adored every single second of this film. It belongs near the top of the best films of 2014 and, I’ll go ahead and call it now, one of the best of the decade. There is something inherently human about Riggan’s struggles to find meaning in his life and his work and his story is one that is sure to go down as one of the most beloved of all time.

So, if you've read this review and you're still not convinced, I'll just leave this image here. It should provide the final push you need:

FINAL RATING: 5/5

Happy 50th Birthday to master filmmaker Guillermo del Toro! Let's Rank His Filmography.

Guillermo del Toro is one of the most imaginative and gifted filmmakers of this day and age and one of my personal, all-time favorites (As if you didn't already know). His imagination seems to know no bounds and we, as audience members, are the beneficiaries of his willingness to share it with us. Not only is del Toro an extraordinary talent, he comes across as intelligent, genuine, and incredibly humble. He has an enormous heart to match his lovable girth. Just watch the below Colbert interview and try to convince me you don’t want to give this guy an enormous hug, even as he discusses horrifying monsters and viruses.

The Colbert Report
Get More: Colbert Report Full Episodes,The Colbert Report on Facebook,Video Archive

This beautiful man turned 50 yesterday. I’ve decided to celebrate his remarkable career by ranking all of his films. Let’s start with the bottom of the barrel, shall we?

8. MIMIC (1997)

Yes, this is the one with the giant cockroaches. After achieving breakthrough success and acclaim with his first feature Cronos, del Toro was hired by the ‘Suits’ to make his first big Hollywood picture. Mimic's production was a disaster practically from start to finish. del Toro and the Suits never saw eye-to-eye on what the film could/should be and del Toro’s ambitions and imagination were cut off at every turn in order for Mimic to become more of a generic ‘big cockroach’ monster-fest. Second Units were employed to add additional, cheap scares against del Toro’s wishes (He insists on being behind the camera for every single shot, no matter how throwaway) and the producers snatched away his final cut privileges. Thankfully, del Toro had a chance to revisit and recut the film, bringing it closer to his original vision. His Director’s Cut is certainly an improvement, but not enough to save Mimic from being his weakest effort.

7. BLADE II (2002)

I can’t quite explain it, but when I was 16 I developed a crazy obsession with seeing the Blade movies. Coming from a conservative, Christian household, it was no easy feat to try and convince my parents that I should be able to watch them. As a last-ditch effort, I mentioned my desire to see Blade II to my friend Angie during one of our high school theater classes. (For some reason I wanted to see the second Blade more than the first…it just looked cooler) She had asked me if there was anything she could get me for my birthday and I jokingly suggested a copy of Blade II on DVD.

A few weeks went by and my birthday had come and gone. Day after day, Angie insisted she had gotten the movie for me, but had kept forgetting to bring it to school to give it to me. I shrugged it off, figuring she hadn’t really gotten me the movie and was just putting off admitting it. Then one day, she came to class, marched right over to me and handed me Blade II on DVD. I couldn’t believe it. I thanked her profusely and as soon as I got home I popped it into my DVD player.

Blade II carries the distinction of being the first Guillermo del Toro film I ever saw. Now, I admit, none of the Blade movies are particularly outstanding, especially not the God-awful third one. But, at the very least, the first two are tons of fun. Wesley Snipes is a total badass and the action sequences are on point. Blade II bests its predecessor primarily because of del Toro's visual direction. When he was hired, he reportedly told Snipes, “Look, I don’t get Blade. I don’t get the character – that’s your territory. I’ll handle the monsters, you handle Blade.” And handle the monsters he did. The Reapers are one of del Toro’s most inventive, terrifying creations and extremely effective as the primary villains of the film.

Outside of the action sequences and the visuals, Blade II kind of falls apart. It's got a goofy soap opera-esque story and the characters aren't developed beyond their generic stereotypes. But, really, did you expect to gain anything profound from a Blade movie? It’s a lot of fun and unquestionably the best of the Blade trilogy.

6. PACIFIC RIM (2013)

All I needed to hear about Pacific Rim was that it was a movie about giant, human-operated robots fighting gargantuan monsters directed by Guillermo del Toro to be 100% on board. Pacific Rim carries the distinction of being del Toro’s biggest production yet (Thank you, movie gods, for seeing fit to provide him with a $200 million budget) and although it wasn’t a major success state-side, its worldwide box office success was enough for Legendary Pictures to greenlight a sequel and an animated series. Pacific Rim shows what happens when del Toro has the means to fully unleash the 10-year-old, monster loving child that drives who he is as a person and a filmmaker. It is full of crowd-pleasing, monster bashing action and beautiful, colorful images. It’s also got a kick-ass soundtrack:


Pacific Rim’s plot and characters are a bit paper thin, but again, when it comes to these kinds of films those elements always have a tendency to take a backseat. Let’s hope that the sequel allows for a bit more development of these items in addition to even grander and more spectacular Jaeger/Kaiju smackdowns.

5. CRONOS (1992)

del Toro’s first feature film is one of the strongest debuts I’ve ever seen. His unique take on the vampire genre showcases his blossoming talent for striking, memorable visuals and poetic, fairy tale-esque storytelling. It’s creepy, disturbing, tragic, and ultimately beautiful. It also marks the first time del Toro worked with the immensely talented and all-around glorious human being Ron Perlman. Considering the limited resources at his disposal, it's remarkable that del Toro was able to pull this off as well as he did. It's a strong start to an incredibly fruitful career.

4. HELLBOY (2004)

Hellboy is one of the greatest comic book movies of all time and it deserves way more recognition than it's gotten. Seriously, everyone’s talking about how wonderful and subversive Guardians of the Galaxy is, but del Toro beat the Marvel Cinematic Universe to the punch with his 2004 adaptation of Mike Mignola's popular cult-favorite. Hellboy had the disadvantage of being released amongst a slew of other superhero flicks (It was sandwiched between 2003’s X2: X-Men United and 2004’s Spider-Man 2), which probably contributed to its lukewarm box office response, but it truly belongs in the same league as those beloved comic-book adaptations.

This really was an ideal example of a filmmaker being perfectly matched to the source material. Hellboy is zany, exciting, scary, and chock full of spectacular creatures and visuals. It was also the first time del Toro managed to infuse one of his big-budget films with the heart and soul of one of his smaller efforts. Hellboy is a visual feast for sure, but it’s special because of its incredible characters and enormous heart. del Toro owes a great debt to Ron Perlman whose perfect casting was the equivalent of Christopher Reeve’s as Superman or Robert Downey Jr.’s as Iron Man. Perlman was born to play this role and he knocks it way, way, way out of the park. His wise-quipping, seen-it-all-before, cigar-chomping attitude is charming beyond all reason and it is an absolute joy to watch.

Seriously, if you haven’t seen Hellboy since its release, I strongly suggest you revisit it. It is one of the very best comic book adaptations of all time and one of the most inventive and enjoyable action/sci-fi flicks ever made.

3. THE DEVIL’S BACKBONE (2001)

After the creative roadblocks and frustrations he experienced during the production of Mimic, del Toro was determined to return to his roots with his next film. He was actually offered the chance to direct Blade II after Mimic, but he insisted that he be allowed to make a more personal film outside of Hollywood in his home country first. Thankfully, New Line wanted him for the Blade II directing gig so badly, they agreed to wait until del Toro was ready. With no ‘evil’ Hollywood execs blocking his way during the production, del Toro ended up making one of his finest films.

The Devil’s Backbone shares many elements with its spiritual sequel Pan’s Labyrinth. Its story deals with the aftermath of the Spanish Civil War, it focuses on a young child dealing with supernatural forces weaving their way through a real world setting, and its human villains are more cruel/frightening than the supposed monsters. del Toro has always stated he felt The Devil’s Backbone was Pan’s Labyrinth’s equal and I’m inclined to agree with him. It is a masterfully crafted, deeply moving horror film – one of the very best of its genre. It’s memorable, frightening, and beautiful, and if you haven’t seen it yet, get to it! It’s mandatory Halloween horror movie viewing.

2. HELLBOY II: THE GOLDEN ARMY (2008)

Hellboy II is a Guillermo del Toro film on crack and I mean that as the absolute highest form of praise possible. Like its predecessor, Hellboy II was released at an awkward time – a week before The Dark Knight. Of course, once The Dark Knight was unleashed on the world, it wiped the floor with any and all competition and Hellboy II was one of its unfortunate victims. This was a time when audiences wanted more serious superhero fare and Nolan’s Batman films provided that in spades. A colorful, batshit crazy effort like Hellboy II was totally against the norm and, therefore, despite a very positive critical response, it was largely shunned and/or ignored by audiences.

Revisiting Hellboy II, I was struck by just how ahead of its time it was. Again, I’ve gotta call out the fact that del Toro basically beat the Marvel Cinematic Universe to the punch when it comes to making more inventive, bizarre, funny, and outlandish comic book flicks. And, truth be told, nothing in Marvel’s universe comes remotely close to meeting Hellboy II’s astonishing level of creativity. It is a stunning piece of work, light years ahead of the first Hellboy.

The sheer breadth of the production design is mind-boggling. If there’s any one movie that proves del Toro’s unprecedented gift for visual genius, it’s this one. Pause the movie at any given time and marvel at the intricate details of one of the most richly designed and imaginative universes ever committed to film. Of course, Ron Perlman is magnificent as always, as is the supporting cast, which features Doug Jones, Selma Blair, Jeffrey Tambor, Luke Goss, Anna Walton, and Seth MacFarlane doing the only noteworthy work of his entire career.

If there is any kind of justice in this world, we will get a Hellboy 3. I would trade nearly every superhero film scheduled for release in the next five years just to get one more Hellboy movie. I cannot stress this enough: if you haven’t seen Hellboy or Hellboy II or just haven’t revisited them in a while, you need to do so immediately. These are two of the greatest comic book adaptations of all time and deserve to be recognized as such and del Toro and Perlman deserve a chance to give movie fans the big finale this series more than deserves.

1. PAN’S LABYRINTH (2006)

Pan’s Labyrinth takes everything that has defined del Toro’s career up to this point and combines it in a cinematic expression that took our breaths away. It is, quite possibly, his finest realized and most beautiful work to date. The consensus is that it’s his magnum opus, and I’m inclined to agree with it. There’s just so much to love and admire here; it’s almost impossible to wrap one’s head around it. It showcases some of del Toro’s greatest fantastical creations (the faun, the pale man, etc.) and juxtaposes them with a brutal real world, a world which our heroine is desperately attempting to survive and escape to achieve her true calling. Pan’s Labyrinth carries all the elements of a classic fairy tale story as only Guillermo del Toro can tell it. It’s haunting, disturbing, and violent. It’s also stunning in every conceivable way - a visual poem. An unforgettable masterpiece.

Gone Baby Gone Girl

I read Gone Girl based on my girlfriend Sarah’s recommendation; she was adamant it was one of the best things she’d ever read. I’d just finished an underwhelming detective story - The Cuckoo’s Calling, published under J.K. Rowling’s male pseudonym Robert Galbraith, and was hardly looking forward to starting another novel that seemed to stem from the same genre. Nevertheless, at Sarah's insistence, I decided to pick Gone Girl up and I’m glad I did. From start to finish, it is a riveting read. The twists and turns keep you guessing all the way through its disturbing conclusion, but what really made Gone Girl so special were its spectacular characters and refreshing sense of humor. Gillian Flynn immediately shot to the heights of my favorite authors, (which, in case you’re wondering, should be considered quite an honor for any hardworking author) and Gone Girl became one of my all-time favorite books.

Of course, part of my motivation for reading Gone Girl sooner rather than later was driven by my knowledge of the film adaptation. I knew David Fincher was attached to direct and with him would come his reliable crew, but it’s harder for me to go back and read a book after seeing its cinematic adaptation. I was a bit nervous about how the novel, which alternates back and forth between its two leads' perspectives, would translate. I was pleasantly surprised to see that Gillian Flynn would be penning the screenplay, adapting from her own work. The final product is a superb thriller. If it doesn’t quite reach the heights of its source material, it’s no matter; it’s still masterful filmmaking and one of the year's best films.

Nick and Amy Dunne are your standard, good-looking, hip and happening young married couple. They’ve just reached their fifth anniversary and Nick is gearing up for another one of Amy’s traditional, romantic scavenger hunts. He gets more than he bargained for when he arrives at home to find his wife is missing and evidence of a violent struggle. Naturally, Nick is singled out as the prime suspect in his wife’s disappearance and his life begins a downward spiral that will reveal all kinds of fun goodies about their not-so-perfect relationship.

If you’re worried I’ll reveal any of the shocking developments of Gone Girl’s plot, don’t fret; I would never dare spoil the delightfully disturbed twists and turns that await you. All you need to know is you will have a grand old time falling down this topsy-turvy rabbit hole. The whole concept of marriage and the concept of what makes a successful one is ripped to shreds, its innards examined in intricate detail for all to see. And make no mistake, Nick and Amy Dunne’s relationship is one that demands to be seen.

Everyone involved with this film from cast to crew fire are firing on all cylinders. Flynn’s screenplay is incredibly faithful to her source material, but not too a fault. Flynn has a strong understanding of the nature of cinematic storytelling and adapts her novel to meet those standards in a way that makes the material feel fresh and invigorated. Her twisted sense of humor thankfully remains intact.

Ben Affleck’s performance as Nick Dunne goes down as a career best and one of my favorite performances of 2014. Rosamund Pike is excellent as Amy Dunne, though I did feel a nagging disappointment at her rather disconnected portrayal of the character. There isn’t as much of an element of the fun-loving ‘cool girl’ she was when she and Nick first met each other and it makes her character less empathetic. Still, Pike’s performance is sure to garner some way overdue Oscar favor. The supporting cast is equally superb. Carrie Coon’s performance as Nick’s sister Margo and Tyler Perry’s as celebrity lawyer Tanner Bolt were my particular favorites, and Kim Dickens and Patrick Fugit as the officers first assigned to Amy’s case are fantastic. Also, gotta love Neil Patrick Harris as a creepy ex-boyfriend.

On a technical level Gone Girl is glorious, which shouldn't be much of a surprise when you consider the talent behind the camera. It might not reach the highest ranks of Fincher’s filmography, but that’s not really a complaint considering the sheer breadth of modern masterpieces he’s directed in the past couple decades. (Alien 3 is definitely at the top of that list.…Sorry, I thought that would be funnier than it really is.) Fincher brings his top-notch crew with him as well, which includes the likes of Cinematographer Jeff Cronenweth (Get this man an Oscar already!), Editor Kirk Baxter and the haunting musical stylings of Trent Reznor and Atticus Ross. Everything meshes splendidly, resulting in a glorious, hypnotizing viewing experience.

It doesn’t matter if you have or haven’t read Gone Girl; David Fincher’s adaptation is going to wow you either way. It’s yet another worthy entry in his filmography and a fine notch on the belts of everyone involved. (Affleck’s career continues its impressive upward swing) Expect to see it on many a top-ten films of 2014 list as the year winds down and to be a front-runner for recognition come awards season. This is thrilling cinematic entertainment at its finest.

FINAL RATING: 4.5/5

Finding My Way Through The Maze Runner

To be perfectly honest, I wasn’t much looking forward to my viewing of The Maze Runner. Not that I had anything against the source material (I’ve never read the books) or even the trailers for that matter; those had at least stirred my interest. I’m just not usually onboard with the whole Young Adult thang and the recent onslaught of Young Adult adaptations has resulted in a large number of underwhelming films. The Maze Runner seems to fit right in with the genre’s latest trends. Despite the fact that James Dashner’s novel was released a year before Suzanne Collins’ first Hunger Games book was published, the cinematic iteration of his novel can’t help but seem like a B-Side to The Hunger Games film franchise. I was pleasantly surprised to find that The Maze Runner is actually a solid adventure flick, which stands on its own feet moderately well. It was exciting enough to keep my interest through its near two-hour running length thanks to strong direction and solid performances from its young cast and manages to thrill despite the sneaking suspicion that we've already seen everything it has to offer.

The plot follows a boy named Thomas (Dylan O’Brien) who wakes up on an elevator with no memory of who he is. He’s deposited into a community of around 60 or so young men who have experienced the same memory lost. They've adapted and learned to live in their environment – a glade/forest surrounded by enormous concrete walls. Those walls house a sinister maze, which opens up to the boys early in the morning and closes its doors when the sun goes down. The boys believe the way out of their prison lies somewhere within the maze, but no one who has been trapped inside the maze overnight has lived to tell the tale. Plagued by strange dreams of his past, Thomas is determined to conquer the maze in order to free himself and his fellow captives and figure out just why the hell they were imprisoned there in the first place.

The Maze Runner’s story is kind of a hybrid of The Hunger Games and The Lord of the Flies, but without the compelling characters or social commentary of either of those novels. What it lacks in original ideas and characters, though, it certainly makes up for with thrilling, expertly crafted action sequences. Considering this is his first foray into big screen territory, I was very impressed with director Wes Ball’s ability to craft genuinely suspenseful sequences. The first two acts are the strongest. Ball does a great job building tension and the mystery of the maze and when we finally get to see it in all its glory, it doesn't disappoint. There are some really cool set pieces here. Things fall apart in a weaker third act where certain characters unceremoniously bite the dust and certain secrets are revealed in underwhelming fashion in order to prepare for the inevitable sequel.

The performances are strong throughout. Dylan O’Brien makes for a likeable protagonist. He isn’t given much to do in the beginning besides asking your standard audience surrogate questions, but he makes it work and really comes into his own as Thomas’s character grows from being a confused bystander to a courageous leader. The supporting cast is strong too. The only casualty here is Will Poulter and his portrayal of the ‘antagonist’ Gally. Poulter isn't given much to work with, as Gally doesn't get much to do except complain about how Thomas is ruining everything the group has established in the years they've been trapped there. Maybe I’m exaggerating, but the guy has, like, 50 speeches that are practically identical. “Thomas needs to be punished! He broke the rules! He’s ruining everything! We can’t trust him!” And so on and so forth. Poulter does what he can with the limited characterization, but is overwhelmed in the end by the shoddy writing.

I won’t tell you to rush out and see The Maze Runner if you don’t already have some form of interest in the material. Really though, you could do much worse, considering how little there is to see in theaters at the moment – at least until Gone Girl is released on Friday. The Maze Runner is serviceable entertainment that doesn’t quite transcend its lack of originality or its absence of compelling characters, but it manages to get by despite these faults, delivering an exciting, albeit somewhat throwaway piece of entertainment.

FINAL RATING: 3.5/5

Boyhood - A Review 12 Years in the Making (Minus the 12 Years)

There’s not much I can say about Boyhood that hasn’t already been said ad nauseum. “It’s a modern masterpiece;” “A new American classic;” “One of the greatest films of the 21st century;” and so on and so forth. As I compose this review, it has a 99% on Rotten Tomatoes and a metascore of 100 on Metacritic. Just to put that metascore into perspective, only 11 films have a perfect 100 on Metacritic.com. That list includes The Godfather, Lawrence of Arabia and The Wizard of Oz. Currently, the only other modern film to achieve this high honor is the 2013 documentary Best Kept Secret. Even then, it only has 4 reviews, the bare minimum to qualify for a metascore, as opposed to Boyhood’s 47.

There’s a danger that comes with any film that receives such overwhelming, near unanimous high acclaim. Naturally, any universally praised anything will merit either a ‘hop-on-the-bandwagon’ critical mentality, chock-full-o’ overused hyperboles, or an enormous backlash from those noble few who just ‘don’t get it.’ You’re damned if you do, damned if you don’t.

(Indiewire recently released an intriguing article about the topic, which you can read here: http://blogs.indiewire.com/criticwire/why-the-unanimous-praise-for-boyhood-is-bad-for-film-criticism-and-for-boyhood-20140804)

Now, those of you who know me (And I’m assuming that’s the majority of my audience) are well aware that I have a particular bias in favor of Richard Linklater. My favorite films of all time are Before Sunrise, Before Sunset and Before Midnight. I’m not so blind in my adoration of the director to not admit that his filmography has its weaknesses (Unlike a large number of people I know, I am not the hugest fan of Slacker or Dazed & Confused and his remake of Bad News Bears is just plain atrocious), but when he’s on point, he’s really on point.

Linklater’s masterpiece, the Before Sunrise trilogy, works so well because it is such an honest, straightforward and accurate portrayal of love and relationships. I’d go so far as to argue that it’s the defining cinematic statement on the subjects. (And I’m sure this is a verbatim quote from my review of Before Midnight, though I’m too lazy to check) They transcend average cinema to achieve a kind of pseudo-realism. Part of this is due to Linklater’s laidback writing/directing approach and his tendency towards accurately portraying life as it really is, including all its ups and downs with no sugar coating. Another key factor in the success of this trilogy is due to the amazing performances of Ethan Hawke and Julie Delpy in the lead roles. Their performances are 100% natural (I sound like a health ad), striking not a single false note. I adore this kind of storytelling and am an enormous admirer of anyone who can strike the delicate balance of portraying life as it really is without coming across as boring, mundane or pretentious. Come to think of it, I don’t think there are any others out there that have accomplished something on this level when it comes to this kind of cinematic storytelling. This is no easy feat and in this era of modern filmmaking it is something to be applauded.


So now that you understand my bias (Or have been refreshed on its nature), I hope you’ll appreciate my review all the more when I admit that the first time I saw Boyhood, I wasn’t entirely bowled over. Seriously, if you had asked me right after the movie (As many of you did), my response was a kind of glazed-over, “I don’t know. I think I need to see it again.” I’d been following its progress ever since I fell in love with Before Sunrise and Before Sunset back in 2007 and the enormous praise Boyhood was receiving only served to pique/overwhelm my interest and excitement. I knew I liked it, but I wasn’t sure to what extent I liked it.

Truth be told, it was difficult to connect to Boyhood the first time around. I wanted to see more of my own life on screen. There were so many elements I could relate to: the divorced parents; the love of Harry Potter, the Beatles and Wilco; the desire to turn off social media and have real-life human connections with people. But, overall, I felt that the film held me at arm’s length emotionally. I felt like more of an observer than anything else and I wanted to connect with Mason more. I wanted to see more ME on the screen. That and I wanted to see events I felt were significant in my own life portrayed on screen.

Upon reflecting on my initial reaction, I realized how selfish I was being. Boyhood isn’t supposed to be about me or anyone in particular except for the character whose life it is chronicling. Boyhood helped remind me that the beauty of being alive and relating to one another is that no two people are alike. Even though our experiences may be similar, we all perceive things in different ways. Looking at it in this light, I felt a bit embarrassed about my attitude following the first viewing. Thankfully, I got to see it again the week after with my dad and aunt and it was that second viewing that really sealed the deal for me.

So, enough about me. How ‘bout we get to that there review, eh?

Boyhood is a singularly remarkable cinematic experience. Without fear of resorting to hyperbole, I can honestly say you’ve never seen anything like it. Of course, I don’t think there are many single films out there that were shot over the course of 12 years, so it really has no precedent. What Linklater has crafted here is a powerful meditation on what makes life/growing up so beautiful and painful. It’s not just about being a boy who ages from 6-18 over the course of a brisk 160 minute running time; it’s about being a mother, about being a father, about being a sister; about being a friend, a lover, a human being. Most importantly, it’s about being ALIVE and acknowledging what an extraordinary gift it is to BE alive.

Linklater avoids many of the staple events of growing up: the first kiss, broken arms, homecomings, proms, major holidays, etc. This was initially disappointing for me as a viewer until I realized how overdone and clichéd these events had become in terms of cinematic portrayals. Linklater isn’t interested in these huge moments. He cares more about the little things – the things that, upon first glance, seem mundane and ordinary, but are really, truly, the things that make us who we are.

He is aided by an amazing ensemble, which includes Patricia Arquette as Mason’s mother Olivia, Ethan Hawke as his father Mason Sr. and Linklater’s own daughter Lorelei as Mason’s sister Samantha. Arquette and Hawke’s performances are marvelous, easily ranking amongst the best of their careers. Lorelei is funny and adorably obnoxious as the big sister.

Of course, the star of the show is Ellar Coltrane as Mason. Watching his character come into his own is one of the most unique, moving experiences I’ve ever had at a movie. That Coltrane managed to carry this character from the age of six to eighteen and give such an authentic and fascinating performance is nothing short of an enormous achievement. As great as the supporting cast is (And really, they are superb), the film truly belongs to Coltrane and he should be applauded for his portrayal.

The narrative unfolds naturally, sporting no title cards to inform the audience of when we’ve moved forward in time. You’ll get little hints here and there from the soundtrack (one of the year’s best), the technology and Mason’s ever-evolving haircuts. By the end, you feel like a part of the family and if there’s anything to complain about, it’s that it all goes by so fast. Even after my first viewing, I would have been willing to sit through an additional hour just to spend more time with these people and to watch Mason continue to grow as a person. Alas, just like adolescence itself, all things must come to an end. But when it comes to an end as simple and perfect as Boyhood’s, it’s difficult to be disappointed.

Boyhood does a really special thing by acknowledging and reminding us of the struggles we all face on a daily basis, even if they might not seem significant at the time. It’s not overtly melodramatic and it doesn’t resort to the kinds of ‘meaningful’ moments we’re used to seeing in these kinds of films. It simply reminds us of the beauty of everyday life, of the importance of family and being there for one another. I still give the upper hand to the Before Sunrise trilogy, but there’s no doubt that Boyhood is a monumental achievement and it is well worth your time.

Like it, love it, gotta have it or just plain 'don't get it,' but experience it for yourself. See it and draw your own conclusions. There’s really nothing quite like it...except life itself.

FINAL RATING: 5/5

Dawn of the Planet of the Apes makes a monkey out of its summer competition

The Godfather Part II. The Empire Strikes Back. The Lord of the Rings: The Two Towers. The Dark Knight. Just in case you’re a bit slow on the uptake, these are all sequels that not only managed to meet the expectations of their masterful predecessors; in some cases they even surpassed them. Now, you can add Dawn of the Planet of the Apes to the list; a remarkable sequel, which takes everything that made Rise of the Planet of the Apes such a rollicking surprise and amplifies them by adding new layers of pathos, character development and intensity. Dawn elevates this franchise to a whole new level of awesomeness. Dr. Zaius would be proud.

At the film’s start, a horrible virus has already wiped out most of humanity. In the wake of this catastrophe, Caeser (Andy Serkis, reprising his role as our hero from Rise of the Planet of the Apes), governs a new generation of genetically evolved super-apes. This civilization is cut off from the rest of the world and the apes go about living, learning and loving in peace. When a small band of human survivors stumbles upon the outskirts of their home, it begins a downward spiral, which will ultimately lead to an explosive showdown between humans and apes. Why can’t we all just get along??

Director Matt Reeves has officially cemented himself as one of the most talented working directors of this day and age. I’m a huge fan of his first film Cloverfield and was pleasantly surprised by his remake of the Swedish classic Let the Right One In, but both of those films play like warm-ups to his work here. He takes his time building suspense and his action sequences aren’t just composed of mindless explosions and computer generated trickery; there’s a weight to the proceedings that evokes a real sense of dread. Dawn of the Planet of the Apes uses the morose mood in its favor and in a way that thankfully doesn’t feel like a tacky knockoff of Christopher Nolan’s Dark Knight Trilogy. (COUGH*MANOFSTEEL*COUGH*) There are moments of understated beauty here, moments that tend to get overlooked in these kinds of films and I’m so thankful that Reeves included them.

While we’re on the subject of effects, can we just go ahead and give this SFX team all the awards now? They’ve really raised the bar, combining state of the art technology with empathetic animation. And if there is any reason to revisit the ‘Why can’t a computer generated performance qualify for a ‘Best Actor’ Oscar?’ argument, Andy Serkis’ performance as Caeser is it. His capabilities as an actor are truly extraordinary and his performance in Dawn of the Planet of the Apes may be his best this side of Gollum in The Lord of the Rings. Equally strong is Toby Kebbell as the rebellious and dangerous Koba, who spent the majority of his life as a lab experiment and has nothing but contempt for the human race.

The human cast fares about as well as they can in the wake of these two stunning performances. Jason Clarke and Gary Oldman stand at the forefront; the supporting cast featuring Keri Russell, Kodi Smit-Mcphee and Kirk Acevedo give strong performances, despite the limitations of their more simplistic characterizations. The screenplay by Mark Bomback, Rick Jaffa and Amanda Silver does an excellent job of fleshing out its characters so they serve a greater purpose than to stand and gape at all the pretty effects, but there’s no question that the apes steal the show here.

Technically, Dawn of the Planet of the Apes is flawless. I’ve already given a shout out to the VFX department, but also worth mentioning is Michael Seresin’s stunning cinematography, James Chinlund’s striking production design and the haunting score by Michael Giacchino, who continues to cement himself as one of my favorite working composers. Dawn is a visual feast and Reeves orchestrates it with passion and elegance.

Dawn of the Planet of the Apes captivated my attention from its very first shot and never let it go. I don’t think there’s a single wasted moment in the whole 130 minute running time. It’s one of the best films of the summer and, quite frankly, I’d rank it amongst the best films I’ve seen so far this year. It continues to pave the way for what is shaping up to be an incredible ‘rebooted’ franchise. You’ll be hard press to find a blockbuster more emotionally satisfying and thrilling.

FINAL RATING: 4.5/5

Summer Movie Review Catch-Up, The Final Four: Chef, Edge of Tomorrow, The Fault in Our Stars and How to Train Your Dragon 2

CHEF

God, I love Jon Favreau. Us Marvel fans owe him a great debt for essentially kick-starting the Marvel Studios film franchise in the grandest fashion. And maybe it’s a put-on, but he genuinely seems to be one of the nicest people working in Hollywood today.  In the wake of his big-budget filmmaking debut, Favreau has toned it down tremendously, opting to write, direct and star in what is clearly a major passion project for him. Chef might leave you starving for some a great meal by its conclusion, but your appetite for a great movie should be totally satisfied.

I don’t want to delve too much into its plot; I knew next to nothing about Chef going into it and I’d like to extend the same courtesy to you. All you need to know is that Chef is heartfelt and hilarious, an instant charmer with a great cast and a superb screenplay/direction. It delves dangerously close to sentiment in its conclusion, but by that point you’ll be so invested in the characters you won’t even care. One of the best movies of 2014 thus far.

FINAL RATING: 4.5/5 

EDGE OF TOMORROW

It pains me that we live in a world where Transformers: Age of Extinction made more money in its opening weekend than Edge of Tomorrow has in its entire domestic run. While Transformers 4 may mark the age of extinction for cinema, movies like Edge of Tomorrow give me hope for a brighter future. It’s exciting, full of breathtaking action sequences and, to top it all off, it doesn’t take itself too seriously.

Doug Liman, after running into a couple of slumps with Mr. and Mrs. Smith and Jumper, is back in spectacular form. Aided by an intelligent screenplay written by Jez Butterworth, John-Henry Butterworth and Christopher McQuarrie and the impeccable talents of Tom Cruise and Emily Blunt, Edge of Tomorrow is basically the sci-fi action movie equivalent of Groundhog’s Day and what’s not to love about that? This is sure to go down as one of the best sci-fi entries of the 21^st century.

In the wake of the upcoming summer release schedule, Edge of Tomorrow will probably be swept aside in the fray, but if you get a chance, make your way to the theater as soon as possible to support this gem. It’s well worth your time.

FINAL RATING: 4.5/5

THE FAULT IN OUR STARS

I was a bit hesitant to see this one at first. Nothing against the source material, which was very well-received, but it definitely appeared to be catered towards a certain kind of audience. One I very rarely find my views aligning with. After hearing it was written by Scott Neustadter and Michael H. Weber, the same pair who wrote 500 Days of Summer and The Spectacular Now, my interest was kindled. I’m quite happy to say that The Fault in our Stars is rather wonderful. It’s sweet, genuinely funny and rather moving. It doesn’t quite manage to avoid its sentimental tendencies entirely, but, thankfully it isn’t too cloying.

That’s really its greatest strength - it doesn’t pander to a particular demographic. Sure, the male love interest is a bit too perfect, giving the female audience cause to swoon and dream in the hopes that they might find their own Augustus, but the story does not in any way dress up the pain and suffering that comes with cancer. It keeps the story grounded, even when the love story seems a bit too perfect to be totally realistic. And how about that cast? Shailene Woodley turns in another fantastic performance as Hazel Grace; Ansel Elgort is almost nearly her equal, delivering a charming and, at times, rather heartbreaking performance. They are the heart and soul of this movie and their honest performances make it very easy to invest in their characters’ journeys.

It may not be perfect, but The Fault in Our Stars gets by with strong performances, a solid script and great direction. If you haven’t seen it by now, you probably never will. But, don’t be put off by the target demographic; The Fault in Our Stars is really, really good.

Okay?

Okay.

FINAL RATING: 4/5

HOW TO TRAIN YOUR DRAGON 2

How to Train Your Dragon 2 doesn’t quite live up to the lofty standards of its magnificent predecessor, but it gets the job done with great gusto. It’s certainly one of the better sequels out there and a fine continuation of this proposed trilogy. It deepens its characters, darkens the mood and continues to deliver heartfelt animated storytelling of the finest quality.

Taking place five years after the first film, How to Train Your Dragon 2 follows the exploits of Hiccup, now a young adult, and his dragon Toothless. Their village Berk has adapted to life with dragons in the most splendid fashion, integrating them into all their daily activities. Hiccup is next in line to be the village chief, but he’s not quite sure he’s ready for the responsibility or if it’s something he even wants to do. Things become more complicated when Hiccup and his friends get involved in a maniac conqueror's plot to rule the world using a dragon army.

The storyline mimics its predecessor in that it’s essentially about Hiccup re-finding his place in the world. I think there’s a line near the beginning of the movie where Hiccup flatout says, “I might have figured out who I am, but now I have to figure out who I am all over again!” It’s not particularly subtle about its lack of new ideas and despite some really great twists and turns along the way, this sequel doesn’t really push the franchise in any new directions.

Despite retreading a lot of the same character beats as its predecessor, How to Train Your Dragon 2 still manages to entertain, enthrall and stir the emotions. That it feels more calculated is to be expected, but the pleasant surprise is that it manages to rise above its shortcomings, becoming a worthy continuation of this excellent series. Sign me up for #3!

FINAL RATING: 4/5