Joyful Noise (2012)

 
Joyful Noise (2012)

3/10

Starring:
Queen Latifah
Dolly Parton
Keke Palmer
Jeremy Jordan

Directed by: Todd Graff

A movie with Queen Latifah and Dolly Parton in it was watched by me two weeks ago. I know some of you are thinking to yourself, “Why would he watch that?” But hey, someone has to, so I did. And at the very end, I just wished I had left the job to some other reviewer.

The main reason I even gave this movie a shot is that Queen Latifah was in it. She has done some good movies in her days, but this is not one of them.

The only sure thing about Joyful Noise is that the writers must really love Sister Act (Whoopi Goldberg), especially Sister Act 2. Because no matter what happens, all I saw was Sister Act 2. Or in other words, maybe the producers were hoping we’d see this flick and love it as we did the Sister Act, turns out we do not, well I do not, speaking for myself.

The movie follows two women, Vi Rose (Queen Latifah) and G.G. (Dolly Parton), who are forced to co-lead a church choir in a small town after the choir director dies. Rose is all about structure and tradition, while G.G. wants to shake things up with modern songs and a new approach. Naturally, their personalities clash, and the tension spills into the choir.

At the same time, Rose’s daughter and G.G.’s grandson start falling for each other, which adds fuel to the fire. So now you've got choir politics, family drama, and a small town trying to win a national gospel competition while everyone is too busy picking sides. There's a lot of singing, a few forced emotional moments, and of course, the big finale where unity magically wins.

Now, the issue here is not the cast, I have seen better acting elsewhere, but the acting in this movie can fly as a pass — it’s that this movie feels like it was built out of recycled scenes from better films. The whole “two adults fighting while their kids fall in love” thing is tired. Every scene feels like déjà vu, and calling it predictable is being generous. It tries to be Sister Act 3, but without the soul, the humour, or the spark. Just drama, choir rehearsals, and random song choices that make you wonder who exactly this film was made for.

Joyful Noise rides on the wings of clichés. And if you are a fan of clichés, then this movie won’t disappoint. But if you love originality, then stay away.

But regardless, Queen Latifah was good in her acting, and Dolly Parton should stick to singing. Everyone else in the movie should get a life, do not bother seeing this.

Woman In Black (2012)

Woman In Black (2012)

6/10

Starring:
Daniel Radcliffe
Ciarán Hinds
Janet McTeer

Directed by: James Watkins

This will be the first Daniel Radcliffe movie I’ve seen since he dropped the wand at Hogwarts, and I advise you to go see it too.

Woman in Black is a horror movie that Radcliffe pulled off. It’s based on Susan Hill’s novel of the same name and directed by British director James Watkins.

I must say, Harry Potter (Radcliffe) can act. Although it was hard to pass him off as a grown man married with a child, because no matter how I tried to accept his role, all I saw was Potter, and I kept waiting to see if he would stupefy something. This is what happens when you are known with a franchise, it can cause typecasting.

What can I say? If you’re not a fan of horror movies, then this might be a bit boring for you, but if you don’t mind a thrill once in a while, give this movie a buzz.

The story is a little weak, but what horror movie story isn’t? It’s full of clichés, but again, what horror movie nowadays isn’t? The scenery was so well crafted, and the cinematographer made sure we enjoyed a lot of wide shots, so we could take in the beautiful visuals the movie had to offer.

The story goes like this: Arthur, a young solicitor, lost his wife and has been sad ever since. His son wants more of his time, but he’s still too shaken by the loss to be fully present.

His office posts him to handle the estate of Alice Drablow, who owned an English manor called the Eel Marsh House, where she lived with her husband and son, Nathaniel. The townspeople believe the house is haunted and try to chase him off, but he stays. He goes to the house, and strange things begin to happen.

Seeing it as his duty, Arthur (Radcliffe) decides to investigate. As he digs deeper, people start dying. The town tells him to clear off. But he hangs around until he finds out the Woman in Black is after him too.

Directing is just as weak as the story. Who goes to a house, notices some scary stuff, sees people and children moving around, and still decides to hang around?

Also, the townspeople were hostile to Arthur Kipps (Daniel Radcliffe) from the start. The funny thing is — and I blame the director again — Arthur never even tried to find out why. The men of the town gather to run him out for what they believe he has seen, and he never asks what the connection is between what he saw and the deaths plaguing the town. He finally asks that question 15 minutes before the movie ends. (Who waits days to find out why a whole town wants them gone?)

The director also didn’t think it was necessary or befitting for viewers to know what’s going on. I get that the aim was suspense, but to me it was dumb. You’ll have to wait over an hour before the full concept of the movie makes sense. (This was frustrating.)

Enough said. This movie is not half bad, and it’s one I recommend.

This Means War (2012)

This Means War (2012)

4/10

Starring:
Reese Witherspoon
Chris Pine
Tom Hardy
Til Schweiger

Directed by McG

Well, I am a huge fan of romantic comedies, and a good movie is a good movie regardless of who is in it… This is not a good movie though.

Directed by McG (Joseph McGinty Nichol), who is a producer of the TV series Supernatural and also directed both Terminator Salvation and Charlie’s Angels: Full Throttle, he brings his boring, low-class touch to the screen by putting together two spies as wolves and a girl as bait.

Here we have one of the most useless ideas to base a movie on. Not only will this movie be a waste of time, you also have to bear with Chelsea Handler, whose acting career is one that needs to end now. Her acting all through the movie will either make you puke or make you laugh if you find mediocre sex jokes funny. Reese Witherspoon’s delivery of Lauren is not one that should go on her resume, neither is Pine’s delivery of a spy.

The story is simple, we have two field agent spies (Hardy and Pine) who get grounded to desk jobs for their carelessness. This gave them enough time for their social lives, which led them to meet a lady (Witherspoon) they both found fascinating, only to later discover they were dating the same girl.

Pine agreed to back down, feeling he is more of an alpha male than Hardy, but Hardy saw that as a challenge, so both decide to play the game of who gets the girl.

The problem with them deciding to this, is that we get to watch stupidity plastered all over the screen. On Lauren’s side is Trish (Handler), who gives her advice on how to choose the best out of the two.

This bad script was not the only the fact that this wasn’t one of the best romcoms of 2012, but having both Chris Pine and Tom Hardy on the same screen seemed like too much macho for one to bear.

The movie still had times I laughed, won’t lie, but the time Hardy got shot in the nuts is not one of them. Don’t worry, this is not a spoiler — you could see it coming a mile away, the movie did not try to have any suspense. I wonder how Hardy will be in the new Batman movie, where he plays Bane.

All in all, I’d rather sit down and watch a sponge dry than watch this again, this movie is lacking what is needed to make it memorable.

Ghost Rider: Spirit of Vengeance (2012)

Ghost Rider: Spirit of Vengeance (2012)

2/10

Starring:
Nicolas Cage
Fergus Riordan
Ciarán Hinds
Idris Elba

Directed by: Mark Neveldine and Brian Taylor

I wonder what is worse, the idea of a black skull instead of the normal grey skull from part one, or the idea of making Ghost Rider 2 with a script that looked like it was written by toddlers?

I think the latter was worse.

I cannot fathom how such a weak script could have gotten a go-ahead from the studio. If you think there couldn’t have been anything worse than the first Ghost Rider (2007), well, the producers of this movie have you covered.

Nicholas Cage is facing some financial issues, so that is why it seems like he is in every movie nowadays. But by now, out of all the crap he has been dishing out, you’d expect one to be at least good. But I guess I am wishing on a star.

The script being weak is one thing. Now add the lines in the movie. It was unbelievable. The only way you can enjoy this movie is if you are 8 and you catch it on Nickelodeon, Also, the acting in this movie does not also meet the price tag of the production, as it seems everyone was doing it for the money.

Set eight years after the first movie, our anti-hero, anti-villain character Johnny Blaze (Nicholas Cage) is still struggling with the curse of being the Ghost Rider. Learning that the rider is uncontrollable, he decides to flee from all he loves and finds refuge in a remote part of Eastern Europe.

While there, he is approached by some monks to save a boy from the devil. At first, Johnny is reluctant, but the monks make him an offer he can’t refuse — they’ll help rid him of his curse forever, the curse of being the Ghost Rider.

The antagonist of the movie is one of Ghost Rider’s arch enemies, Blackout (Johnny Whitworth), who is a murdering psycho with no control whatsoever (that’s in the comics). Now, what would you expect? We have Blackout and the Rider together in the same movie. You’d expect some fun action, fighting, and cool CGI all wrapped in one movie ride.

But the makers of the movie had something else in mind. The antagonist will be named Blackout, but the only resemblance to the comic version is his face, they changed the entire origin story of the character and also his powers. Not only was that a heartbreaker, it was like looking a gift horse in the mouth. Here was a recipe for a dark movie that would rock, but instead we have to settle for a PG-13 Ghost Rider.

Directed by the Crank guys, Mark Neveldine and Brian Taylor, with a screenplay written by David S. Goyer, the combination of these three still didn’t help make this a must-watch.

I think the studio with the Ghost Rider rights was pulling some gimmick, trying to ride the wave of the upcoming Avengers movie. But sadly, the audience didn’t bite, and the poor box office performance will result in the end of this franchise for now.

What else was wrong with this movie?

Cinematography. I have seen bad cinematography in B-movies, but this was worse. With a budget exceeding $60 million, you would expect better. So where did the money go? Trust me, it was not in the CGI. The CGI was so out of place. What would you expect, the movie was made with like half the budget of the first one.

In the very much future, when the rights go back to Marvel and they’re done with their Infinity War (which was in two parts, last one called Endgame) saga, we can hope for a better Ghost Rider movie. I advise you to take your time to look for something better to watch.

Justice League: DOOM (2012)

Justice League: DOOM (2012)

7/10

Starring (voice actors):
Tim Daly (Superman)
Kevin Conroy (Batman)
Susan Eisenberg (Wonder Woman)
Michael Rosenbaum (Flash /Barry Allen)
Carl Lumbly (Martian Manhunter)
Nathan Fillion (Hal Jordan/Green Lantern)


Directed by: Lauren Montgomery

Justice League: Doom could as well be tagged Justice League: Contingency Plan, because literally that was what it was all about.

What Justice League is complete without the Bat being totally involved? This wasn't an exception, as it was all based on the contingency plan of the Bat falling into the wrong hands.

This animated movie plot has Vandal Savage, voiced by Phil Morris, who is fed up with the world and decides it’s time to burn it all down and rule whatever’s left. His big plan? Wipe out most of humanity and build a new order with himself at the top. Classic villain playbook — global destruction, rise from the ashes. Savage doesn’t just go in guns blazing though, he assembles a crew of familiar DC villains and hands them detailed plans to take down each member of the Justice League, quickly and efficiently.

Here’s the twist — those plans didn’t come from Savage’s genius. They were Batman’s own contingency plans, stolen and weaponized. One by one, each hero gets hit hard and is taken down from Green Lantern, Superman, Wonder Woman, to even Martian Manhunter.

So the League is broken, scattered, and trust gets shattered, punches get thrown, but somehow they still have to come together and save the world. Again.

Mark Waid-penned JLA: Tower of Babel which this movie is based on, where the Legion of Doom is formed to eliminate the Justice League using protocols created by Batman to take down the group should any member ever go rogue.

The movie was adapted and written by Dwayne McDuffie, shortly before his death in February 2011 at age 48, and it is directed by Lauren Montgomery, who also directed the animated versions of Wonder Woman, Green Lantern: First Flight, and Superman/Batman: Apocalypse.

Lauren took Dwayne’s adaptation of Tower of Babel and brought about JL: Doom, which I have to add is one of the best direct-to-DVD movies DC has released so far. The voice actors were amazing in their delivery, and you just feel sucked in and happy, as the voice actors were reprising their roles from various animated DC direct-to-DVD movies.

I believe DC went all the way to make sure the movie was fantastic, because the animation and art style is exquisite.

What didn’t work for me was the pace of the movie — it starts slow at first but picks up later on. Also, with so many characters, there’s little character development, so if you’re not familiar with them and their motives from the comics, you might have trouble connecting with some.

All I can say is buy and watch this whether you are a fan of the DC comics or not, a fan of cartoons or not, this is a movie made for everyone. It gets my 7.

Safe House (2012)

Safe House (2012)

                                       

6/10

Starring:
Denzel Washington
Ryan Reynolds

Directed by: Daniel Espinosa

Safe House — as time goes by, you come to see how weak the script is and how dull it can get.

Other than that, if you are in for some conspiracy and don’t mind a little mix of some action, then Denzel’s delivery of Tobin Frost (Denzel Washington’s character), an ex-CIA agent turned international criminal. He acquires a series of secret files detailing the illegal activities of several worldwide agencies.

The movie plagues on corruption and what people are willing to do to cover it up. The rate of blood and body count is quite high in this movie, as both Reynolds and Denzel have their fair share.

Reynolds plays Matt Weston, a young CIA operative in charge of a safe house (a place to bring prisoners or witnesses to keep them safe) in Johannesburg, South Africa. Been there over a year and has had no visitors.

Tobin Frost (Washington) checks into an American Consulate in South Africa, with a gang of gun-shooting thugs on his heels.

He's taken to the safe house under heavy guard to be interrogated.

The interrogation didn’t last long, as the gun-shooting thugs showed up and made Ryan’s boring life meaningful.

As far as scripts go, this could have been better, I have to be honest. To me, it felt more like an all-out action film with little care on the way it goes, very little character development and bad pacing.

Denzel’s acting was, as usual, excellent and worth commending. Not as grand as the one he pulled off as Eli in The Book of Eli, where he played a man who memorized the whole Bible, but better than the one in Unstoppable, about the train.

Denzel any day is a good lead, and Ryan Reynolds was a good supporting cast. His performance was unbelievably good. It is one thing to be an actor, it is another to be good at it. Now I can comfortably say that Ryan Reynolds is good at it.

If you are expecting to see any comic relief from Reynolds, sorry to disappoint you, none was available. If you were expecting to see him display any macho man attitude, sorry again, that too was removed from the script.

Directed by Swedish director Daniel Espinosa, who did a grand job staging the fights, the shootouts, the explosions, and the car chases. Well, as I said above, Safe House is an action-packed thriller true and true.

Go see it, if you don’t mind action films, with little to no character development or depth.

Journey 2: The Mysterious Island (2012)

Journey 2: The Mysterious Island (2012)

3/10

Starring:
Dwayne Johnson
Michael Caine
Josh Hutcherson
Vanessa Hudgens

Directed by: Brad Peyton

Loud, clumsy and meant to be seen on 3D. The effects and events were all so cheesy, the dialogue so lame, and the landscapes too colorful.

Dwayne Johnson, "The Rock", has in the past two years been in some really funny movies, like Tooth Fairy. Why he decided to do that movie, I don't know.

Then there was Fast Five. I’m not much of a Fast and Furious fan, but he did well there... then he decided to sink lower than the Tooth Fairy joke to do this movie.

This is a sequel to Journey to the Center of the Earth, which Brendan Fraser played the lead in, but due to schedule issues, he couldn’t return.

Studios need to get another hobby, other than the one they all seem to have, which is: "Hey, the part one cost 60 million and made over 240 million in the box office alone, let’s do a part two."

The story had Josh Hutcherson return from the first movie playing Sean, and with him we have his mother’s lover Hank, played by The Rock, who helped Sean decipher a code, which had the location of...

I’ll let you guess.

If you guessed Mysterious Island, you’re right.

Sean believes his grandfather is trapped on the island and needs help.

He and The Rock head off to Mysterious Island, and all I kept thinking was… WHY?

The Rock said it was for bonding, Sean said it was to find grandpa.

Directed by Canadian Brad Peyton, who also directed Cats & Dogs: The Revenge of Kitty Galore, he pulled some amazingly dull stunts in this movie that will go over the head of any adult viewer, as most of the events were just plain bogus and boring.

Here, in their version of “Alice in Wonderland”, the elephants are the size of cats, bees are so big you can ride on them, and don’t get me started on the lizards.

The movie's comic relief guy, Luis Guzman, looked and acted like something out of a Disney home video.

We also have Sean’s love interest Kailani, played by Vanessa Hudgens, who seemed more out of the movie than in it.

I guess my main problem with the movie is the cast. It was like they were acting in another movie. This is not Michael Caine’s best. I still found it hard to believe that the old Michael Caine could have survived on that island alone for that long, but hey, it’s a movie that you should not see.

Man On A Ledge (2012)

Man On a Ledge (2012)

5/10

Starring:
Sam Worthington
Elizabeth Banks
Anthony Mackie

Directed by: Asger Leth

Contains Spoilers

I had two urges this month: watch Man on a Ledge and Journey 2: The Mysterious Island. One down, and here we go...

Man on a Ledge wasn’t a good movie to be honest. The ending was unrealistically manageable, which will either leave you smiling or make you want to puke, especially the scene of the homeless man who liked Nick well enough to tackle a police officer on his behalf.

The story took a while to find its footing, but after about 40 minutes of a poor start and bad pacing, you kind of get a feel for how the movie is going to be.

The plot goes: Nick (Sam Worthington) broke out of prison with the aid of his brother, then causes a scene in a building next to the one his brother was going to help him rob. This scene (caused by Nick) is to keep the crowd and police busy while the robbery takes place nearby.

Eventually, when the police show up, Nick claims to be wrongfully imprisoned and insists he is innocent of the crime he was convicted for, and intends to prove it... by standing on a ledge. Seriously! You can tell the writers weren’t even trying. The movie has no suspense, no twist. It’s just a plain story that keeps trodding along till it ends.

Directed by little-known director Asger Leth, who I believe may have skipped a class in movie school called "WHY THINGS HAPPEN 101." Here I am watching a movie about a man trying to kill himself, then I see cops who I believed to be dirty cops chase this guy off the ledge into the building, and actually try to take him out, then later I see it is all staged, for a robbery and still I am thinking, why? Because I can see how this would not happen or easily fall apart in a real world, so why write it in a movie?

The movie goes on and later you find out they weren’t dirty cops at all?

One thing I’ve learned about movies is that a good cast usually helps make a good movie (I say usually because there are notable exceptions—Gigli). Man on a Ledge boasts Anthony Mackie, who I feel is just wasting his talent. His mediocre performance was only partially overshadowed by Elizabeth Banks. Sam Worthington, who played Nick, is no better in the lead role. You’d think the exposure from Avatar would have helped.

The cinematography is okay. Shots of Sam’s life on the ledge must have been some work for the camera crew, work I wish they had done better. According to Sam, in an interview on The Ellen DeGeneres Show, he actually had to act on a skyscraper standing on a ledge.

Too bad, because I’m giving this movie a 5, and tag it as not worth seeing.

Chronicle (2012)

Chronicles (2012)

7/10

Starring:
Dane DeHaan
Michael B. Jordan
Michael Kelly
Alex Russell

Directed by Josh Trank

With great power... comes great irresponsibility

Chronicle could have been far better if we knew the cast, but the fact that we didn’t made it excellent.

It may sound contradictory, but the movie itself is full of the contradictions of life.

In any case or scenario that we’ve seen Hollywood depict, the guy being bullied or the school clown always later rises above everything and everyone to become a hero.

The rejected stone becomes the chief cornerstone kind of stuff.

Here in Chronicle, he (i.e. the bullied) rose above everyone, and his story arc shifted from protagonist to antagonist, all within the first 30 minutes of the movie.

The plot is about three high school students who found a hole that led to a remarkable discovery. This discovery had its side effects as they started developing uncanny powers, telekinetic.

They start to learn to control their abilities and start to use them to their advantage and also use them to play tricks on people.

Then their lives start to spin out of control, and their darker sides begin to emerge, leading to the whole movie you’re about to go watch.

Well, much has to be said for Chronicle, and a lot of kudos to the director/writer, who by the way was making his directorial debut at 26.

Chronicle was written by Josh Trank (director) and Max Landis, and it crosses borders on the effects of child abuse on a person’s psychology and how power can corrupt even the simple.

I guess the main character Andrew (Dane DeHaan) must not have come across the movie Spiderman, which treats the notion “with great power comes great responsibility.”

Shot from a documentary view and seen as found footage (much like Blair Witch Project), the movie has its bad parts too. Like the reason Andrew kept a camera on all the time. Here are some stupid reasons given by the film and my take on it:

1. A police officer refers to the camcorder next to an unconscious person’s hospital bed and says, “The camera gets to stay on for our investigation.” (Really? When did they start that?)
2. Andrew’s father gets home drunk, and Andrew shouts, “I'm setting up the camera so I can record this.” (Why do you want to record your father abusing you?)
3. Andrew goes robbing and keeps the camera running so as to document his rise in the ecosystem. (I don’t get it.)

All in all, the writers could have done more and taken this movie to the top. The movie showed why Professor X is so important in the training of young mutant minds.

Chronicle may not be a masterpiece, and if you hate the idea of found footage, camera shaking, and loud irritating noise, then Chronicle may not be for you. I have to applaud the acting in this movie though, it was fantastic from all the cast.

Worth seeing.

The Grey (2012)

The Grey (2012)

5/10

Starring:
Liam Neeson
Frank Grillo
Dermot Mulroney
Dallas Roberts

Directed by Joe Carnahan

The first thing that pulled me into this movie was the marketing. They tried to pass it off as some spiritual survival story, probably hoping to hook the Christian crowd.

But let’s be honest, this isn’t a spiritual movie. Unless debates about God’s existence and people yelling at the sky excite you, then maybe you’ll find some meaning. If not, it’s just another survival film with extra talking.

The Grey, for the most part, is half captivating. You get wolves, snow, survival, and some drama in between. We get some info on how wolves hunt, how they behave, and a few other bits, but it’s not deep enough to count as educational.

Originally, the lead role was meant for Bradley Cooper, but Liam Neeson stepped in. And to be fair, he held it down. Hats dip to you, sir.

The story kicks off with a plane crash—oil rig workers stuck in the middle of frozen nowhere, Alaska-style. They’re barely holding it together, and then the wolves show up. Glowing eyes, constant howling, full horror setup.

The first guy gets taken while he’s meant to be on watch. From that moment, you know the wolves are running things, and it becomes a countdown from there.

Now, if that was all the film gave us, I’d easily rate it an 8. But no… they had to start getting philosophical. Long talks about God, why bad things happen, what’s the meaning of it all. Every time they sat around the fire to talk, I was just waiting for a wolf to jump in and interrupt.

Why does every survival movie need a smart-ass?

You’ve got a group of clueless men and one guy who knows the wild—his actual job was to protect the rig from wolves. But still, someone always wants to challenge him. “Who made you leader?” Really? In this situation, the guy with actual knowledge is the leader. It’s common sense.

There’s a saying: in the land of the blind, the one-eyed man is king. This guy had two eyes and still had people questioning him. That trope is tired.

That’s just sick.

The visuals were solid though. The camera work, the tension, the mood—all done right.

In the end, I think they wanted to mix survival with big life questions. At one point, Neeson’s character is yelling into the sky, asking God to show up. But nothing happens, so he keeps moving.

That kinda sums up the film. It starts strong, dips into too much talk, and then ends the way you probably expected.

Seeking Justice (2012)

Seeking Justice (2012)

5/10

Starring:
Nicolas Cage
Guy Pearce
January Jones

Directed by Roger Donaldson

I have to be honest, I’m not a Nicolas Cage fan. Worse, I’m not a Guy Pearce fan either. Put these two together and add “Produced by Tobey Maguire (Spiderman)” and you have a recipe waiting to be boycotted.

But funny enough, the movie isn’t half bad. Not so great, but as far as B-movies go, it is okay.

Again, Cage and Pearce prove that they are not the reasons to be going to the cinema, which I must add.

The story is simple. Will Gerard (Cage) is a high school teacher whose wife Laura (January Jones) got beaten and raped while he was in school, by a man named Hodge.

In the hospital, he’s met by a man (Guy Pearce) who promises to handle the guy who did it. All Cage had to do was promise to do some other jobs for him when the time comes. Who agrees to that?

Cage did, thinking this way with the man gone, it will spare Laura the ordeal of having to go through a drawn-out trial that would cause her to relieve the matter, thereby prolonging her suffering, well he was led to that thinking anyways.

So, that night, Hodge is killed, and a picture is sent to Will as proof. 

Now, six months later guy (Guy Pearce) calls and asks for a favor. One thing led to another, our school teacher is wanted for murder, and that’s all folks.

The movie is a proper B-movie, having all the classic B-movie antics. Well, enough hating on the movie, let’s talk about what was right with it.

I wasn’t bored.

It could have been better planned, and the premise was just not it at all. But all in all, it’s a good way to kill time.

This is not the first movie Cage is doing that is not worth paying for. He has done loads.

After The Sorcerer’s Apprentice, all the movies I’ve seen him in have been just chaotic. We had to see him wield a sword in Season of the Witch, play a coming-back-from-the-grave guy in Drive Angry. All of these have not been worth the time I spent seeing them.

I look forward to his next movie Ghost Rider 2, hoping to have fun watching that, since it is a franchise movie I expect the writing, the acting and work should be a lot better.

But concerning this, I recommend you do not bother seeing it. You see, as I said it is not half bad, but it is bad enough that I cannot in good conscience say, go see it. So, see it at your own risk.

Haywire (2012)

Haywire (2012)

4/10

Starring:
Gina Carano
Michael Fassbender
Ewan McGregor
Bill Paxton
Channing Tatum

Directed by: Steven Soderbergh

The Ocean's Eleven, Twelve and Thirteen director made this Lem Dobbs–badly scripted action thriller about conspiracy and all that.

So what is good about Haywire?

The cinematography is classic. Steven Soderbergh did a good job directing this movie, and kudos to the editing team, as the movie starts with you wondering what’s going on, as we see former American Gladiator Gina Carano playing Mallory engage in a fight with Aaron (Channing Tatum) after an exchange of words. Then cut scenes of the past mixed with the present take us through the whole plot of the movie.

The plot: Mallory at a diner takes out Aaron in a fight and takes a diner customer hostage. In the course of the slight police chase that follows, she starts to fill him in on the backstory:

She and Aaron worked together on a job in Barcelona, rescuing a Chinese dissident (Anthony Brandon Wong) for a client (Antonio Banderas). Both Mallory’s boss Kenneth (Ewan MacGregor) and Coblenz (Michael Douglas) seem to share a secret about the true nature of the Barcelona operation. Kenneth coerce Mallory to do another job where she is to pair with a spy, Paul (Michael Fassbender: Shame and X-Men: First Class). From here everything changes and the conspiracy starts.

So what is bad about Haywire?

The fight scenes are well choreographed but dull, you will see what they want to achieve, but it comes off slow and stiff. The acting of Gina Carano showed that she hasn’t had much experience acting, as she acted like a brick from the beginning to the end of the movie. The close-ups on her face didn’t help.

The introduction of Michael Douglas and Banderas was just a stunt to get people to the cinema, as their roles were as insignificant as the time I wasted watching this thriller.

The ensemble cast in this movie just play around the conspiracy till the end, a style of movie that I don’t believe should be done. Things just keep twisting and turning, and you don’t get the whole picture till the very end, that is if you sat down till the end, and you are not bored stiff. You are watching a movie about a woman beating up every guy she comes across, and after you have been watching for an hour, you start to lose interest.

I watched for over an hour and I still didn’t know why she was doing all this revenge stuff. If not for the fact that I have to review it, I would have walked off.

The movie is a sad excuse to show off Gina’s fighting skills, as it's clear the acting still needs some work. I recommend you go see another movie instead.