Buttered Popcorn: Buzzmans Movie Review Thread

[Buzzman]

I'm going to start doing these reviews again and try and catch up while im on break. Feel free to request a movie that has come out in the past few months if you want to see a review, otherwise i'm just going to review them in a random order with all future releases getting priority.

 

[wingsfan77]

Moonrise Kingdom?

 

[Buzzman]

Django Unchained (2012)

Set in the South two years before the Civil War, Django Unchained stars Jamie Foxx as Django, a slave whose brutal history with his former owners lands him face-to-face with German-born bounty hunter Dr. King Schultz (Christoph Waltz). Schultz is on the trail of the murderous Brittle brothers, and only Django can lead him to his bounty. Honing vital hunting skills, Django remains focused on one goal: finding and rescuing Broomhilda (Kerry Washington), the wife he lost to the slave trade long ago. Django and Schultz's search ultimately leads them to Calvin Candie (Leonardo DiCaprio), the proprietor of "Candyland," an infamous plantation. Exploring the compound under false pretenses, Django and Schultz arouse the suspicion of Stephen (Samuel L. Jackson), Candie's trusted house slave.

Only Quentin Tarantino can make a film about slavery and turn it into what is at times a flat out comedy and not only get away with it, but walk away with critical praise for doing so. Django Unchained is one of those rare films that keeps the mood light for the audience to endure in its almost three hour runtime, but when it’s time to strap up and dig deep into the story, the film becomes an intense, thrilling, and uncomfortable adventure full of rich characters, wonderful set pieces, and an off the wall soundtrack that somehow manages to work. It has all the qualities you’d come to expect from a Tarantino flick.

Even though it doesn’t actually have acts split up into it like Inglourious Basterds did, it essentially is broken up into three separate acts. Each act is paced entirely different from the other, starting with that fantastic slower paced Tarantino dialogue between the two characters that’s needed to help establish them as the clear heroes. They do bad things, but there is always justification for it to happen. The interactions Django and Dr Schultz face are very violent but presented in such a bizarre manner, it’s actually quite funny to watch. It’s weird to have such a fun time during such a film and the time flies by that when Calvin Candie is introduced and takes you to Candyland, you wonder if it will begin to slow down, but how wrong you are. Not only is the last act filled with tremendous amounts of laughs, but the most intense and uncomfortable moments occur in this plantation. The momentum doesn’t ever seem to die, but the last ten to fifteen minutes probably could have been cut and it might’ve been for the better, but regardless this was a film that surprises you even when you are waiting for it. Kudos to Tarantino.

Like Inglourious Basterds, Christoph Waltz just dominated the god damn screen. He isn’t as good here as he was as Hans Landa, but he nearly reaches that same dominance. As Dr Schultz, he creates another character that you come to love through slow, intense, calculated dialogue. He is badass without ever have to physically show you why. Jamie Foxx as Django handles his own and does perfectly well in the role, is unfairly the weakest part because he’s still strong, but the surrounding cast around him just excels at what they were given. DiCaprio finally steps away from the hero, and takes a far sadistic character that the audience may come to love, but ultimately wants to see him die a slow and painful death. He creates uneasiness with the character and you never know whether he’s going to kill you or serve you dinner. Calvin Candie is yet another iconic Tarantino character audiences will fall in love with. The two complete surprises of the film though come from Samuel Jackson and Don Johnson. They create so many laughs with every appearance on the screen; they practically steal the spotlight and beg to have their own movies focused solely on them. It’s just an all around amazing cast that nail their roles down hard.

I was always weary with the trailers and the vibe I was getting, but once I got in the theater and it started playing, all the worries went away and I ended up falling in love with the film. It’s one of the most best all around films of the year and will leave its three hour run time feeling short. I won’t say go and see it because most were going to anyway but what I can say is make sure you see it sooner rather than later because it’s such a great film that lives up to expectations in a year filled with so much disappointment.

Overall Score: 9/10

 

[wingsfan77]

I just watched "Safety Not Guaranteed" and thought it was really good, kind of surprised at the ending.

 

[Buzzman]

I'll review both of those either after the Lions game or tomorrow after work since Detroit doesn't play, but the ending to SNG and the movie in general had me thinking for a bit. The debate for me comes from the part in his ad that says he did it once before.

 

[Buzzman]

This is 40 (2012)

A look at the lives of Pete and Debbie a few years after the events of Knocked Up.

It has been a decent amount of time since I last popped in and watched Knocked Up all the way through but from what I rememeber, Paul Rudd and Leslie Mann’s characters weren’t near the top of my list on reasons why I enjoyed it. In fact, I know I actually hated Leslie Mann and how she slowed down the laughs to a halt. When this was announced and I found out where the focus was landing this time around, unsurprisingly, I lost some intrest. Then the trailers came out and it looked underwhelming. The last jab went into its wave of reviews that labeled it a miss for Apatow and company. All of this pointed towards a waste of a film. Maybe it was the situation of walking in with shit expectations, but I walked out loving everything they threw at me.

The first thing they really nailed and probably why it got such poor reviews because its not something wants to see in a comedy, is the relationship between couple Pete and Deb. They don’t skip out on anything and go through every joy and struggle between them. For me, it was a relationship I was cheering to work out, even when things got ugly. This is the heart of the film and it achieved so much of it; maybe because I have seen this exact relationship before, but I truly loved it. The stuff involving the rest of the family got a bit repetitive but for most of the film, they brought a ton of laughs and a bit of heart to the story. They had me laughing real bad at times; it came as a bit of a surprise to me. This is another case where I think the supporting cast might have turned the audience off a bit. Its conclusion for each character gets wrapped up with entirely satisfying results, in a good way rather than an eye rolling manner.

Paul Rudd and Leslie Mann could be married in real life. They have amazing chemistry that just oozes through the screen. Their interactions and bickering is probably entirely improvised with a basic structure that they just nail. They bring laughs, sadness, and comfort to you while never doing anything truly groundbreaking. Just solid, solid performances. The supporting cast is even better that are just all scene stealers. Albert Brooks as a cheap, Jewish dad kills it with the laughs, Mellissa McCarthy and Jason Segal take what are basically small cameos and turn them into memorable scenes, and even his daughters cracked me up. The older one got a tad annoying, but never really hampered my enjoyment. This has got to be one of the better casts in a comedy.

As it stands today, 12/27/12, This is 40 is 50% rotten. How? I cant really say. I can see some flaws one might have with the film, but to actually rate it lower than a six baffles me. Maybe it is the case of expectations making it seem better than it really is, but after seeing the movie a 2nd time in theaters within a week, I fucking love it. It is one of my more enjoyable films I’ve seen this year and definitely a contender for most surprising. Hopefully you can go out and enjoy it as much as I.

Overall Score: 9/10

 

[Buzzman]

I'll review both of those either after the Lions game or tomorrow after work since Detroit doesn't play, but the ending to SNG and the movie in general had me thinking for a bit. The debate for me comes from the part in his ad that says he did it once before.

I started to review both Moonrise and SNG, but at the styart of each, I kind of felt uncomfortable reviewing them because it has been so long since I have actually seen them. I got SNG for Christmas, so ima give both of them a quick rewatch to see if the enjoyment I had for both is as high as they originally were.

 

[godspeed]

Ya I saw all the bad and so so reviews for This is 40 but we decided to see it anyway Sunday Night.
It was suprisingly good. No way it should have the 50 rating on rotten tomatoes. Its run time is too long, and there is clearly scenes they could cut out, but it's definately not a waste to go see. We enjoyed it.

 

[wingsfan77]

Seems like a lot of Apatow movies have a long run time so that shouldn't be surprising.

 

[Palooza]

Ya I saw all the bad and so so reviews for This is 40 but we decided to see it anyway Sunday Night.
It was suprisingly good. No way it should have the 50 rating on rotten tomatoes. Its run time is too long, and there is clearly scenes they could cut out, but it's definately not a waste to go see. We enjoyed it.

Apatow sucks at editing. All his movies are too long. The bad part is, it's only been getting worse as he goes on.

 

[Buzzman]

Jack Reacher (2012)

In an innocent heartland city, five are shot dead by an expert sniper. The police quickly identify and arrest the culprit, and build a slam-dunk case. But the accused man claims he's innocent and says "Get Jack Reacher." Reacher himself sees the news report and turns up in the city. The defense is immensely relieved, but Reacher has come to bury the guy. Shocked at the accused's request, Reacher sets out to confirm for himself the absolute certainty of the man's guilt, but comes up with more than he bargained for.

Jack Reacher is one of the first films in my little experiment where I wouldn’t watch the trailers, read up on it, and just attempt to avoid all the information I could on it. It seemed to work out well here because outside of people complaining that Tom Cruise is way too small to play Jack Reacher himself, I didn’t know a single thing about the film. It seemed to work in my favorite as things caught me buy surprise and I expected a smaller scaled Ethan Hunt in a generic action film, but instead got a easily paced, mystery thriller that was a very easy and enjoyable watch.

The opening minutes of the film setup a badass mystery. A man essentially goes to town on a few people and sets up a fall guy. Little does the shooter know though, the fall guy knows a man named Jack Reacher, who is essentially the world’s best investigator. Most of the film does a nice job of not going a little overboard with Reacher and his capabilities; he’ll stumble along the way, figure things out over time, and not feel invulnerable. There are bits though where they do, but never to an extent to make you dislike the character. The film is really enjoyable all the way through, but it’s the type of film where the layers begin to peel off and the answers to the mystery are not as complex and thought out as you would have liked. The villains kind of slide from great to mediocre over the course of the film, and only Tom Cruise can hold it together.

Speaking of Tom Cruise, he might be on a comeback because Ghost Protocol was badass and his future roles look intriguing, and here is in perfect form. I know fans of the books have gotten worked up about the characters misrepresentation with Cruise being a smaller guy, but he still plays a smart badass. He can still take on 5 guys at once, still carry fear, and spit out one-liners that are memorable. He portrays a nice little heroine that you can cheer for; as simple as that. His sort of but not really love interest in the film, Rosemary Pike is a little shaky, but she is gorgeous to look at in the hot secretary kind of way. She teases but never shows. She interested me far more than I thought she could. I was all ready to praise the villains of the film in the first 70 minutes of the film because they were kept in the dark to us. We seen them, but never understood their motivations or backgrounds, but as the runtime kept chugging, they became more and more generic until the climax cemented them as mediocre shooters with mediocre plans. I am curious to see Jai Courtney play John McCalne’s son.

At the end of the day, Jack Reacher is a bit too smart for its own good, but a very enjoyable better than your average action film. It’s because its pacing is more of a mystery thriller that allows you to learn and watch Jack Reacher and come to like him. If they do wind up making a franchise of this, what we got was a very solid start that with some improvements could become something really good.

Overall Score: 7.5/10

 

[Buzzman]

The Words (2012)

Starring Bradley Cooper, Jeremy Irons, Dennis Quaid, Olivia Wilde and Zoë Saldana, the layered romantic drama The Words follows young writer Rory Jansen who finally achieves long sought after literary success after publishing the next great American novel. There's only one catch - he didn't write it. As the past comes back to haunt him and his literary star continues to rise, Jansen is forced to confront the steep price that must be paid for stealing another man's work, and for placing ambition and success above life's most fundamental three words.

This is a film that can kind of puzzle you before, during and after you watch it. As the movie starts, things slowly begin to reveal themselves, things go on, characters begein to change, stories become fiction, fiction becomes reality, up is down, and black is white, and then it ends. You think toy uorself what the hell did I just put myself through. The beginning and the end of a very simple story to it but the film tries to throw in these twists and turns that turn out to being a completely useless plot device. It was unneeded and bogged it down. Not to that it ever had a chance to be anything great. The plot at one point could suck you in when a writer plagiarizes someone else’s work and has to face all kinds of consequences, but that quickly gets swept away for more unimportant matters. I have to wonder what was going through the creative minds behind this when they thought they should include Dennis Quaid at all in this. He has to be one of the more forgetful characters of the year. You could cut his entire role out and the film would be better, shorter, and more tolerable.

Bradley Cooper is the only thing worth mentioning in this. He’s not even that good but compared to the rest of the cast, he seems to be the only one not zombified into the film. During his brief chances to create a conflicted author, he nails it pretty good. He doesn’t get any help from there though. The flashbacks of the story he stole do nothing because it’s just an endless carousal of back and forth depression between two people that care for each other but can’t stand to look upon the other. It would work if it wasn’t constantly shoved onto the screen when they get a chance. Then you throw in Dennis Quaid and Olivia Wilde in a bizarre completely stupid out of place story within a story within a story and you wind up watching an old pervert slowly seduce someone he could never possibly have. Just an awful cast combined with an awful story.

The Words is a complete waste of time. It accomplishes nothing in its runtime. How it wasn’t direct to video is behind me, but it quickly faded from theaters and rightfully so. Throw in yet another failure distributed by Open Roads; a few more of these duds and they might not be around much longer.

Overall Score: 2/10

 

[Maynard]

This is 40 (2012)

A look at the lives of Pete and Debbie a few years after the events of Knocked Up.

It has been a decent amount of time since I last popped in and watched Knocked Up all the way through but from what I rememeber, Paul Rudd and Leslie Mann’s characters weren’t near the top of my list on reasons why I enjoyed it. In fact, I know I actually hated Leslie Mann and how she slowed down the laughs to a halt. When this was announced and I found out where the focus was landing this time around, unsurprisingly, I lost some intrest. Then the trailers came out and it looked underwhelming. The last jab went into its wave of reviews that labeled it a miss for Apatow and company. All of this pointed towards a waste of a film. Maybe it was the situation of walking in with shit expectations, but I walked out loving everything they threw at me.

The first thing they really nailed and probably why it got such poor reviews because its not something wants to see in a comedy, is the relationship between couple Pete and Deb. They don’t skip out on anything and go through every joy and struggle between them. For me, it was a relationship I was cheering to work out, even when things got ugly. This is the heart of the film and it achieved so much of it; maybe because I have seen this exact relationship before, but I truly loved it. The stuff involving the rest of the family got a bit repetitive but for most of the film, they brought a ton of laughs and a bit of heart to the story. They had me laughing real bad at times; it came as a bit of a surprise to me. This is another case where I think the supporting cast might have turned the audience off a bit. Its conclusion for each character gets wrapped up with entirely satisfying results, in a good way rather than an eye rolling manner.

Paul Rudd and Leslie Mann could be married in real life. They have amazing chemistry that just oozes through the screen. Their interactions and bickering is probably entirely improvised with a basic structure that they just nail. They bring laughs, sadness, and comfort to you while never doing anything truly groundbreaking. Just solid, solid performances. The supporting cast is even better that are just all scene stealers. Albert Brooks as a cheap, Jewish dad kills it with the laughs, Mellissa McCarthy and Jason Segal take what are basically small cameos and turn them into memorable scenes, and even his daughters cracked me up. The older one got a tad annoying, but never really hampered my enjoyment. This has got to be one of the better casts in a comedy.

As it stands today, 12/27/12, This is 40 is 50% rotten. How? I cant really say. I can see some flaws one might have with the film, but to actually rate it lower than a six baffles me. Maybe it is the case of expectations making it seem better than it really is, but after seeing the movie a 2nd time in theaters within a week, I fucking love it. It is one of my more enjoyable films I’ve seen this year and definitely a contender for most surprising. Hopefully you can go out and enjoy it as much as I.

Overall Score: 9/10

there is a dvd screener of this on pirate bay

 

[Warner2BruceTD]

RE: This is 40

I'm highjacking this bitch with my review from another site:



Even Paul Rudd could not save this, and he is always fantastic.

I haven't been more excited about a movie in a long time, but this was a letdown. As others have mentioned, like most Apatow movies, it was way too fucking long. Albert Brooks killed every scene he was in. His character was supposed to be funny, in an asshole sort of way, but Brooks couldn't pull it off and he just ended up being an off putting asshole with go away heat.

Even though she always plays the same character, she nails it every time so I don't mind Leslie Mann. But the material just wasn't there to hold up what felt like an 8 hour movie, despite a great great cast that also included Jason Segel, Robert Smigel, the brilliant Lena Dunham, the equally brilliant Chris O'Dowd, and John Lithgow.

And don't blink or you'll miss Michael Ian Black & Tatum O'Neal.

Throw in Megan Fox, Charlyne Yi, and Melissa McCarthy, and it's obvious Apatow just shoehorns as many "name" actors into his movies as he can just to put himself over.

Pass. Even Rudd & Mann's undeniable charisma on screen together can't save this mess.

 

[Goober]

I thought This is 40 was funny, but the plot was a convoluted mess.

 

[Buzzman]

Warm Bodies (2013)

The romantic comedy genre hasn’t been a good one to follow. They tend to always be filled with the same tropes and layouts to follow, which is why they tend not to be that enjoyable. Warm Bodies happens to fall into that genre, but it does things to attempt to change those rules and avoid the typical cliché while still falling into that category. The biggest factor just so happens that one of the parties involved in the relationship for this romance is a living, breathing, undead zombie.

The pacing of this film really helps make it an easy watch for the viewers. Things almost kick into gear immediately. Every character you need to know about is shown and introduced within the first ten minutes, the heart of the story kicks into gear not much after, and then it does something most films of the genre don’t do. It slows down and peels back its couple with them together the entire time. Normally these are done through two separate storylines and have them magically fall in love, almost like skipping ahead, but Warm Bodies shows how they develop their friendship and how it could lead to more. Sure it’s a bit cheesy at times, but it’s handled really well, and when everything comes together, you don’t feel irritated but rather warm and welcome to the conclusion you always knew it was heading for. It doesn’t do ground breaking things, but manages just enough to be original.

Normally I am not a big fan of voice over in a film, especially a lot of it, but the circumstances obviously called for it, and it’s used to great effect. It’s very comical, very dramatic, and is a tool that flows nicely within the context of the story. Nicholas Hoult nails his role. He isn’t asked to do much outside of the narration, but he manages to make his circumstance seem less cheesy than it really is. He allows himself to take the less is more kind of route. His romance partner is Teresa Palmer. You may know her from Take Me Home Tonight and Sorcerer’s Apprentice (a bit of a typecast) but I have always enjoyed watching her. She’s beautiful and never manages to annoy me with whatever she does. She has the very difficult task of befriending a zombie and slowly developing feelings for him without having the audience laugh at her the whole time unintentionally. That is accomplished well enough, but at times you just can’t help but shrug a bit at what’s actually happening. How can you make a zombie romance movie? It just doesn’t seem all that plausible.

That is where Jonathan Levine comes into play. He wrote and directed this film. Many of you may know him from the great 50/50 in 2011, but his other project, The Wackness was great as well. He does a great job here all around. He helps make this story emotional, with some really great edit entries, great use of camerawork, and some amazing placement of flashback sequences that really pull you in when the film might begin to feel a little stale. He spreads it around to help make this story seem like it could work. If placed in a different director’s hand, it could have very easily been a complete disaster. Instead he helps make one of 2013’s first really good movies. I’d definitely recommend you go out and see it. It’s very funny, heartwarming, and good. I understand the hesitation with the subject matter, but it is better than it sounds. I’d advise if you haven’t seen a trailer to it yet, don’t watch it. Its very bad and gives away some key laughs, plot points, and even manages to spoil the ending. This is one of the very first films where my experiment of not watching trailers paid off. I hope that trend continues with the rest of the year.

Overall Score: 8/10

 

[Buzzman]

Texas Chainsaw 3D (2013)

This can be a really easy write-up or it can be incredibly hard. The movie can be really funny to an extent that you can somehow wind up enjoying it for all the wrong reasons, but at the end of the day, it’s still a terrible film that doesn’t do a single thing of value. It all comes down to the mood you’re in when you watch it, and if you tolerate some terrible sequences to get a laugh out of the few that are scattered throughout. This can be considered a so bad it can be good, but only if you want it too.

First thing to point out is this somehow manages to be a direct sequel to the original what with the opening sequence being the family and the house basically burnt to the ground. That is except for one little baby…….and LEATHERFACE himself. As cliché as that sounds, it’s far from the most mind blowing story telling. The original took place in the year 1974, so when this baby grows up to become our protagonist, 20 years should have passed making the present time as 1994; how moronic they are. Everything they wear, say, see, and interact with all makes it pretty clear it’s 2012. They don’t even have the decency to attempt to hide this giant time gap; they use an iphone in the film for fuck sake. Its remarkable funny to watch for all these gadgets from the future make its way into the film. Other things to watch for are the various products they couldn’t afford to show in the film so they warp it just a tiny bit to make it appear to be something else. Some pretty funny stuff.

Its worst fault is in its rating. The film is rated R but at times you would never guess how or why they went that route. They have no problem showing torture, gruesome acts of violence, and a ton of swearing. It has all that generic bullshit they throw out in in a horror film, but they break the number one rule. Tease but don’t show. It’s amazing how far they go out of their way to make sure no skin is shown, yet feel fine showing bodies get torn apart. There is one scene where it almost seemed like they were trolling the viewer. The protagonist is wear a button up shirt that is unbuttoned just enough to show everything but the breast themselves. It wouldn’t be a problem if this was PG-13 but with what they have already shown and the rating they were given, this is just pure shit on their end of the stick. Such a tease.

This is not a film, but more so a comedy sketch gone wrong. Not to spoil the movie for yourself, but this film actually makes Leatherface out to be the good guy in all of this. That sentence right there should be enough to allow yourself to decide if you’d actually waste time on this. More than likely you will shit all over it for the trash it is, but that doesn’t mean you cannot enjoy it and have fun with some of the many faults it brings to the table. 2013 already has a solid film to place at the bottom of the well where its all but guaranteed to wind up on lists this time next year.

Overall Score: 3/10

 

[Buzzman]

Gangster Squad (2013)

It is very hard to mess up a gangster film in such a manner where it’s actually unbearable to watch. They have simple guidelines you can follow that while generic, are enough to have the audience enjoying themselves. Throw in a huge cast full of talented people, drop them in post-WWII Los Angeles and have Mickey Cohan chewing up the screen, how could it not be good? Well, just take two hours and watch Ruben Fleischer’s Gangster Squad to find out how it could be possible.

This movie is essentially broken up into two separate acts of the film. Neither of them are very good, being dragged down by common techniques you’d expect from a first time director. The first half of the film is a gathering of sorts. Roles are given to the characters, and the entire first thirty to forty minutes is just one long montage of recruiting the “Gangster Squad” together that will take down Mickey Cohan and his empire that he built. It’s slow, boring, and kind of a big mess of stereotypical characters with even poorer introductions. The next half is the actual act of taking Cohan down, which feels chaotic at even its finest moments. Its flow of repetitive slow motion set pieces, terrible one liners, and conclusions that are laughable on screen when its supposed to be serious in tone. It’s just a mess all over the place. I have no idea if it was supposed to be a light hearted comedy, hard drama, or both. It never drew proper guidelines to follow.

This is a giant cast full of a whole slew of actors I enjoy to watch very much. Starting with Josh Brolin, he’s written into a role that just movies from punch to punch without going too much into his past and why he feels the need to save others when he’s not always needed. He’s a live breathing broken record player. Other member’s f his unit such as Gosling, Pena, and Mackie are essentially just throw away roles that I have no idea what attracted them to it in the first place. The biggest gripe and out of control performance has to go to Senn Penn. His swollen face, cheap lazy accent, and fat suit combine to create such a boring over the top Cohan, you never truly feel like you’re watching a career criminal, but rather a circus performer separated from his stage. His final shots are so painfully executed; it cemented its status as pure shit.

What it all boils down to is Ruben Fleischer. A few years back he really came out of nowhere with Zombieland and put himself on the map. Then two years ago he ruined all that good reputation with the god awful 30 Minutes or Less. This time he was jumping genres (comedy to drama, got himself a great cast) and it was nothing short of a complete disaster. He was too eager to throw in slow motion, too inexperienced for proper chase sequences, and just not good enough to make an interesting story. He’s proven his debut film was just a fluke and can be thrown into the pile of many shitty directors working in the business today.

I’d suggest you give Gangster Squad a pass and be weary of anything Fleischer makes in the future. This had tons of potential, but a missed opportunity is all its ever going to go down as. January of 2013 continues to be the worst month of film I’ve ever come to witness, and the bar was never very high.

Overall Score: 3/10

 

[Buzzman]

The Perks of Being a Wallflower (2012)

When I first found out about this movie I knew nothing about it. I just saw an image of Emma Watson while it was being filmed and that was enough for me to begin to follow it. When I started digging into it, I found out it was based on this critically acclaimed novel that I refused to read because I wanted to go in knowing nothing of its story and content. I wanted to be as blind as possible to it. It wasn’t until the trailer came out until I really wanted to watch it. I became obsessive over the trailer until it got to the point where I could close my eyes and play it in my head; it may be my favorite trailer of all time. How excited I was then when I got passes to see the movie almost 2 months early, even before it premiered at TIFF. I got to see it before any sort of buzz was put into my head. It was the perfect scenario I wanted to walk into.

The film drops us into the world of Charlie, a young teen entering into the world of high school and the ups and downs that come with it. He is an awkward kid who comes off innocent and lonely. The film is a point of view of the experiences that allow him to open up and interact with the world he avoided growing up. It’s a roller coaster of emotions for him that connect great with the viewer. When he laughs, you laugh, when he’s sad, you become sad. It tugs you around and just slams you into the ground but then helps you back up and all is good in the world. The film plays out very similar to that last sentence. It takes you into the minds of a bunch of teenagers described as “misfit toys.” They are all broken in their own fashion and some hit more at home than others, but I promise you that you will fall in love with at least one of these characters. None of the problems presented here feel fictional, which adds to the quality of the film. It’s great.

I have never been a fan of Logan Lerman. I thought he was a bit annoying in 3:10 to Yuma and all I picture when I hear his name is Percy Jackson, from that awful failed franchise. It kind of makes it that much more impressive when I found myself really impressed with what he brought to the table. His awkward mannerisms, cautious approach to things, and his emotional outburst are so fulfilling because of him. He made the viewer view him as Charlie rather than Logan Lerman. For the time being, he’s changed my view of him. Obviously I was always looking forward to Emma Watson based on the second sentence of this film, but all bias aside, I think she was great. She plays this kind of dream girl that is strong right from the start and it feels almost impossible to not fall in love with her the same way Charlie does. She plays the ultimate hipster girl. To round out the trio of stars, Erza Miller continues to convince me that he’s going to be around for a long time. He goes from a dark despicable character last year to an upbeat, charming, homosexual with a whole slew of problems. He seems capable of stepping into whatever is handed to him and run away with it. These three are the heart of the film and these actors all created this tight knit group of friends that you know will last a lifetime.

When you look at the quality of the film, it is not very surprising to see the author of the book Stephen Chbosky both wrote and directed the film. He makes such a great movie with a whole slew of techniques that work out. His biggest feat comes from his music selection. Most of it fits right in with this group of kids and it’s the perfect use of music that helps swing the viewer into the right mood. Some films have some misses, but everything seems to hit for me. I might have loved the soundtrack more than the film itself. It’s a great film that kind of came out of nowhere for most viewers and I’m glad it was so critically acclaimed because of my love for it. It comes out near the middle of February and I highly advise you to see it soon.

Sidenote: After seeing the film for a third time, I finally dived into the book. It’s a short read and it’s just as solid. If you like the movie, I’d recommend the book as well. It allows you to learn little bits of information that couldn’t be worked into the film. I read it in two days. Very easy, but good read.

Overall Score: 9/10

 

[EmpireWF]

The Perks of Being a Wallflower (2012)

Sidenote: After seeing the film for a third time, I finally dived into the book. It’s a short read and it’s just as solid. If you like the movie, I’d recommend the book as well. It allows you to learn little bits of information that couldn’t be worked into the film. I read it in two days. Very easy, but good read.

This man writes the truth.