Had a feeling this one wasn’t going to be as funny as the previews made it out, and I was right. It has a lot of “snicker” moments, but few real belly laughs. Not a bad movie I don’t think, and it tries to inject some heart into the script, but its a pretty free-wandering film.

Melissa McCarthy plays Tammy, an average young adult who’s life isn’t really going anywhere, who has the worst day of her life. She hits a deer on the way to work which wrecks her car. This makes her late and thus gets fired from her job. Arriving home early she finds her husband is cheating with the neighbor, which sends her over to her parents house, who live two doors down. Here is where the adventure begins. Broke, she teams up with her alcoholic grandma, played by Susan Sarandon, for a cross country drive.

My wife really enjoyed the film, and I did think it was ok, but not hilariously funny. McCarthy’s typecast role of the loud-mouth spewing shocking interjections (Identity Thief, Bridesmaids, The Heat) continues here, and for me it is starting to get a little old. I think she’s a funny actor and hopefully she can branch out a little more in the future. She wrote and produced this one (also produced by Will Ferrell & Adam McKay), but there just wasn’t enough here.

Jersey Boys (the film) is based on Jersey Boys (the musical), which is based on the rise of The Four Seasons in the 60’s. I haven’t seen the production, but from the movie I can see why it has been so popular, it looks to have everything that would make a good Broadway show. Unfortunately that doesn’t always translate well to a good movie, and that is the case here.

Don’t get me wrong, it was ok. But that’s really the best I can say for it, just ok. Some plot elements don’t flesh out well, and others don’t make much sense at all. For instance, though Frankie Valli talks throughout the film how important family is where he comes from, his own family takes a back seat until something traumatic in the last third of the film. It just comes out of left field so fast, that it feels very disjointed and doesn’t connect well with the rest of the movie. This could work on a stage, but (for me, personally) film needs to have a little more cohesion. I’m a big musical/play fan and see at least a couple to a few a year. Just some of the things that may work on Broadway don’t move over well, and in adapting Jersey Boys to the screen, they seemed to try to keep it is as original as possible without taking this into consideration.

If you grew up when The Four Seasons were big, or if like me you listened to all these songs on the oldies station with your parents when you were young, then there is some nostalgia to it, and the movie is interesting enough. Unfortunately just not a great film. I would be interested in seeing it on stage where I’m sure it is better.

Saw this one on a whim, and really glad I did. Snowpiercer is a South Korean-American film, written and directed by Bong Joon-ho, and based on a French graphic novel. It has a lot of the elements and themes you associate with graphic novels. It’s hard to explain unless you see the film, but there is a definite east Asian feel to the movie, with scenes, dialogue, and a story that would be just at home in a Korean setting with English dubs. However, they went with a (mostly) English cast, including Chris Evans (Captain America), Tilda Swinton, Ed Harris, Octavia Spencer (Academy Award winner for The Help), and Jamie Bell (of Billy Elliot and Jumper).

This movie takes place in the near future. In an attempt to curb global warming, governments around the world sprayed a new chemical into our atmosphere. It ended up working too well, and sent our planet into a new ice age. The only survivors are the lucky few hundred that boarded a world-traveling luxury train called the Snowpiercer. The train has been moving continuously for 17 years now, and no one can get off, or they freeze to death quickly outside. Over the years, a caste system has developed, so those in the front live in luxury and to excess, while the poor in the back cars of the train struggle in squalor, and only survive at the whim of the powerful. If it sounds like just a new take on an old story, it sort of is, but this movie does make it different enough that it feels fresh.

The acting is great, though Chris Evans’ attitude and style isn’t much different than his role in Captain America, so maybe he’s just a one trick pony. Everyone else is in form though. Most inhabitants have gone a little crazy after having been cooped up in a train for 17 years, and they all play them to a T.

This film almost didn’t make it stateside, after being released almost a year ago in South Korea (where it went on to become one of the biggest domestic releases ever there). There were some bickerings back and forth between the director and the movie studio here, and it is only now seeing a bigger release due to stellar reviews and huge positive response (a whopping 94% on Rotten Tomatoes right now). This movie is a pleasant surprise. It’s not for everyone, but if you just enjoy good filmmaking, you should check this one out.

I haven’t seen E.T. in decades, so perhaps it hasn’t held up well, I really couldn’t say. But I do remember loving it as a child when it came out. Earth to Echo may be the same for the latest generation, though I think it holds less well with adults. From a grown-up’s perspective, it’s a pretty bad film.

There aren’t a lot of redeeming qualities in this film unfortunately. The acting is very rough, from everyone in it. The kids I can at least understand, they are young, and while you hope for better, it can at least be partially forgiven. But even the few adults in this film are terrible. There is one scene in particular where a man is so over-the-top, so completely hamming it up, that I actually laughed out loud in the theater, though it was supposed to be a tense scene.

If you haven’t heard, the film is basically an updated E.T. Kids find a stranded alien, and try to help him find his way off the planet while a super secret government group is hunting them down. But there is none of the heart of E.T. in this film. You don’t feel for the kids, and only remotely feel for the alien. The film tries to keep things light with “humorous” dialogue, but it’s pretty unfunny. This movie is really only for the very young, and even they might grow bored before it is over.

Michael Bay has the transformers shtick down. I generally like these movies, even though, for me personally, they aren’t all that memorable later. I’ve seen them all exactly once each, and can tell you bits and pieces of what happened, but can’t really recall the whole plots of any of them. But it seems to be working, as the movies are exciting (while watching them) and the audiences still seem to be liking them too.

In the latest, it is more of the same. It has a whole new cast (except for good old Optimus Prime), but the formula hasn’t changed. There is more action than story here, but it is very good action. In the 165 minute film, there might be 20-30 minutes where something fantastical isn’t happening. The premise is the “makers” of the transformers, which is the same group that wiped out dinosaurs on our planet millions of years ago, have put a bounty on Optimus’s head, and a group has arrived to collect him. The battlefield is once again our planet and humans are caught in the middle.

Since Shia LaBeouf has been intent on flushing his career down the toilet, he was replaced by Mark Wahlberg as the new lead. I like the move, Mark looks more like an action star and Shia’s “antsy” style in the films grated on me. While there is nothing really new about Transformers 4, the recipe is still working, and for those that liked the first 3, you’ll like the newest as well.

Its sad when a movie has a ton of potential and manages to blow it all away. The Signal started out well, and got very interesting quickly, but the promise was never fulfilled. It follows 3 computer geeks as they trek westward, on the trail of a hacker who brought down their server. When they get there, they find an abandoned house, shortly before they all black out. When the lead character awakens, he is in an institution and is told he was abducted by aliens. As he is poked and prodded by the scientists (lead by Laurence Fishburne), he begins to feel all is not as it seems (even in a fantastic scenario as this) and tries to make his escape.

The movie has a quiet intensity in spots, but is pretty lackluster overall. The plot is also full of holes and questions, very few of which get answered by the time its over. There are some spectacular scenes, but by the time you realize something is very wrong, you almost don’t care anymore, which in a movie is never a good thing. The writer/director is young, and there are enough bright spots in the film to think he can learn and get better, though I hope he tones down the use of slow-motion camera work (every single action sequence in the last 30 minutes) in his next movie.

Quite simply one of the most unfunny “funny” movies I’ve ever seen. I should have known something was up when every preview or clip I’ve seen from it showed the same couple scenes, because those were the only truly funny scenes in the whole movie. The film seems to just be Jonah Hill and Channing Tatum buddying around, making up dialogue as they go. I’m not even sure this movie had a script, I have the feeling everyone showed up on a Saturday and said “Let’s make a movie today!” As of right now, it is actually rating (slightly) higher than the first film. I’m flabbergasted at how that is possible.

Why does a good movie bomb at the box office? Hard to say why this happens from time to time. Edge of Tomorrow is not doing well at the theater, even though it seems the people that do see it are loving it, including reviewers (71% on Metascore, a whopping 90% on Rotten Tomatoes). Whether it was poor marketing, strong competition, or just an audience tired of sci-fi over the last couple years, this great film is going relatively ignored.

Edge of Tomorrow takes place in a near-future Earth where an alien race has landed and is wiping us out. It gets you into the action pretty quickly, when Tom Cruise’s character, a major in the armed forces that has risen in the ranks due to politics but knows nothing about combat, is thrust into the main front. He dies pretty quickly, but wakes up the previous morning in a Groundhog Day-like fashion, with no one else aware. It turns out the aliens have the ability to time shift, which they do whenever they lose a battle, so they can re-fight it and change the outcome, while the humans are none the wiser and thus lose every fight. Cruise has now leached this power, and relives the same 2 days over and over. With this power he is able to learn more and more each day in hopes of overcoming the alien threat before they locate him and stop his loop, learning from Emily Blunt’s character, a seasoned trained fighter, as she too was once in a loop before she lost the ability.

It all sounds very fantastical, and while it seems extremely far out there and hard to grasp, the movie presents it in a fashion that is easy to follow. Obviously it has stunning effects, which is expected in a big budget film, but it is also much more than just a shoot-em-up disaster movie. Cruise’s emotions play out, from hope when he realizes he has this time loop on his side to help him defeat the threat, to despair when nothing he does seems to stop the threat over the hundreds (thousands?) of days he repeats. The big finale is wholly unexpected too. This is a film worth seeing on the big screen, and I hope more people do before its gone.

Some movies are made to make you sit on the edge of your seat in suspense. Some make you laugh until it hurts. Some make you gasp in fear. The Fault in Our Stars was made for one purpose only, and that is to make you cry. If that is entertaining for you, this movie is right up your alley.

As a movie on its own (if you can remove the emotion it attempts to wrestle from you) it is ok I guess. Cancer stricken girl falls for cancer-remission boy, in a relationship that you know from the beginning is not going to end well for anyone involved. And that is the problem I have with this movie, nearly from the get-go all it wants to do is see the audience covered in tears. It does a good job of it too, by the time it was over, plenty of grown men in the the theater with me (all with a girl that dragged them to it I’m sure) had a piece of dirt or something in their eye causing it to water uncontrollably. This is a definite chick flick, and the numbers played out, with an 82% female audience (and 79% under the age of 25) on opening weekend.

I’m comfortable enough in my skin to admit I’ve been known to choke up at a good movie, but this one is a little overkill for me. My wife teased me that I’d be a waterworks before we went in, but while I only shed a tear or two, she was a blubbering mess, so I guess I’m just outside the demographic on this one. But guys, you can earn some serious points by taking your date to this film.