The Voices (2015)

Voices

Dave’s 3-Word Review:
Interesting perception…weird.

Once in a good long while, you run into a movie that takes you aback for a moment. Not in a good way, but not necessarily in a bad way either. More like in a way that forces you to collect your sanity from the ground…where it was probably left during the viewing of said film. It’s usually so different from what you’re used to that if you’re a critic like me, you might need to freshen up your critiquing skills – because this particular movie was a bit of a challenge. So, if you’ve seen The Voices starring Ryan Reynolds – you probably understand where I’m coming from. If you haven’t seen it, I don’t feel super comfortable telling you that you need to either. It’s a movie that will either cross your path or not…and my ability to determine whether its good or bad is, in the end, kind of pointless…but I’ll try anyway.

The Voices is really about a man that’s crazy, but you see and feel the world through his eyes. In this world, everything is so chipper, bright, and colorful and everyone loves him…but in reality, it’s dark, strange, and everyone thinks he is a little off. Any story involving a main character hearing voices also seems to fall into the territory of psychotic and murder…which this eventually does as well. The way they go about it, though, is very different. You understand how crazy and demented he is, but you understand how his mentality is separate from his intentions at the same time…it’s honestly kind of smart.

Here’s what I had a problem with…movies like this that mix and mash tones don’t sit well with me. They feel imbalanced because that’s what they are. They are imbalanced because the main character himself is completely imbalanced…so yes, it’s smart. However, smart movies don’t always work for me because I’m also a guy built from simplicity – what is your main reason for watching this movie? Is there really a purpose? These questions end up receiving an answer of “no”, and because of that, I had trouble enjoying this film…I just didn’t understand why I was watching it. It’s a dark humor type of movie, and those are always touch and go. Whenever you find yourself in these dark comedies, pay attention…the way these movies typically play out and eventually end is commonly similar and leave you feeling a little empty and maybe dissatisfied, and the same applied for The Voices.

I feel bittersweet and almost flawed because I don’t always get the same out of some movies that others do. I understand and appreciate the hidden smartness of the movie, but these movies also tend to leave a bad aftertaste in my mouth after I watch them and all I can really say is that in the end, I don’t care to ever see it again. If anyone is like me, I think it’s important to inform them how it was for me. Reynolds, of course, did a phenomenal job in his role, and knew how to perform his scenes of oddities rather splendidly…but for me that’s just not enough to get me to warrant a return.

The Good:

Direction/Perception: This is a smart film that created mirroring scenarios between an imbalanced character and an imbalanced direction in overall tones. By taking the route of seeing the world through the crazy man’s eyes, the film transformed a seemingly typical overdone story and made it something special.

The Bad:

Entertainment: For me personally, I wasn’t entertained. It was dark humor, and not specifically the kind I like. It was the kind that leaves a bad taste in my mouth and ultimately leaves me dissatisfied because after all is said and done…there’s not too much of a point to this movie and not too much of a point to watch it at all.

Fifty Shades of Grey (2015)

50-Shades-of-Grey

Dave’s 3-Word Review:
Abusive and shallow.

I normally avoid reviewing any type of movie that is shamelessly made to simply arouse its audience. I don’t see the point in doing so, and typically speaking, it’s a little awkward for me to say the least. More than anything though, these films are definitely geared towards a smaller general audience than most films – while everyone else is probably going to hate it. Fifty Shades of Grey, for example, was clearly just adapted to a movie because the book itself sold more than it should have – and so the movies wanted a piece of the cut as well. I’ve heard a lot of bad things about both the book and the film, and because it has gathered so much controversy, I find myself in an unfortunate obligation to provide my own two cents into the mix.

Many of you aren’t even sure about what this plot is, but have heard that is is derived from its original source: A Twilight fanfiction – other than that, most of you are clueless. That’s because there isn’t really any plot, it’s about Anastasia Steele, a student of English Lit who has a really big assignment – interview billionaire Christian Grey. It is at this interview where the two fall desperately in lust with each other, and all the hi-jinks of misconstrued BDSM pursue.

Out of everything this film has to offer, I find that the most important to state is the title. Fifty Shades of Grey gives off the impression that somewhere in this film lies depth. First of all, you could see it as not just a black or white film, but a deep film with all the complexities in between. OR, because the main character’s name is Grey, it implies that his character is infinitely complex and diverse as well…but neither is correct. Everything about this film screams the opposite of depth. I don’t think I’ve ever seen anything so absolutely shallow in my entire life. Christian Grey isn’t complex. He has a one-track mind type of guy from the beginning of the movie all the way to the end. Everything he says and does is in reference to his kinky nature. Even when we are offered the ability to learn what he does for a living, the answer is simply tossed to the side as if it doesn’t matter. Give us a different side to him…give him meaning. Give him a life…nope. There’s nothing special about him.

The second thing I need to mention is abuse. It’s been stated everywhere by now that the BDSM presented in this movie isn’t true to real dominant/submissive lifestyles. That instead, it is abusive. From my understanding, that’s truer for the actual events in the book than it is in the film. Nevertheless, I do see some abuse. It’s hard for me to really state everything that is absolutely wrong, because I’m not exactly a BDSM expert…to me, the entire concept is abusive, but some things that happen in this movie are inherently wrong, like the way he treats her in general. He gives her ultimatums, stalks her, threatens her – and this is all done in all seriousness…because that’s just who he is, when in reality, it’s all just supposed to be done for fun. This was too serious. Which is why I can see the abuse.

Of course, the story wasn’t trying to suggest abuse and downright sexual harassment and rape is cool or anything. Of course not. From the get go, it was just trying to arouse its audience, whether that be the readers or movie watchers. The generic idea of – let’s make as many sexy scenes as possible by two attractive leads…the rest doesn’t matter – is the exact reason why this film is absolute horse crap. It’s mainly shallow, and without any real depth or substance, you honestly lose any real reason to continue watching it.

The Good:

I’m trying very hard to come up with something that’s actually good about this movie, and I came up with two things. One – production wise, the film looks nice. It is visually appealing and the music works pretty good. Two – even though this isn’t really saying that much, the actors did really good with what they were given…which was crap. I know it’s hard to really notice their ability to act under such a horrific script, but I promise it’s there. Anastasia’s character, specifically, probably had the most depth and range – so she was probably the best out of everyone. Take that as you will.

The Bad:

Honestly? Read the rest of my review – it all comes down to the fact that this is infinitely shallow, promotes abuse, and is mostly just created to make money and arouse viewers.

Hot Tub Time Machine 2 (2015)

Hot-Tub-Time-Machine-2

Dave’s 3-Word Review:
Stupid, but okay.

When you have a film with a title of Hot Tub Time Machine, there’s simply no way on earth you need to take it seriously – and yet it happens. From its origins, this series was meant to be taken as it is – which is stupid with inside jokes pertaining to period humor. That’s it, but you get everyone calling out how horrible it is…which is fair – it is stupid…but I actually somewhat enjoyed the second film. Time travel, specifically, is an interesting concept to follow into franchise sequels, and the way Hot Tub Time Machine 2 did it…is a bit reminiscent of other time travel flicks like Back to the Future. Both in direction, ideas, and how they describe the science. So what is it about?

Well, in the second film, our group is back (minus John Cusack), and are in a bit of a bind. Their successful lives are taking a turn and when Lou (Rob Corddry) is killed in the present, they have to go to the future to save his life – because the killer is from the future…in a different timeline. I can’t explain the science, just watch it, they steal Back to the Future’s explanation anyways.

When you get right down to it – that’s the plot. They have to go to the future to find Lou’s killer…whoever that may be. Now at this point, I was extremely worried about the film. It didn’t have a strong opening and absolutely required knowledge of every scene in the first film…but once it got into the future, I was okay with it. While the previous movie focused on period humor, making jokes about the past with knowledge of the future – this film’s setting was dealt in the future. Like in Back to the Future 2, it instead focused on an idea of where the world is going…in an entertaining, over-exaggerated light – specifically speaking…the direction of the media and what it will eventually take to excite an audience. That’s nothing new though – we’ve seen similar interpretations in several futuristic and alternate movies…even including The Hunger Games.

This was a comedy, though, so I have to address how funny it was or wasn’t. Again, this deals with a lot of stupid humor, just like the first one did – but I have to admit I didn’t laugh as much. As cool as it is to focus on where the world is heading for the future, the audience just doesn’t connect as much with it unless they go to the past. People are familiar with things that have actually happened, so to make fun of that with several inside jokes is what truly made the first film better. Not the characters or writing, but the attitude towards changing the past without repercussions and just saying….screw it. I laughed with the first movie, I didn’t with the second. That’s not to say I didn’t enjoy myself…I just didn’t physically laugh, and I think that’s important for a comedy.

I will say, without spoiling anyone, that the ending was the best part of this film. For several reasons. In fact, waiting for the events in the end pretty much made the rest of the movie worth it. The end, by the way, did have me laughing.

The Good:

People can complain all they want about Hot Tub Time Machine 2, the fact is I’ve seen worse. I watched this movie without complaint and appreciated its explanation on where the world is heading, even if it was all just a gag.

The Bad:

First of all, no one asked for this movie to happen. Second of all, the best parts of this film were taken from other sources…then again, I don’t think they were ever claiming to be original. Finally, the jokes just didn’t work as well, because these films draw strength from making inside jokes about the past because they are from the future – going further into the future just switches that around, giving the people in the future the ability to make an inside joke…and the audience is unfortunately left out of the inner circle…so it wasn’t that funny.

Furious 7 (2015)

Furious-7

Dave’s 3-Word Review:
Adeaue, Paul Walker

What can I say? The Fast and the Furious series is one of legends…it’s not exactly perfect. It has so many flaws, plot holes, and technical issues – but at the same time, each of these films, particularly from five onward, has been out of this world exciting and full of entertainment. What you love about these films is a mixture between the characters and their chemistry, the action sequences, and the cars. It’s really simple – this series was meant for guys. Cars, chicks, violence, and beer. If you can take that with a grain of salt, then I encourage you to watch Furious 7 – because all in all, they did it again.

Before you go to the movie, though, I do recommend you freshen up on the series, because at this point, a lot has happened. That’s not rocket science. There’s not too much flashbacks as the movie begins, so if you’re not full of F&F trivia…you might be a little confused as the film begins…but you slowly start to piece things together. I’ll give you the cliffnotes – Deckard Shaw (Jason Statham) is out for blood – specifically speaking, Dom’s (Vin Diesel) because his gang put his brother in the hospital. The NSA, or something like that, is willing to give Dom access to God’s Eye, a seriously intrusive security service – to find Shaw – if he’ll agree to do something for them in return..which involves lots of action, stunts, and explosives.

Alright, so I had some issues following the plot as the film began. It’s been a while since I’ve seen the other movies, but when you keep introducing characters, it becomes a bit of a hassle to juggle everything and still make sense. Thankfully, I expected as much, so this wasn’t as big of a deal. You watch these movies for the crazy things that they do, and trust me when I say – there is a lot of great things going on in this film…a lot of it is shown in the trailer…but still. It has a strong focus on Vin Diesel’s character this time around, as he faces off against Statham. There’s a lot of revenge and emotion going on between these two, and it’s really pretty fascinating to watch.

Now that there are seven movies, it’s starting to get really difficult at picking a favorite. Ever since the fifth movie came out, each film has been consistent at displaying just the right amount of energy and emotion. I have to say either the 5th or 6th film is probably my favorite, but again, this is up there. It’s mostly bittersweet because of Paul Walker and his recent passing. There was a lot of questions surrounding how the film would ultimately play that out – and I have an answer.

There are specifically three main scenes that appeared to be altered in respect to Paul Walker’s passing. One is near the beginning, when he is made to promise that there will be no more funerals…I feel like this was key, and they had to put it in – his face just didn’t look right. It was there, but I wouldn’t be surprised if it was CGI. Later on, there is a huge action fight scene that Walker stars in…but it’s distant, dark, and is done with careful choreography and camera angles. That’s not him. The last scene I noticed was clearly made as a form of farewell that could have only been done after he died – and I’ll let you decide for yourselves…but I’m pretty sure it was CGI again.

As for respect – they did a good job at making this a send-off film for Walker. Obviously the movie couldn’t be made the way they originally wanted it to be made, but with all due respect, they still did a really good job with it. I wish I could explain more about the route they took, but it would just be too spoilery. Watch it and decide for yourself, but personally, I had fun watching it, and believe the movie itself did a good job saying goodbye to a beloved actor.

The Good:

This movie kind of had it all. It was action oriented, as always, had an amazing cast, characters, and chemistry – and it was really smart with its farewell message to Paul Walker.

The Bad:

Obviously, they had to change things up. The initial vision had to be changed, and I think Paul’s death effected some scenes that if you’re paying attention – can spot right away. They did a good job, no doubt, but you can spot a few things here and there that feel off or incomplete.

Insurgent (2015)

Insurgent

Dave’s 3-Word Review:
Packed, but solid.

Oh No! Not another young-adult dystopian sequel movie with young romance and stereotypically attractive leads! Now that I got that out of my system…get over yourself! It is what it is, and yeah it may have some undoubtedly predictable qualities, but the true reason you actually watch these things are for everything else. The story, the twists and turns that you wouldn’t normally expect. The Divergent Series is actually a little bit of a ballsy one if you ask me, and Insurgent was always my favorite book out of the entire book series – and the same may just apply for the film’s adaptation as well. However, with any movie, it sure does have its flaws and strays away a little from the source material, but other than that…it’s actually pretty entertaining all on its own.

So, Tris is on the run from the power-hungry Erudite faction members, led by the insufferable Jeanine. No matter where she goes, the guilty memories of lost loved ones captivates her living dreams, and she simply will not stand until Jeanine stands for her crimes. So she sets off to find others like her and those willing to fight for what is right. Meanwhile, Jeanine needs a strong Divergent to unlock a mysterious McGuffin box that holds the answers to the universe…or something like that.

Insurgent was always my favorite part of the series, because not only does it match the tone of the first film, but it also introduces a heck of a lot more action. No need for all that character development and lovey-dovey humdrum bologna that the first film insisted on – we can now focus on what makes this series…well…kind of epic. There is a lot of action and there is a lot of twists and turns that no audience member could really predict. However, if you’re going to put all the action of a book into a two-hour film, you’re going to face some serious time constraints which don’t really feel natural.

Our mighty band of heroes definitely kick tail here, but they do it by going from “faction” to “faction”. We see a new angle for pretty much every faction that we haven’t before, but in the end it feels like it’s almost rushed. The book obviously takes its time introducing you to these factions, and the way the book does it is really, really cool. The movie simply didn’t have enough time to show you everything, and so each scene change only lasts a few minutes before it’s onto the next – so it definitely feels rushed.

I can’t say I wasn’t entertained, though. There were a lot of really energetic and fun scenes in this film that seem to be choreographed really well – and it should be noted that the actual story is solid. No matter how rushed it might feel, you’re never confused as to what’s happening. You know what’s going on, you know why, and you have a good idea about what they need to do to accomplish it – but the ride along the way is just too much fun to ignore. The only problem you might have with understanding the movie comes down to how much you remember about the first movie – as the story heavily relies on the first film. It’s definitely not a standalone feature.

The Good:

Insurgent surprisingly does a good job at staying true to the book while introducing its own interpretation as well. The changes made were made well and kept the idea intact. For the most part, it’s more of an entertaining and fun ride watching this action-packed sequel.

The Bad:

It’s hard for me to talk for someone that hasn’t read the book, but I would assume the film felt a little rushed and jagged. It doesn’t take its time when it probably should, and so you’re left thinking that maybe it missed out on some potentially strong and important scenes.

The Cobbler (2015)

Into the Woods (2014)

Dave’s 3-Word Review:
OMG, just stop!

I like to see myself as a musical-appreciator. I do. I’ve seen a good fair share of musicals that I have enjoyed…more so than not. However, there is a guy in the musical industry that I just can’t stand, and his name is Stephen Sondheim. For instance, I hate Sweeney Todd: The Demon Barber of Fleet Street mostly for the songs that aren’t catchy, but instead repetitive and annoying. Into the Woods, on the other hand, takes all that and kind of brings it one step further by having a workable storyline and then completely destroying it halfway in. It’s hard to explain, so let’s first start with plot.

Alright, so this is the land of fairytales intertwined…sort of like in Shrek or more so like TV’s Once Upon a Time – and of course, it is filled with music. Now, the story is more or less focused on a baker (James Corden) and his wife (Emily Blunt) as they are dealing with infertility. That is, until a witch comes around, promising them a child if they obtain four objects for her…which they need to get in the woods.

The woods in question is basically an international highway where all the fairytales cross paths. Cinderella, Little Red Riding Hood, Rapunzel, Jack and the Beanstalk, etc. That part is really cool, and probably the best part of the film – how they were able to mix, mash, and weave all of these stories together was all sort of impressive. That being said, it’s also a flaw. As far as movies go, this was really jumbled storytelling from the get go. There were far too many characters to keep track of, and in my opinion, that distracted from the Baker’s story. He was clearly the main character because he was ultimately the glue that held the rest of the story and characters together…but because of a huge, never-ending cast…he was drowned out a bit. However, out of every flaw this film held, this was the most trivial.

Next comes the music. It’s a musical and music is unavoidable, that I get. However, it’s Sondheim. That means 90% of the film is filled with music, and not even great music at that. If none of the songs are sticking in my head; if I’m not singing or humming them later on throughout the day or week, I don’t think it did its job. In fact, the only feeling I got while listening to these songs was OH MY GOD, JUST STOP! – and I actually enjoy musicals! I can’t even begin to explain how annoyed I was with the music in this film…so you can understand my absolute rage when it overstays its welcome.

This is without the doubt the biggest flaw Into the Woods has: everything the plot sets up in the beginning – through all the characters, elements, and goals – ends exactly at 1 hour 15 minutes. After that, we’re given another hour or so of bad ideas and horrible writing. The events that follow in this film do not add to the plot, but instead subtract! It destroys everything the film had already set up for itself – making us question why we watched it in the first place. Include really annoying music that never ends and you have a film that’s just plain bad. Maybe it works in the Broadway play in which it’s based, but not here. Not here at all.

That’s not to say that people here didn’t do a good job. They did. There were talented singers and actors alike, and beyond that – there are some really nice set designs and overall visual imagery. Plus, somewhere deep down lies a very interesting and smart idea as far as combining beloved fairytale characters together goes. At the same time, I’d much rather just watch an episode of Once Upon a Time, because that’s a TV show – and doesn’t restrict itself to a certain time limit…plus there’s no singing.  This was like taking 10 seasons of that TV show and mashing it up all together – and THEN adding a bunch of music that sounds like it was put together on one drunken and lonely night.

The Good:

The concept.

The Bad:

Everything else. The music was torture, the pacing is jacked, and the writing makes no sense because it singlehandedly destroys what was actually good about the movie (see above). In short, this movie makes me mad.

The Random:

Johnny Depp, no one is going to believe you’re a wolf.

Earth to Echo (2014)

Earth-to-Echo

Dave’s 3-Word Review:
It’s live action?!

Out of all the found footage movies that exist out there, not a whole lot of them are considered kids movies. At most, maybe Super 8, since most of the cast is children. However, that wasn’t really a kids movie…it worked for everyone. Earth to Echo, on the other hand, is totally a family-friendly and kids-oriented film that implements the found footage template to tell its story. Don’t get me wrong though, some kid films are also entertaining for adult audiences, and I actually think that’s true here as well.

Earth to Echo is ultimately about a group of three friends who are more or less outcasts. They are each others friends, and that’s it. When a freeway is bulldozing its way through their home town, each one of them is forced to move and get separated from one another. During the fiasco, everyone in town’s phone goes haywire, so they begin documenting the strange phenomenon to get to the bottom of everything. That’s when they discover a tiny robotic alien creature in the desert that is attempting to rebuild its spacecraft and needs the boys’ help before it can leave. However, a questionable group of “construction workers” continually try to stop their efforts and keep the alien for themselves.

I’m not even ashamed to admit that this film lured me in. Immediately. You really love these characters, they are pretty funny at times, and you feel bad for them because they are forced to leave each others’ sides, and that becomes a serious theme in the film – abandonment and misunderstandings. It actually has some really good, real world points to make about issues that face kids and sometimes parents just don’t understand or recognize the problems. These issues, of course, were blanketed under the fun adventure plot of following a mysterious map and helping Echo, the cute defenseless little alien – but they are there, nonetheless.

What really shocked me for some reason, was that this film was live action, not CGI. Maybe it’s just the fact that I didn’t watch the trailer, but the movie poster appears to be CGI…like Wall-E or something.  It’s not a big let down or anything, I was just surprised once I began watching it…and it was a pleasant surprise. The film simply gets better and better as it moves on – and its ultimately a really fun movie that I would very much recommend for kids.

How is the acting? With any kids movie, you have to ponder if they’ll get the acting right, and for the most part its touch and go here. Some of the acting is great, some of it feels forced. That can’t be helped, but the nice thing about that is the fact that found-footage usually has the ability to make bad acting just look amateur…which contradicts itself to look real. It’s hard to explain – but if I watched Paranormal Activity or The Blair Witch Project without the element of found footage, I think it would suck.

The Good:

Earth to Echo is a kids movie, okay, it’s not a movie for everyone – but even so, it’s done pretty well all around. The found footage feels fresh, the social issues feel real, and friendships all feel perfect. Above all that, I actually believed these actors were filming everything…which I have trouble feeling nowadays for found footage, so that impressed me.

The Bad:

Like I said, the acting isn’t exactly perfect, because its just kids. It’s also not meant for everyone, so not everyone will enjoy it. It also tries a little too hard to be E.T.

Chappie (2015)

Chappie

Dave’s 3-Word Review:
District 9: Robots

Say what you will about Neil Blomkamp, but I’ve always really enjoyed his material. They might not be perfect in every which way, but they were always entertaining on one level, and infinitely important on a much deeper level – and the way he went about presenting these problems was usually really visually stunning and brilliantly laid out. Chappie finishes a spiritual trilogy in overall tones and concepts. Even though Blomkamp has said this is the only one without political undertones, it does have equally important, if not subtle morals strewn about.

Chappie stars, once again, Sharlto Copley in the lead – the first artificial intelligent robot in a futurist world filled with a robotic police force. Dev Patel plays Deon Wilson – the “creator” of artificial intelligence – and once Chappie is introduced to the new world, he acts like a child. Everything he learns is taught to him. When a group of thugs get a hold of him, they want to use him for their own criminal agenda, but Deon continually attempts to keep Chappie innocent and staying away from crime.

Interestingly enough, this film has a lot of comedic elements to it, mostly because it’s hilarious to see a robot act so much like a human while every other robot in the movie is just that – a robot. More than that though, there is a lot of elements in the film that are important when it comes to child neglect, abandonment, and abuse. If you ignore all the comedic parts and the thug storylines, you have Chappie, who is in essence, a mere child. The things they put him through would shock anyone if the character was a human boy – and things like that do happen.

It does have a pretty colossal flaw though, and I couldn’t for the life of me figure out why this was…but the villains in this movie are stupid. I mean it. The entire foundation of the plot has to do with the thugs wanting to kidnap Deon because they want a universal remote control that can turn of the police robots. Yeah. A remote control. Then, for random reasons, Hugh Jackman is in the mix doing questionable things as well because he wants the robot he created to be taken seriously. I get that, but I still couldn’t buy his character – maybe it was the short shorts.

All in all, I can easily say that I did enjoy the movie. I don’t know if it’s up to par with the other two movies, but it does have interesting elements that still make it feel unique and perfect for Blomkamp’s world. EVEN THOUGH it does take place in Johannesburg again.

The Good:

Chappie is a pretty interesting movie that displays certain thoughts towards mistreatment of children, but keeps everything light-hearted as well – as it has some pretty funny parts.

The Bad:

The villains. Every last villain in this movie is just dumb…like henchmen in Disney cartoons.

Exodus: Gods and Kings (2014)

Exodus---Gods-and-Kings

Dave’s 3-Word Review:
‘Plagued’ with disappointment.

I’m no stranger to religion-themed films. Most the time, they bug the crap out of me, but there are a select few that I do typically enjoy. Specifically, I like when films have a secular take on a biblical story. Noah, for example, was done really well and took a lot of smart creative liberties at the same time. I say it all the time, the books in the Bible are actually good stories with great morals, but are constantly butchered by preachy filmmakers who focus more on converting you than they do the actual story – so they never have the guts to, let’s be honest here, be realistic. I was looking forward to Exodus: Gods and Kings for the same reason that I enjoyed Noah. Ridley Scott has come out saying he believes he is a better storyteller for being agnostic, because he has to convince himself that the story makes sense first. Does it? Sure, why not, but does it tell the story of Moses the way it should? I’m not entirely sure.

I’m not going to sit here and pretend that you’ve never heard the story of Moses. It’s been told and retold seemingly a thousand times over, and it has once more been repeated…but a few creative liberties were taken in Ridley Scott’s portrayal. When it comes down to brass tax, he focused on a more realistic variation of the story that feels unique, changes things up, and still somewhat fits in with the story in the Bible. The main problem with that comes down to how they dealt with God…which like in Noah, came down to visions that may or may not be real. The problem with that, is Moses always worked hand-in-hand with God himself…and that’s not true here.

To give you an idea, instead of Moses carrying the staff of god, and carrying out all of the events in the story (the plagues, splitting of the sea, etc), God basically tells Moses to stand in the sidelines and watch it all unfold…which understandably makes Moses upset in general, because he hasn’t yet let go of his Egyptian lifestyle. I’m completely fine with creative liberties because technically speaking, it was always God that made these things happen in the Bible as well, not Moses…I mostly just had a problem with Moses being sidelined. It was like Katniss in The Hunger Games: Mockingjay – Part 1. While they both played important roles in the films, they more or less did…nothing. For a 2.5 hour long film, you can’t just do nothing.

Other than that, I can completely understand people’s insistence on blaming the film on changing everything. The story of Moses is an epic one all by itself, and you could almost see him as a Superhero with powers while reading it as a kid. For Christian Bale to play Moses, sit in the sidelines, and complain for two hours…it’s kind of disappointing to say the least. Now, it’s a very pretty movie, and the way they dealt with the plagues was awfully interesting and unique, but…you know…it was a little boring.

What you won’t see me complaining about, however, is this stupid argument on an all-white cast. Could they have done a better job with appropriate actors? Maybe, maybe not, all I know is that the cast we have did a fine job as far as acting goes. They were given a script and they pulled it off. Let’s stop shaming them on it, because out of all of the flaws this film has, that has to be the least important.

The Good:

Exodus: Gods and Kings has a pretty good idea going for it, and offers its audience a brand new and unique take on the story of Moses – which all in all, isn’t as bad as people put it out to be.

The Bad:

The biggest problem I had with this film was that Moses was sidelined for most of the film because God wanted to take over and get things done…which is when Moses just starts complaining all the time. If you thought this film was boring – that’s probably why. Another reason is because the film tried to be very realistic and the things you expected to see happen…don’t…or at least not in the way you were expecting (to be fair, that could be a good or bad thing).

The Film Editorial

Reviews and News for Movies!

Dave Examines Movies

Sticking Up for the Bullied Movies

The Ü

Jade's film reviews and fictional adventures.

catherineonfilms

Film reviewer of new releases and older titles alike.

jisbell22

Random Observations of life

grace4films

Short Movie Reviews

digitalshortbread

Film Reviews with a Bite

Films and Coke

On film and TV with footnotes and cold beverages.

Follow

Get every new post delivered to your Inbox.

Join 1,917 other followers