2014 Movie Preview: #10 - The Amazing Spider-Man 2

Release date: May 2

Plot summary: We've always known that Spider-Man's most important battle has been within himself: the struggle between the ordinary obligations of Peter Parker and the extraordinary responsibilities of Spider-Man. But in The Amazing Spider-Man 2, Peter Parker finds that a greater conflict lies ahead. It's great to be Spider-Man (Andrew Garfield). For Peter Parker, there's no feeling quite like swinging between skyscrapers, embracing being the hero, and spending time with Gwen (Emma Stone). But being Spider-Man comes at a price: only Spider-Man can protect his fellow New Yorkers from the formidable villains that threaten the city. With the emergence of Electro (Jamie Foxx), Peter must confront a foe far more powerful than he. And as his old friend, Harry Osborn (Dane DeHaan), returns, Peter comes to realize that all of his enemies have one thing in common: Oscorp.

My take: For as much as I like Andrew Garfield and Emma Stone, I was not impressed with the Spiderman reboot that came out two years ago. While I still have reservations, my initial glimpse at this sequel gives me hope. From the look of the film, it appears that Marc Webb is more confident and comfortable shooting this type of movie and is trying to create more of a comic book look. What makes me both interested and nervous for this sequel is the number of villains that seem to be featured in this film. That can either make for something really awesome or a jumbled mess that causes people to begin using phrases like "too many cooks in the kitchen". Given the bar that the Avengers franchise has set, this has some big shoes to fill in order to stand toe to toe with those movies.

2014 Movie Preview: #17 - Horrible Bosses 2

Release date: November 26

Plot summary: Fed up with answering to higher-ups, Nick, Dale and Kurt decide to become their own bosses by launching their own business in "Horrible Bosses 2." But a slick investor soon pulls the rug out from under them. Outplayed and desperate, and with no legal recourse, the three would-be entrepreneurs hatch a misguided plan to kidnap the investor's adult son and ransom him to regain control of their company.

My take: The first Horrible Bosses had a lot of potential but did not quite live up to my expectations. With a lot of sequels, the law of diminishing returns sets in. I truly hope that isn't the case here because the cast is so strong. Based on the limited amount of knowledge we have on the plot, it seems like this can potentially build off of the first one and deliver an even stronger film this time around.

Web of guys

The first trailer for The Amazing Spider-Man 2 is here. Most will most likely notice the large number of villains seen or hinted at in the trailer (Electro! Rhino! Goblin!). What I noticed is that it seems like someone finally turned the lights on. I wasn't overwhelmed with the 2012 reboot largely in part because it felt so dark. Here's hoping this sequel uses its winning cast more effectively.

Die hardly

The old adage goes, "those who cannot remember the past are condemned to repeat it". This is a phrase that doesn't exactly hold true in Hollywood. Instead, studios tend to repeat history because they do remember the past. When a formula works, they reuse it time and time again. One of the most frequently used formulas is the Die Hard formula. For the past 25 years since the original Bruce Willis film hit theaters, Hollywood has frequently used the 'one man overcomes the odds to defeat a group of evil terrorists' trope. It's one thing when we are talking about a sequel to the franchise (which we already saw this year). It's another thing when it's a completely separate film that borrows the framework. So then, what are we to make of a film that not only uses the trope but then also uses the exact same context and setup as another film that was released mere months before it?

That is the question were left answering as White House Down, the latest film from master of disaster Roland Emmerich, hits theaters. Just like Olympus Has Fallen (a film which I have yet to see) did this past spring, our country has been put into peril as terrorists infiltrate the White House and hold our government hostage. Playing the role of John McLain this time (right down to the white tank top) is Channing Tatum playing John Cale, a security guard for the Speaker of the House who has aspiration of working for the Secret Service.

When all hell breaks loose, Cale finds himself as the lone guy able to help protect President James Sawyer (Jamie Foxx, doing a not so subtle job of actually playing President Obama). The two scamper through the White House hoping to avoid death while also trying to eliminate the bad guys. Of course, the film finds time to have this racially mismatched duo crack wise with each other during the down moments, which feels cribbed from Die Hard 3.

We then move on to borrowing from the fourth Die Hard film as the protagonist's kid is put into peril. In this case, the moppet is Joey King, playing Cale's daughter. She's a political junkie who happened to be visiting the White House with her father at the time of the attacks. And of course, to remind us that the apple doesn't fall too far from the tree, we get several scenes of her finding ways of talking tough and standing up to the terrorists, even though most 10 years would be absolutely petrified by the events that occur in the film.

And if you thought that Die Hard 2 was ignored, you'd be wrong. These domestic terrorists are able to gain access to these government buildings with embarrassing ease largely because of their being at least one, if not more, moles within the President's administration. Apparently, in this America, the concept of background checks is the only thing that is too far-fetched.

I will grant you that director Roland Emmerich will never be confused as someone who makes sophisticated films. If you've seen any of his previous films, you'll know that they require you to stop thinking and just enjoy the goofy ride. I've been able to do that with some of his past films because they are so outlandish in their attempts at putting people in peril. However, after completely destroying the world in 2012, he really had no way of topping himself and thus this film feels like a let down. There are a few moments of zany inspiration, like a rocket launcher being used during a car chase on the front lawn of the White House, but it overall just felt like a noisy rerun of better action films.

There's an attempt to add some gravitas to the picture through its casting. James Woods is the retiring head of the Secret Service. Maggie Gyllenhaal is a Secret Service agent. And Richard Jenkins plays the aforementioned Speaker of the House. They all manage to keep a straight face through this silly plot, but their presence alone isn't enough to improve the overall quality of the film. As for Tatum and Foxx, they seem to be having fun in their respective roles, but they also come off as pale imitations of the real or fictional person they are emulating.

For a film like this to work, there needs to be a true sense of fun, which is absent here. You have to slog through a half hour of obvious exposition to set up every single plot payoff that will come in the film's finale. And as the action starts to pick up, the film spends too much time trying to figure out how reverent it should be when it comes to depicting a White House under siege. I also could have done with one or two fewer twists that come near the films end that unnecessarily overcomplicate the film's plot. I don't have a problem when a film liberally borrows from a successful formula, but White House Down follows it so dutifully that it prevents the film from being the escapist fun that it should be. Grade: C

Bounty fare

I'm a latecomer when it comes to the appreciation of the work by Quentin Tarantino. While most discovered and embraced his approach to filmmaking with movies like Resevoir Dogs and Pulp Fiction, it took me until 2009's Inglorious Basterds to see how talented he is. The way he is able to pay homage to film genres while also subverting them with anachronistic soundtracks can be quite entertaining. He also has the capability of writing dialogue that is equal parts hilarious and horrifying, while wholly captivating. In his latest effort, Django Unchained, Tarantino's style is once again quite apparent.

Paying tribute to spaghetti Westerns, Django is the story of a dentist-turned-bounty hunter named Dr. King Schultz (played by Christoph Waltz) who locates and frees a slave named Django (Jamie Foxx). Schultz needs Django's help in locating his latest bounty. Successful in their mission, the two form a bond and work together in trying to free Django's wife (Kerry Washington), who's currently the property of a Southern plantation owner by the name of Calvin Candie (Leonardo DiCaprio, in a delightfully against-type role for him).

Each of the film's primary cast members brings a great deal of energy to their roles. Waltz is terrific again here (and deserving of his recent Oscar win) as man who's hunting people for more noble reasons than he was in Basterds. It was also enjoyable seeing DiCaprio playing someone so slimy and evil. And I should also point out Samuel L. Jackson, who is perhaps even more diabolical than DiCaprio's Candie, playing a slave who sees through Schultz and Django's act of deception. There are also a handful of cameos, some more recognizable than others, from a host of actors who add just a little bit more to each of their scenes.

I must admit, however, that for as entertaining as everyone is here, I felt something lacking in a lot of the scenes of dialogue. When watching Basterds, there were several scenes of dialogue that left me as a viewer white-knuckled in fear sensing something terrible was going to occur. In this film, none of the scenes ever reached that same level of anxiety in me. This time, Tarantino seemed much more impatient at getting to the payoff instead of properly building to it.

With this being a Tarantino film and all, the payoff to those interactions is, of course, bloodshed. You could probably fill 100 bathtubs with the amount of blood that spills in this film. And it's not just the blood that is in excess. The last third of the film is pure action that grows tiresome, especially after intergral characters are killed off prior to the film's ultimate climax. Any enjoyment from these scenes does not stem from watching Django exact revenge, but rather from appreciating Tarantino's effort to write fanfiction about a dark time in our country's history.

Django Unchained is a Tarantino film through and through. In this case, that means having to take the good with the bad. For all the juicy characters and bloody action that he offers, you also have to deal with his inability to curb his impulses and recognizing that there can be too much of a good thing. Those who are fans of his will no doubt enjoy this latest entry, even if they see it as not being on par with some of his other efforts. For those who are unfamiliar with his style, this is probably not the best entry point. His depiction of violence can be a jolt to the system and it is not as successfully offset with engaging dialogue as it is in his past films. Django is a bloody good show, it's just too bad it could have been so much more than that. Grade: B