NEW THIS WEEK
In
this surprisingly conversational reboot of the beloved 80’s property, Kristen Wiig stars
as a university professor who reunites with her now-crazy former partner
(Melissa McCarthy) and her friends (Kate McKinnon and Leslie Jones) to form the
titular team of paranormal investigators. When ghosts from New York’s part
start popping up on a regular basis, the Ghostbusters must fight to send the
spirits back from where they came from before an even bigger threat takes hold.
We Said: “While it's
understandable that some out there will be skeptical about this new, modern Ghostbusters,
sometimes the best thing to do is trust in the talent. […] Don't worry; your
childhoods will remain intact.” Rating: 3.5
out of 5
The Good: Obviously, this
movie had some very big shoes to fill, and with all the negative press
surrounding the film, I went in expecting very little and was pleasantly
surprised to see that 2016’s Ghostbusters is actually pretty
alright. Fans of previous collaborations between writer/director Paul Feig and
star Melissa McCarthy will certainly find a lot to enjoy, but personally the
standout to me was Kate McKinnon. She is a
Ghostbuster. She steals every scene she’s in and is certain to be a popular
Halloween costume for years to come. Additionally, Thor’s Chris Hemsworth
showcases his surprisingly spot-on comedic sensibilities as the team’s dumb
secretary. Ultimately, although it is unnecessary, there is a great deal of fun
to be had with this reboot.
The Bad: Of course, when
compared to the original film, this new Ghostbusters is rather weak, with an
over-complicated plotline, and sometimes truly groan-worthy humor. To their
credit, a good half of the cast seems to be really trying hard to land this
iffy script, but everyone else seems to be fully aware of how miscast they are,
and phone it in like crazy. The callbacks to the original film are misguided
and the super-villain subplot slows the movie to a screeching halt. This is a
movie filled with missed opportunities. I’m not mad at you 2016 Ghostbusters,
just disappointed.
Overall: Ghostbusters
is perfectly okay. It certainly does have some excellent performances
and fun sequences throughout it, but never it all never fully comes together as
a whole. That being said, if you can mange to put the first movie out of your
mind and instead just focus on this movie, and the goofy scifi fun its having, Ghostbusters
can be an enjoyable ride.
A
sequel of sorts to the classic story of the man raised by apes, Legend
of Tarzan focuses on the hero (now living in high society England under
the name John Clayton alongside his wife Jane) reluctantly returning to the
Congo as suggested to him by American explorer George Williams (Samuel L
Jackson). Little do they know, the request for the famed Tarzan’s return to his
jungle home is a trap, set by Christoph Waltz’s villainous Captain Rom and an
old adversary from his past (Djimon
Hounsou).
We Said: “It's an impressive spectacle, for sure,
but also serves to highlight The Legend of Tarzan's inability, or
unwillingness, to be more than just a standard adventure film rather than a
fresh take on the character.” Rating: 3 out
of 5
The Good: I was surprised at
how enjoyable a lot of Legend of Tarzan actually was. A
great deal of the action and drama are rather captivating. Director David Yates
really managed to turn the very dated and potentially boring Tarzan story into
something really engaging. There were many sequences of the movie that had me
at the edge of me seat, totally into the action on screen. When an adventure
story manages that, it’s really something to applaud. Alexander Skarsgard gives
a excellent (and ab-tastic) performance in the title role, and Margot Robbie
manages to elevate her Jane into more than just the plot device the story wants
her to be. I’d literally watch her in anything. She’s always great and this
film is no exception. Overall it’s an entertaining movie to have watched.
The Bad: Legend
of Tarzan makes some very questionable decisions over the course of its
runtime. Top of the list, of course, is its decision to be a sequel to the
story of Tarzan, as opposed to the actual story. That’s a very strange choice,
and the plot that was invented for this movie instead is pretty weak and
confusing. It also interjects elements of historical fiction throughout for
reasons beyond my understanding. Both Sam Jackson’s comic relief character and
Christoph Waltz’s villain were actual historical figures who lived through that
time, and have true stories far more complex and compelling than the one’s
assigned to the stock characters the movie portrays them as. My biggest problem
with it, however, is its halfhearted attempts at modernizing the sensibilities
of the very outdated source material. We’re left with a movie that uncomfortably
doesn’t know what to say about itself. Legend of Tarzan is rather awkward.
Overall: Although the
script is messy and makes some distracting decisions, the direction and lead
performances in The Legend of Tarzan elevate the movie to a place where its
action is truly exciting to watch. If you don’t think about it too hard, Legend
of Tarzan is pretty fun.
The
Ice
Age gang is back in their strangest adventure yet. Manny the mammoth’s
daughter is now grown up and getting married, with their good friend Sid the
sloth planning the whole event. Of course, everything falls apart when ever-unlucky
acorn hunter Scrat somehow manages to accidentally launch himself into space,
sending an asteroid hurtling straight to prehistoric earth on the day of the wedding.
Hilarity ensues.
We Said: The overwhelming
sense of "who cares; it's just for kids" comes off of Ice
Age: Collision Course like cold wind off a glacier. […]It's a Mc-movie,
designed more for superficial appeal and mass-production than for any long-term
nutritive value. It maybe fine once in a
while, but you probably don't want to encourage a taste for it.” Rating: 2 out of 5
