"There's no 'I' in 'team', but there is in 'horrible'."

My thoughts...

Battle of the Year is a film about a team of American all-star "b-boys"(a style of breakdancing) that are assembled to compete at the world's biggest b-boying competition in France.

After fifteen years of failed attempts to win the coveted championship prize, the USA team's sponsor, Dante Graham (Laz Alonso), looks to break the drought by hiring a new team coach, Jason Blake (Josh Holloway).

Coach Blake comes in and cleans house by getting rid of every current member of the team. He uses a local dance showcase as his source to recruit a completely fresh crew.

Coach Blake has never managed a b-boying squad before this.  He was, at one time, well-known in the field of basketball.  At his peak, he coached his team to many championship victories.  His ability to win is why Dante Graham hired him for the job. Having no prior knowledge of the art of b-boying, Coach Blake brings on an assistant, Franklyn (Josh Peck), to help him with the technical aspects of coaching the squad. They are given a three-month window of time to prepare and ultimately go up against the world's best b-boyers from each country.

What seems like a clear and concise set up for the plot is actually the beginning of an atrocity that becomes Battle of the Year.  If I had to describe the film in one word: corny.

Let's start with the cliché’s of this film. Coach Blake, a renowned basketball coach, loses his wife and son in a tragic car accident and, as a result, becomes a low-life alcoholic.  Seriously?  Yeah, it’s an easy way to kill someone in a script; but it’s a tacky way to create backstory.  Why not use the backstory to add mozre to the character?   And let me just say this: if becoming an alcoholic is not convincingly justified, then don’t create that persona for the character.  It seemed like, for me, the writers couldn't think of a better way to describe why this character's life sucked, so they killed his family and made him an alcoholic.

Other cliche`s that littered this film were Franklyn's desperate attempts to be recognized for his intense knowledge of B-boying and, later, his validation that he belonged with the team. My favorite character: the dancer with a wife and child who sees this competition as a way to a better life.

I couldn't tell what was worse: Chris Brown's acting or the film itself.  Chris Brown tries to play this rebellious teen that won't follow Coach Blake's strict agenda. At times, Brown is shown mocking Coach Blake's words behind his back. What was supposed to come off as defiant and cocky ended up melodramatic and dismissible. I thought Brown's whole performance was in need of some humility. That finally came when he got clocked in the face, for me, the highlight of the film.  Was it Brown’s performance or character???

Brown's performance didn’t help his supporting dancer's performances either. When it comes to B-boying, it’s easier to teach a dancer to act rather than teach an actor to dance.  It takes years and years of practice to master the steps. It’s clear, in this movie, that the dancers were given an "Acting 101" pamphlet and told to figure it out on their own.  Films, such as Miracle, have proven that it’s possible to train athletes into decent and believable actors.  It would have been nice if they could’ve pulled off the same scenario teaching these dancers to act.

After five pages of notes, I finally left the movie.  The use of montages felt like cruise control, their cheesy pep-talks couldn't motivate a 5th grader to eat his vegetables, their celebrations weren't organic in any way and the use of horrible cliché one liners seemed to make up the recipe for this film.

The worst part: the disappointing dance sequences. It would have been nice to watch a dance routine from beginning to end.  Instead, they used sporadic shots of the routines that felt like they were assembled from a highlight reel. This would have been a great place to make up for some of the poor storytelling.  But, it was just another disappointment.

I wondered how they got the funding for this movie; but then I remembered the Sony and Puma product placement, and it all made sense.  

What I Didn't Like (to recap):

1.     Cliché’s

2.    Poor Performances

3.    Bad Dance Sequences

What I Liked:

1.     The documentary style footage of the crew traveling to France. Maybe the whole film should have been shot this way.

2.    The images of France.

3.    Uh... That's really it. 

Go see it? No. If you want to watch quality b-boying videos, I suggest you take the electronic device you are reading this on and YouTube search "B-boying". My guess is you will be more entertained with what you find doing that than going and seeing this waste of time.

Overall Rating: 0.5/4 Stars

These are my thoughts... Not yours!

-Big Red

"It has Sandra Bullock AND George Clooney in it, it has to be good, right?"

My thoughts...

Gravity is the story of Sandra Bullock, as Dr. Ryan Stone, and George Clooney, as Matt Kowalsky, as they work together to try and survive after an accident leaves them adrift in outer space.

My initial reaction after watching this film was just, "eh". I wasn't overly thrilled with it, but I didn't feel it was a complete waste of my time either.

The story starts out in space with Dr. Stone and Kowalsky floating around their spaceship; Dr. Stone making repairs to the ship and Kowalsky attempting to set a world record for minutes spent treading in space. There’s no backstory… No setup… Nothing... Okay. So then, an emergency abort mission is called in through Kowalsky and Dr. Stone’s headsets from Mission Control in Houston and they’re told to return to the ship immediately. Right from the get go, our main characters lives are in immediate danger and we're all of a sudden supposed to care about these characters without knowing anything about them? That was problem number one for me.

I did like Dr. Ryan and Kowalsky as characters, but without a backstory, I didn’t have much reason to care for their well-bring. That may sound harsh, but, let’s face it, caring about a character is the essence of a movie. When you connect with a character on an emotional level and something tragic happens, you’re able to empathize with that person as though it’s happening to you. This movie just skimmed right over that part.

Gravity was almost like a crossword puzzle to me; there were blanks that needed to be filled in.  The lines of the characters fed the plot right to our ears- not giving us, the audience, a chance to think for ourselves; this is known as exposition. Personally I would have preferred a more creative way of receiving the back-story on the film’s two main characters.  Especially, since we only know them as astronauts in space.

Although I understood each theme of the film, it felt as though they, too, were spoon fed to the audience. Overall, I think it had good vision, but the execution was not all there for me.

I will say it’s very eerie watching these characters interact in space. The dead silence spoke louder than any words could have; but again, its impact was lost the moment the characters also commented on it.  As if we couldn’t figure it out ourselves…

As I was once told, "A good film should be able to be told no matter where the characters are. In a desert, on a ship, or in prison. Doesn't matter." The pure truth of Gravity is this: In my opinion, I don’t think this film would’ve survived in any other setting; and that's a problem. Space played a big part in this film, but I think the filmmakers relied on it too much.

What I Liked:

1.     The Idea: As I said in the review, the skeleton of the film was there and the foundation was laid, the building was just never built correctly. But it was a fascinating idea.

2.    The Camera: I don't know HOW they did it, but I thought I was in space for 90 minutes. It was gorgeous and very convincing. I saw it in 3D and it’s definitely worth the few extra dollars. SIDE NOTE: If you are prone to motion sickness, be careful. There's more spinning than the teacup ride at Walt Disney World.

3.    The Acting: Bullock and Clooney’s performances were both very good. It was unfortunate the director didn’t do their acting skills justice.

What I Didn't Like:

1.     Lack of Backstory: I can't stress this enough. If there's nothing giving the audience a reason to care, it's a forgettable film.

2.    The Dream: Really? That was a dream? What was the point? So she realized how to overcome the problem? Again, forced information. And that's a sub point I didn't like, the force-fed information. It infested this film and ultimately weakened it.

3.    The Ending: I'm talking the end, end. I won't spoil it, but when you see it, you'll wonder, "REALLY?! Of ALL places?!" I'm trying to stay as vague as possible. 

Go see it? I would say it was worth my time, but it may not be worth the price of a movie ticket. If you do decide to go see it, go all out, get the 3D tickets.

An Oscar nod? There is a lot of stir about Oscar nods for both Bullock and Clooney and possibly Emmanuel Lubezki for his cinematography work. None of which surprises me as I applauded all three of their work!

Overall Rating: 2.5/4 Stars

These are my thoughts... Not yours!

- Big Red

Gravity Official Trailer

"After all the horror films that have come out, should I waste my timewith Insidious Chapter 2?"

My Thoughts...

With all of the scary movies coming out from The Conjuring to The Purge, one of them has to be good right?

I am personally a big fan of the Insidious series when it first debuted in 2010. After seeing it, there was no surprise they were setting up for a sequel.

I couldn't wait, but I was also really nervous. I liked the first one so much that I didn't know how they'd treat the second one. Even calling it Insidious Chapter Two still made me question if this would be a true sequel. Would it follow the story line of it's predecessor, or would it veer off into a completely different direction?

Kudos to director James Wan for keeping it right on track with the first Insidious. I love it when a director brings a story full circle and everything falls into place. He also kept the very unique and classic horror style that had originally enticed me with the first Insidious.

This film is filled with intense build ups and gratifying scares that will have you clutching the edge of your seat. But the unique thing that makes this film better than most horror films are the comedic relief points Wan gives his audience. Times when the audience can laugh and relax a little. A technique that I give Wan a lot of credit for using; and using effectively. 

I think it's the comedic relief, in between the mix of build ups and scares, which helps the audience relate to the movie; and ultimately brings about a scarier experience. A horror film with long periods of builds and a few jolts here and there just doesn't seem to have the same effect. 

Take notes filmmakers. COMEDIC RELIEFS IN HORROR FILMS IS A GOOD THING!

At times, Wan goes a little over the top with the dramatics of the film, but for a horror film, that's almost expected.


WHAT I LIKED:

1. Comedic Relief: Wan used this to his advantage to give the audience time to relax and thing everything was okay before he began his next scary beat int he film.
2. Horror: Wan never takes the horror to far. He scares you and moves on. A thing other horror films seem to lack. They like to prolong the horror, like its suppose to continue scaring you after your brain has already processed what's going on.
3. Overall Story: If this had been another case of a bad sequel, I may have just given up horror movies for good. Insidious revives my belief that a good horror film can be made with a purpose and a quality story line that will leave the audience guessing.

WHAT I DIDN'T LIKE:

1. Another Sequel?: That's what it seems like anyways. Wan left the ending of Chapter 2 much like he left the original: open ended. And if I was worried the first time about the second one messing up the quality of the first Insidious, now I'm petrified. 
2. Corniness: Sometimes, the corniness was just too much. I was rolling my eyes at times, especially with the dialogue.
3. Movie Theatre: This is just a personal note... I love the movie going experience, but for some reason people like to think that going to the movies is an interactive experience. He can't hear you saying, "OH NO! DON'T GO IN THERE!" So please, shush. This is not your living room.

Go see it? Yes! But WATCH THE FIRST ONE BEFORE YOU DO!!! I can't stress that enough. otherwise you'll be an adult lost in a McDonald's ball pit.

Overall Rating: 3/4 Stars

Those are my thoughts.. Not yours!
- Big Red

Insidious Chapter 2 Official Trailer