External Ratings (as of posting)
IMDB – 6.2/10 from 24,866 users
MetaCritic – 40/100 on 30 critics, 6.7/10 on 104 users

Audience and Scoring:
Ross – 5/10
Weber – 5.5/10

 

Weber

Ever watch a movie and know it’s based off of something – book or otherwise written material that wasn’t directly a movie first?  That’s basically what hit me part way through DU.  It’s not bad, necessarily, especially since I’m not sure this IS based off of any other work.  (A comic is suspected but as I say, unconfirmed.) Anywho.

Solid Vampire Action movie.  It deserves its own subcategory with the likes of Blade, since it certainly doesn’t belong with Interview With a Vampire or Only Lovers Left Alive (fantastic vampire movie, without once saying the word “vampire” throughout).  DU won’t win any awards, but I’d watch it again if I caught it in passing.  It’s well acted and – hopefully – a lead-in to a larger collection of movies in the future if it does well enough.

It suffers however in a few spots.  I really, really wanted a larger, darker Epic Original Vampire (Charles Dance, by the way).  The trailers made it seem like that’s what you were getting.  It comes close but ends up feeling too conversational, not at all like a tortured centuries-old being trapped in a cave the entire time.  Minor though definitely a reason for a lower rating, and overshadowed by a return to Vampire Badassery, where only DIRECT sunlight kills and Vlad – Dracula – is a whirlwind badass mowing down enemies.  Which leads to the next problem: shaky cam during fight scenes.  It’s really not so much DU’s fault as it is a systemic issue with, oh, every fight scene lately.  Super tight angle, lots of motion, hard to tell what’s really going on, etc.  It’s done all over the place and this is no exception.  Finally lapping back to the bookish source feel, there’s something missing, an empathy for the other characters I think.  Sure, you want Vlad to win, he’s the “good guy” this time around, and you want the slimey bad guy to lose. The Turks, their sultan, and their huge army being your antagonist, which was almost wince-inducing by the end of things and borderline xenophobic, but hey.  But everyone else?  Meh.  Vlad loses several close lieutenants / advisors / generals / fighting buddies, whatever, people and you’re SUPPOSED to feel bad, but they wind up closer to cannon fodder than I get the feeling they should have.  Short movie is short; a bit more could have been done to flesh out some people’s roles.

Side note:  there was an interesting attention to detail, as well.  Sword fighters had calluses on hands kinda detail.  Or maybe Luke Evans is just that good.

As my colleague points out, the music was quite well done.  As to be expected from Game of Thrones’ Ramin Djawadi.

TL;DR - Decent vampire flick definitely worth its 
entertainment value.  Nothing mindblowing, a bit 
heavy on the love story, but at least the vampires 
don't sparkle...thank f@#$.  I'm interested to see 
more of this line of vampire lore, too.

 

Ross

 

This movie isn’t amazing or terrible. It isn’t ground-breaking(despite what the trailer may lead you to believe) but its a fairly solid action movie. Luke Evans does dark and brooding effectively, Charles Dance struggles mightily to act through what seems like 30 pounds of makeup, and the rest of the cast stand around being set pieces to work with when necessary.

Gary Shore does a fine job of utilizing a fairly large budget and making a pretty-enough movie. The thing is though, if you want to do an action movie without a ton of plot or character or true threat really, then you have to show me the action. I want to see the fully choreographed sequences in all their glory. You can use quick cuts and shaky cam, just don’t abuse them. I’m not asking for every moment for every character to be fully realized(Michael Bay) but I want to see Dracula mess people up, a lot. This is not to say that all the action-y parts are bad. Far from it, just not totally utilized.

The movie deserves praise for it’s sound and music. The sound design was fantastic, from the echo of batwings to the clang of blades, the IMAX speakers got a full workout. Then there is Ramin Djawadi’s score, which played perfectly to the setting and gravitas of the world we were in.

TL;DR - If you want a taste of old school medieval 
action movie, it's worth it. Not a whole lot here 
besides the cool-factor of Dracula, but okay nonetheless.

External Ratings (as of posting)
IMDB – 8.5/10 from 78,617 users
MetaCritic – 79/100 on 49 critics, 8.1/10 on 355 users

Audience and Scoring:
Ross – 9/10
Weber – 9/10

 

Weber

First, a little meta commentary. Holy what in the what, amazing marketing / trailer packs for this movie. Part of the high rating is entirely due to how well marketed the film was overall. The trailers give away very little. As someone who had his ears plugged and eyes closed for the new Interstellar trailer that preceded the film, this was just overall a good job. Side note: you may not want to see this one if you and the SO are having troubles. It’s not depicting of any kind of normal relationship. I add that because one couple in particular left the theater looking like they never wanted to say much to the other ever again. But I digress.

Moving along. This is, if you couldn’t tell from that first paragraph, a difficult movie not to spoil. The directing pedigree was something I’m honestly glad I didn’t pay attention to beforehand. I may have had a different preconception of things, a different anticipation of events, had I know that David Fincher, of Fight Club, Se7en, and The Curious Case of Benjamin Button fame, was helming this thing. The acting on all fronts was impeccable. As in I believe in Ben Affleck playing not completely bombing Bruce Wayne, now. As long as he doesn’t do that trademark smirk. Which is also pointed out in this movie. I don’t think I breathed correctly for the last, oh, half of this thing. There are also striking moments of humor during the descent into morbidity – it does get very, very dark – coming from the movie’s Nancy Grace (couched in some name I don’t recall, because hey, it might as well actually be Nancy Grace footage). Giggling ensued as she rapidly waffled on the issue and spewed awful and realistic Fox News vitriol every time she was on screen. Everyone acted the hell out of their parts, especially the coffee-swilling detective played by Kim Dickens.

The end is truly creepy. Of the “this is how you scare your horny teenage kids / college goers” variety. Or your grown-ass-wo/man variety. It’s incredibly chilling in its potential for realism, especially when you’ve personally witnessed similar relationships. And that’s where this one brings it home amidst the spectacle. Kids, Weber says don’t stay with someone because you like who you make yourself become for them.  Well, you know, if that person is homicidal or a sociopath or something.

TL;DR - This one is very spoiler free, on purpose.  
The movie deserves it.  Go see it if you like 
thrillers and don’t suspect violence of your SO.  
It’s a solid flim.

 

Ross

 

So Ben Affleck is a pretty good actor, I guess. So is Rosamund Pike and Neil Patrick Harris and everyone else in this movie. This film, walking the fine three sided line between crazy, realistic, and meta as all hell, is a step above it’s own advertising. We all know the premise, lady goes missing, potentially innocent husband is grilled by media, society and the police, and then the rest happens. Spoilers will come, believe you me, but I’m going to try to get through all this other stuff first.

David Fincher does an admirable job translating the best-selling novel to film. His direction is spot on, highlighting the grim world that Affleck and others inhabit, all while ensuring that you see clearly through each character’s intentions. There are no, “mistakes” in this movie from a directorial and design standpoint. Everyone is as they should be, aging as the story progresses, gaining weight, losing focus on different parts of their lives. It is beautifully shot and magnificently framed at every turn.

Trent Reznor and Atticus Ross prove once again that a soundtrack doesn’t need to be a big booming score(not hating on Hans Zimmer, just sayin’), instead it can be a bleak, droning soundscape that is less there to draw attention, and more there to create tension at the perfect moments, and rip away any curtains in others. It isn’t a soundtrack I would buy(because I don’t particularly feel like walking around in a modern-era midwestern family nightmare)but it certainly achieves it’s goals.

The part I’ve been waiting for, where I can tell you about the joyous insanity that is Gone Girl. Amy Dunne is simultaneously the most batshit crazy and perfectly sane person in this movie. She is dragged from her aspirations in New York by her loving Missourian husband to the deep, boring hole that is North Carthage, to stand beside him as he tends to his dying mother. Eventually, mom dies and Nick(Affleck himself) uses her trustfund money to start a bar(aptly called, “The Bar”) and proceeds to cheat on her with one of his creative writing students. So is she justified in leaving him? Yes. Is she also justified in setting up a nationwide manhunt and framing him for her dissappearance/potential murder? Not so much.

 

This girl is a genius, mind you, so she plans all of this to the letter. It’s poetic really, she sets him up nice and proper. She reads her plans to the audience with such clear-cut conviction that it almost makes you question the absurdity of her strategy. Can she really get away with it? Is she really wrong in her decision to ruin him after he has taken so much from her?

 

All in all, yes. Everyone in this movie does bad. The fact that we end up with a frightening American family picture(her pregnant, him being held somewhat hostage by the pregnancy and the sheer weight of their story) is the greatest punishment for them all. The totally-not-Nancy-Grace character breaking the story of her pregnancy helps add to the brutality of their life. Its never going to be just good ol’ midwestern boring again.

TL;DR - Go see this movie. It's good, everyone 
involved does a stellar job and it's gripping from 
start to finish.

External Ratings (as of posting)
IMDB – 7.6/10 from 11,335 users
MetaCritic – 57/100 on 41 critics, 6.5/10 on 61 users

Audience and Scoring:
Ross – 7/10
Weber – 8.5/10

 

Weber

Revenge porn EVERYWHERE!  The best murderer on the planet gets a wild notion to become Totally-Not-the-Punisher and go on a rampage.  My score for this one is a tad high…slightly ashamed of it honestly, but this was one of the more enjoyable, over the friggin top movies I’ve seen in a while.  (Hint: I watch more movies in a week than I critique here, these reviews are all “currently in theaters” at the time of writing.)

Denzel does what a lot of the, uh, salt and pepper acting crowd are doing these days:  let’s make a movie where I (Denzel) get to kick all. the. asses.  But this one is outrageous.  Select Liam Neeson’s two Taken titles, cram them together sans the abductions, toss in a dash of Man on Fire themes, crank it all up it to 11, and add some seriously awesome sound both in the Intense Music and FX department.  That about covers it.  The sound was really particularly impressive; solid score fitting an intense action movie, excellent use of surround sound, and some of the best and most accurate weapons FX this side of Heat – which, you know, is acclaimed for its weapons FX.

The story isn’t all that.  Not by a longshot.  Boilerplate action movie.  Bad Guys do bad things, Good Guy returns to a former lifestyle and proceeds to smash their faces, Bigger Bad Guy shows up to clean up the mess, hijinks ensue.  It’s paced well and Marton Csokas (LotR: Fellowship, xXx (the good one, with Vin Diesel), Kingdom of Heaven, Æon Flux, et. al.) plays a sufficiently Creepy Russian Dude.  Seriously, I was a bit skeeved out during one particular scene.  What IS interesting about the story was the dogged insistence and repetition of Denzel’s character to check his watch and use it to time various events.  It’s shown briefly in the trailer, but it plays a major – but unspoken – part in how he does what he does.  I’ve rarely seen that particular punctuality aspect highlighted so well, especially as it’s done without obnoxiously shoving it in the audience’s face through spoon-fed monologuing or the like.

TL;DR - Equalizer is a solid, enjoyable R-rated action film 
with just enough story to keep it interesting.  While not a 
masterpiece, not by a long shot, it’s definitely entertaining 
if that’s what you’re after.  If you saw the trailer you get 
the gist, don’t expect Count of Monte Cristo.

 

Ross

 

A movie in which Denzel Washington brutalizes and generally murders a large amount of Russian mafia-types. That’s what The Equalizer is, and it is shameless in executing this. This movie felt like Shoot ‘Em Up but with fewer guns and more melodrama. It’s fun, it’s occasionally ridiculous and it’s good at what it does.

Denzel does his job as the rain man of killing mobsters. He counts seconds and stabs people, all while maintaining his seemingly very calm demeanor. His character isn’t a revelation of cinema, nor is the job he did acting it, but he gets the job done efficiently and effectively despite most of it involving just staring at the camera with a slightly menacing look on his face. Martin Csokas is what you’d expect, a crazy eyed, Russian killer without the slightest ounce of remorse. Chloe Grace Moretz, despite appearing to be a main cast member isn’t featured in a fair amount of the film, at least not all the cool, homicidal parts.

The direction isn’t anything to write home about but the movie is fairly pretty. The sound was fantastic(in IMAX), with music that was sometimes silly in it’s seriousness but never lacking in it’s attempts to set you on edge. Violence was handled quite nicely, being simultaneously brutal and not super-gory. People die in some nasty ways but I never found myself asking if this was just an excuse for fake blood and makeup shenanigans.

In a movie about vengeance and hyperviolence everyone involved did a solid job. It isn’t going to win awards or propel any actors into stardom but it’s a good escape if you’re looking to burn a couple hours. Don’t walk in expecting anything too crazy and you’ll leave like I did, satisfied and content with my purchase.

TL;DR - The characters are typical and decent, the story 
doesn’t blow you away and everything happens the way it 
should. Good guy deals with oftentimes surprisingly inept 
bad guys. This is a fun, good looking, loud action 
movie with Denzel in it. 

External Ratings (as of posting)
IMDB – 7.7/10 from 17,263 users
MetaCritic – 56/100 on 32 critics, 7.4/10 on 62 users

Audience and Scoring:
Ross – 7.5/10
Weber – 8.0/10

 

Weber

Caveat: I did NOT read the book beforehand.  Apparently it’s the first of four?  Good to know!  (The titles for the other 3 are atrocious, bee tee dubs.  Sorry.)  Unlike other recent young adult (YA) novels that have been turned into movies – OTHER than Hunger Games, though there are certainly parts that suffer as well – the pacing of Maze Runner was surprisingly well done.  Typically, along with pacing, scene cuts and general plot lines will leave an uneducated viewer filling in large gaps; Divergent comes to mind as one that made me, again having not read the source material, reach a bit or struggle with aspects that had been glossed over or not as filled out due to various movie constraints.

SPOILER: I was somewhat caught off guard by the number of “kids” that die in the film.  I figure it sticks true to the book, but it’s not something you see this side of Lord of the Flies a whole lot.   The characters were, overall, intriguing, and no particular part felt over-acted or poorly delivered.  Fans of HBO’s Game of Thrones should recognize at least one familiar face, but the others were relative unknowns – to me, at least.

Action sequences were well done, and several parts (one shown in the trailer) where the walls of the maze nearly crush someone had me cringing waiting for a stray limb to pop off.  The Greavers were particularly gruesome in all honesty.

It’s not a terribly deep film, but given it’s based on a series of YA novels I wouldn’t expect War and Peace or anything.  Typical Leader of the Pack role struggles exist, but are handled in somewhat novel fashion, if a bit overbearing toward the end.

TL;DR - Solid movie, and I look forward to the next in the series which 
hopefully won't get canned like some of its peers apparently have.  
I intend to go read the source material now, though I have it on good 
authority from my young nieces that it's "just OK."

 

Ross

This movie is a 7. Really though, the art direction and sound design bump it up just a tad. The dystopian world that The Maze Runner occurs in is simultaneously drop dead gorgeous and horribly frightening. The raw, painful nature of the maze shifting and the grating, bellowing noises that it makes are a serious benefit to this, at times, flawed story.

Nothing in this movie is particularly bad in context, though some story moments feel contrived and some characters serve as mildly mysterious exposition machines. It is still one of the better, “Hunger Games” style movies that I’ve seen in a long time. At points the action is gripping and claustrophobic, while the drama between the teens is solid. Characters come off as, for the most part, realistic, given the over the top situation they’ve been put in.

My issues lie with certain moments of direction and the ending. Wes Ball, in his silver screen debut, does some very good work making the world of The Maze Runner both haunting and beautiful. Sometimes he ends up wasting this world with quick-cut, shaky cam, action sequences that left me feeling mildly confused and annoyed that I couldn’t have just been given an easier-to-understand view of the trouble. These moments don’t ruin the movie by any means, just stick out in the middle like a pothole in the road.

The ending has a very similar quality. It was fast, filled with exposition, and hastily put together story-wise. Could leave you with a sour taste in your mouth, or leave you wanting more of the universe they’ve put together here, either way, unsatisfying. Regardless, this movie is worth the 12 bucks to see if you have a spare couple of hours, nothing mind-blowing, but solid in it’s own right.