I’m a bit of an animal lover. Always had dogs in our house growing up, though we can’t anymore due to my wife’s allergies. About 8 or 9 years ago my wife signed me up as a “zoo parent” to a grizzly and we’ve been contributing to his care at the local zoo ever since (as well as other animals here and there over the years, they are our “children”). So of course we were going to see Disneynature’s Bears when it came out.

This isn’t a film for everyone, obviously. It is a story/documentary about a new mother bear and her two cubs in their first summer together in the Alaskan mountains. It shows the dangers they live with on a daily basis from wolves, other bears, and of course starvation if food gets scarce. Narrated wonderfully by John C. Reilly, it paints an accurate portrayal while infusing some humor to elicit a chuckle here and there. It’s a short film at 78 minutes, so if you love animals, bears, or just wildlife in general, it’s a great way to kill an hour.

Sometimes I wonder if I’m seeing the same movie critics are. Sometimes highly touted flicks are total busts for me (I’m looking at you Wolf of Wall Street – DiCaprio was stellar but the movie… not so much), and in others, the reverse is true. Transcendence is one. I almost skipped this one because it is getting only middling reviews. I’m glad I took a chance on it, this is a fantastic film. While there are points in which the viewer is asked to take a pretty big leap of faith, it is a thought provoking and emotionally intense film.

I’ll say from the beginning, this is not a film for the masses. Though the visuals are great (the director is Wally Pfister, known more as the long-time cinematographer collaborator with Christopher Nolan, through Inception, his Batman films, and all the way back to his early Memento days), it isn’t a high-octane action movie. It is slow moving and can be wordy at times. I liken it to Spielberg’s A.I., which I also loved. When A.I. came out, it was not well received and did not do well here in the USA, only international tickets (rare when this movie was released in 2001) saved it from a total bomb. But it was an emotionally gripping movie, and I felt the same things in Transcendence.

The movie takes place in the near future when labs around the world are about to go online with a true artificially built intelligence. Things come crashing down when a terrorist group afraid of what this means for humanity decides to take it down and all the scientists involved with it. When one of the leads (played by Johnny Depp) is near death, his wife and friend upload his consciousness to a computer, thus making him the first fully aware A.I. For the rest of the film, you are left wondering if this is really the former human making decisions and only pretending at emotion, or if he is still “alive” inside the computer, as he makes newer and faster discoveries in science and medicine. You are not fully sure of this, and of his final intentions, until the very end of the film.

Sometimes I just want a pure action film and I don’t want to think, but other times I’m in for something that will make me pause and consider some “what ifs.” In this movie, these include what will a person do for the love of another, what is our responsibility to our planet, where will our continuing advancement of technology take us. When A.I. came out in 2001 it was not a success, but over the years people have warmed up to it. Perhaps Transcendence will find new life later as well.

Heaven is for Real is a based-on-a-true story of a little boy, Colton, who has a near-death experience at the age of 4. Upon leaving the hospital, he starts talking about things that he shouldn’t have known, and says he visited Heaven and met Jesus. But more than that, it is the story of faith and accepting those things we cannot explain.

The boy’s father, Todd, is played by Greg Kinnear, who is absolutely fantastic in this movie. He plays the pastor of a church, a man whom the local community loves. But when Colton starts talking about Heaven as a real place to which he has been, Todd is faced with a crisis of faith. For this pastor, talking about what comes after life has always been sort of metaphorical, as it is probably for most of the world’s population that believes in some sort of afterlife. He wants to believe his son, but everyone around him tells him this is not possible. The boy did not “die” on the operating table (his heart or brain never stopped), and non-believers give him plenty of explanations. Even his own church and close family is uncomfortable with the discussion, all for different reasons. In the end, Todd has to decide that his entire life has been built on faith, and since he will never have the concrete answers he wants, he has to be content that something happened that he cannot explain.

The movie is good, and I think it can be enjoyed whether you are Christian or not. The end is a little too touchy-feely. They try to wrap everything up in a happy bow, and for a movie that the main premise is having to accept things as they are, the last 5 minutes felt a little out of character. But Kinnear’s performance as a struggling man of faith is outstanding (there’s a scene in the beginning where he tries to reason with God as I’m sure most of us have at some point have that is chilling). Well worth a view.

I’m a bit of a sports nut. I know the rules to all the major sports, and can spout off frivolous stats (especially baseball of course, I’m a St. Louisan) with the best of them. I have a soft spot for sports films. Say what you want about a lot of Kevin Costner’s films (see my review of 3 Days to Kill earlier this year), but he knows how to make a sports film. I love Field of Dreams, Bull Durham, and yes, even For Love of the Game. I loved Draft Day too.

As the title states, this is the story of a single day in the life of a football GM on the day of the NFL draft. Costner plays the GM of the Browns, a long suffering franchise seemingly always on the cusp of just about ready to break out, but never finding their stride. What I like about Costner’s other sports films, and there is plenty of in this film too, is they have heart. It’s not just a tale of events, they pull you in and you root for the characters to excel. At different points in this movie, you don’t know if things are going to go right for the team or not, but in the end you are definitely satisfied with the result. I think this is a great stereotypical “guy’s film” since it is heavy sports related, but I think it’s a movie my wife would enjoy too.

I have to say I’ve been loving the new Marvel films, especially those in the Avengers series. I wasn’t in to comics as a kid, and in fact wasn’t much into superheroes at all outside of the Batman and Superman movies. But these new films are great, and they seem to keep getting better. Thor 2 last year was far and away better than the first, and the new Captain America tops its predecessor as well.

This isn’t a deep movie. Don’t see it expecting some earth shattering revelation or any kind of thoughtful commentary. Even so, the people behind it know the formula they are going for and blend it to perfection. Captain America is now living in today’s world and learning about how it works in 2014 as opposed to his time of the 1940’s. The film is not all action (though that is obviously the highlight), there is still a good story, and our hero does have much to learn about this new world. He comes from a time when he could stand up as Captain America and fight for the good ol’ USA knowing he had justice and right on his side. He now lives in a place where the people he is working for might not always have the best for society as their goal, and he is having to change his way of thinking to adapt. This is brought home when one of the hero’s long-time friends ends up on the opposing side.

I’m sure these movies can’t stay good forever, at some point the quality has to drop off. But if you like pure action films, it doesn’t get much better than this right now.

Sab . o . tage (verb) deliberately destroy, damage, or obstruct (something)

The only thing thing this movie sabotages is Arnold Schwarzenegger’s action flick cred, if there was any left that is. Not much to say besides this movie is a big turd, really seems everyone just showed up for a paycheck. So full of clichés that you don’t know whether to laugh or groan. The fake blood is on such an epic scale that it’s almost as if the filmmakers are treating it is a farce. And of course you see the “surprise” ending coming practically from the first 15 minutes in. The movie studio should be ashamed for making this one, the theater should feel ashamed for taking your money to see it, and I certainly feel ashamed for having sat through it.

Wes Anderson has an extremely unique style. You can tell one of his films from just a couple minutes of viewing. His style has fans and critics. Personally I don’t feel one way or the other towards it. Some of his films I like (Royal Tenenbaums), some I don’t (Moonrise Kingdom). In my opinion though, The Grand Budapest Hotel may be his best.

I will say if you don’t like Wes Anderson, this movie won’t change your mind. It is full of his unique narrative style, clever, quirky dialogue and scenes, bright contrasting colors, and his artistic camera work. The story and character development are what I love about this film. Though Moonrise Kingdom may be his most commercially successful film, I feel it lacked the shading and color he usually gives his protagonists. Budapest does not, and the characters are brought to life with a rich and detailed direction. There was also a mystery element to the film which keeps the viewer riveted. When tragedy does come (and in Anderson’s style, it is quick and almost glossed over), you really feel for the characters. Though it is strange and implausible, it is a lot of fun. This is a great film that you’ll continue to think about when it is over.

I didn’t really know anything about Cesar Chavez before seeing this film. I knew he was a civil rights activist sometime before my time, but not much more than that unfortunately. I’m glad I saw this movie, it taught me a lot, and as biographical films go, it’s pretty good. Sometimes these movies can be very paint-by-the-numbers, but the good ones make you connect with the people living these lives. Like Mandela that I saw last year, I really felt for the main character and his predicament, and the fight he was trying to lead.

Cesar Chavez is portrayed by Michael Peña, a very fine actor in a lot of movies and tv shows, but a person you don’t see often in leading roles. His work as Cesar is fantastic. As a leader, he knows his people are angry at the low wages ($1- $2 a day) and poor working conditions (no bathrooms on site, no available drinking water despite a full day working under the sun). Yet he preaches peaceful protest and chastises when people lash out against the farm owners. While he was focused mostly on the plight of the farm workers, it still resonates today, especially with the continuing hot button issue of immigrant and children-of-immigrant workers.

If you totally ignore the biblical aspect of it (which is next to impossible for anyone that attended Sunday School every week), I guess Noah is an ok movie, but still a little far out there as historical films go. There’s a little too much of a sci-fi fantasy element to it for my tastes. Honestly, I think the film would have been better if you gave the main character a different name, had it take place on a different planet, and just called it science fiction. Personally, every time someone said Noah’s name on screen, I had to shake my head at what was going on.

The acting is good, and I’ve been hearing about the visual effects which did indeed live up to the hype. But I was incredulous from the very opening narrative, when we were told that fallen angels, called “watchers” (which look like misshapen stone giants) helped forge man’s place on this planet. I understand watchers are mentioned in the Book of Enoch, but that is such an obscure reference that their inclusion in a film about Noah was just too far fetched. And then the ever-present glowing rocks that can create fire from nothing, and can even be shot out like a gun. Many die-hard religious types are complaining about the environmental aspect to Noah’s story, which I didn’t mind as much. I also wasn’t bothered by Noah’s personal struggle of faith especially in the latter half of the film, though it did seem to only be included to stretch the movie out.

This movie is doing booming business right now, but it has to be solely because of the hype and intrigue. It is currently sitting on a C on Cinemascore (which is a rating of pure word-of-mouth of actual moviegoers, not critic reviews). A C is awful, which is indicative that this movie will not hold well in theaters. See it if you want to see what all the talk is about, but be prepared for a little disappointment.