“Focus” is a movie about con artists and relationships. The movie was good, but unmemorable. The thing is that there is nothing bad that I can say about the movie, except that it was lacking something, but I don’t know what that is.
I don’t buy Will Smith as a con man, but maybe that’s the point because I’m not supposed to. His character is handsome, well dressed, well mannered, well off, and a great con artist, but I don’t see Mr. Smith playing that role. The confussing part about what I just said is that Will played the character really well. Will Smith didn’t do anything wrong. He is a great actor, but like everything else in this movie there was just something missing.
The same thing can be said for the rest of the cast. They all portrayed their characters well, but whatever is lacking in the film kept everyone and everything from reaching the full potentional, which bums me out because I was looking forward to seeing “Major Dad” kicking some ass.
Like I said, the movie has all the makings of a great film, but it doesn’t deliver. I am sad to say that I have to give “Focus” two thumbs down, and I recommend you wait to see it when it comes out on DVD.
“Insurgent” was surprising…surprising that it was any good. Why? Because the first film in the series was one of the worst movies ever made. The first movie, “Divergent”, had absolutely no point at all; they could have literally shortened the film without loosing any of the main points and created an opening for “Insurgent”.
However, I had to see it because I was tricked. My wife and I were at the theater to watch a different movie a few months back. During the previews they showed a metal box that lit up…that’s it. I leaned over and told my wife that movie was going to be good because any time they show a box, especially one that lights up, the movie is always good. She started to laugh because she knew what the preview was for, and she knew that I hated the first movie. So she has been giving me crap about wanting to see “Insurgent” because it has a box. I maintain that I was tricked.
The movie was surprisingly better than the first movie, but not enough for me to see again. It’s almost like that you have to see all of the movies, or read all of the books, together for them to go anywhere or to even make sense. Perhaps once all of the movies have been released and are on TV, I’ll do just that and watch them back to back and so forth to see if there is any point to them.
So in conclusion, “Insurgent” is better than the first movie, but still the worst movie of the year so far. that I have give this movie two thumbs down, and I recommend you wait to see it when it comes out on TV.
“Kingsman: The Secret Service” is a good British spy flick that makes fun of other spy flicks on purpose, even though the movie itself isn’t one of the spoof movies; it is a legitly honest old school spy movie made in the 21st century.
Samuel L. Jackson plays the billionaire baddie that is sickened by violence. In fact this is my favorite Sam Jackson movie ever, because this is probably the first time that he wasn’t “Sam Jackson”. Normally the man has one character that he shares on and off stage, and that character is himself.
“Do you like spy movies, Mr. DeVille?”
“Nowadays, they're all a little serious for my taste. But the old ones...marvelous. Give me a far-fetched theatrical plot any day.”
“The old Bond movies. Oh, man. Ah, when I was a kid, that was my dream job: gentleman spy.”
“I always felt that the old Bond films were as good as the villain. As a child, I rather fancied a futuristic colorful megalomaniac.”
“What a shame we both had to grow up.”
It really is a good movie that is both serious and non-serious all rolled up into one and put on screen at the same time. Less serious than a Bond movie, but a lot more serious than Austin Powers; and no matter how you look at it, it is totally British. I give this movie two thumbs up, and I recommend seeing this in theaters.
“Mortdecai” is a fantastic movie that most other movie reviewers hated. I loved everything about the movie from the characters, to the actors, to Mortdecai’s moustache.
I don’t think that Gwyneth Paltrow was even acting in her role of Lady Mortdecai; based off of interviews and her reputation as a person, which happened to be perfect for this role…the uppity rich snob who’s demanding and gets whatever she wants, but can also be nice (not genuine, but nice to also get what she wants). Perfect for this role! I know that I am being mean, but I am being truthful.
I love the British and weird sense of humor that a lot of Americans seem to not understand. This movie was straight up British, and I love that about it.
Johnny Depp was back, and once again proved that he has depth and is able to shake the Captain Jack persona that he has been known for. Every actor in the movie upheld their own character and played their roles well. There is absolutely no complaints in the cast or their acting abilities in this film.
“Mortdecai” is about the dark side of the art world, hidden treasure, and moustaches. In fact, the whole underlying unsubtle moustache theme helps take this movie to another level.
I could not find one thing to complain about because this movie had a lot going for it, and with that I give “Mortdecai” two thumbs up, and I recommend seeing this in theaters.
“Taken 3” is the best of the “Taken” franchise. Liam Neeson seems to be typecast to play one character for the rest of his life, but that character is exactly what this movie needs.
The story is once again about the unluckiest family in history, and Liam’s character has to do whatever he needs to make things right, unfortunately this time no matter how hard he tries there are some things that he cannot undo. That alone would be enough to make the third instalment better than the first two movies; however, what really sets this movie apart is the addition of Forest Whitaker.
Forest Whitaker drives this movie home for me. He is undeniably one of my favorite actors, and he doesn’t disappoint this time around either. I like the little things in movies that sometimes go unnoticed, like Forest’s rubber band.
Also unlike the first two films, which go together, as in you need to watch part 1 to understand part 2, “Taken 3” can stand on its own as a good action flick, but is not so far out there that it doesn’t flow with the older storylines.
“Taken 3” brought something new to the franchise, and kept it entertaining. With that I give this movie two thumbs up, and I recommend seeing this in theaters.
