Most Anticipated Review: Lawless

14. Lawless (R) - Runtime: 116 minutes
Starring: Shia LaBeouf, Tom Hardy, Jason Clarke
Director: John Hillcoat
Writer: Nick Cave

I don't know why I get so excited for gangster/crime movies. Most of them end up being boring for me - I can never tell who's who and what's really happening. The dialogue and plot can get so convoluted that even with the subtitles on, I can't comprehend. But I had faith in this movie - number 14! I think the main reason was because of Nick Cave as the writer. The last time he wrote a movie was The Proposition with Guy Pearce and I thought that was a brilliant western film when I really at the time didn't care for the genre. So I was hoping that he could bring the same awesome sauce to the gangster film. While the movie has its moments, it largely ends up being a snooze fest in my opinion.

Set during the Depression in Virginia, the Bondurant brothers run a pretty successful bootlegging operation. But then Guy Pearce shuffles onto the scene as Charlie Rakes, the new sheriff, demanding a bigger cut of the profits. It's up to the brothers to make sure they take care of their own and make damn sure that Rakes gets outta town. The story is narrated by LaBeouf, who does a decent job of not being annoying Shia LaBeouf throughout the movie. But he seems to have the worst perspective to tell this story. He's the youngest brother, Jack, and can't be trusted to handle such manly business. The main problem with the movie is that it would have been much more dramatic had they not presented the story through Jack's point of view. The movie would have been much more riveting had there been no narration and more emphasis on Tom Hardy's character, Forrest.

He's the main thrust of the movie - the brother who holds a lot of respect in town and controls every aspect of the business. Plus he gets beat up and shot and stabbed a whole lot - the dude is such a badass. But here we go again - the main problem with his character is Tom Hardy's performance. I could not understand half of what he was saying. He mumbles and grumbles through most every line and if it weren't for subtitles, I wouldn't have understood half the movie! I love Tom Hardy, but he almost got too into character for this one.

As for the rest of the performances, they're okay. Guy Pearce really hams it up as the obsessed neat freak sheriff. And Gary Oldman does a fantastic job of playing a big city mob boss, but gets only 15 minutes of screen time. I don't even know why the character is in the movie - he adds very little to the narrative and offers a motivation for Jack to aspire to be a mobster - but nothing beyond that. Jessica Chastain shows up as the love interest and you do get to see her topless (bonus! With Tom Hardy!), but the sex scene is awkward and dirty (as in germs dirty, no sexy dirty! Minus! Tom Hardy is fully dressed and not sexy for all you ladies watching) - it just seems like another wasted character

While I wouldn't say you should never see this movie, it's really not worth your time unless you're really into bootlegging. Or Jessica Chastain. If you're into Tom Hardy, well, you'll probably find him a little less attractive after this movie. It's a slow story that plods along and doesn't really get interesting at any point. I'm ashamed I put this so high on my list.

Rating: Not Worth Paying For!

Most Anticipated: Savages

45. Savages (R) - Runtime: 131 minutes
Starring: Aaron Taylor-Johnson, Taylor Kitsch, Blake Lively
Director: Oliver Stone
Writer: Shane Salemo, Don Winslow, Oliver Stone

Boy was this movie terrible. I'm not gonna sugar coat it - this was one of the worst movies I've seen all year. From the annoying narration to the unnecessary grotesque violence to the super lame plot, this movie has absolutely nothing going for it. I'm really ashamed of putting this on my list! You have to feel bad for Kitsch - I love the dude as Tim Riggins on Friday Night Lights, but he can't catch a break - John Carter and Battleship were huge bombs at the box office and now this stinking pile of poop is on his resume as well. He might need to get a new agent.

Savages starts out on the wrong foot - Blake Lively narrates the opening scene with this awful set up: "Just because I'm telling you this story, doesn't mean I'm alive at the end." Oh! So profound! Thank you. Not only doesn't it sound absolutely stupid, but Lively is probably the worst narrator you can get - she delivers her lines like she's on the toilet and scrolling through her Twitter feed while reciting the lines. Listen, I don't expect Morgan Freeman, but c'mon, let's at least make sure there's a pulse in the room! Anyways, she's a girlfriend to both Kitsch and Taylor-Johnson (Chon and Ben - worst pothead duo names ever), the former is the hothead of the group, while Ben is the hippie-dippie free love guy. This is explained by Blake Lively as "Chon likes to fuck, Ben makes love!" Once again, profundity abounds in this movie. So they grow weed and have attracted the attention of Salma Hayek, who is having an identity crisis of her own - she doesn't know whether or not she's a good mum. First world drug lord problems! Amirite? Of course she wants a cut of Cheech and Chong's business, but they refuse. So she kidnaps Blake Lively. Which I was happy about, but then she still kept narrating the movie, which I was not happy about. Shit happens and when it's time for the climactic battle - it ends up pulling a Breaking Dawn Part 2 on us and ends on a much dumber note than before. Seriously, the ending is pure awfulness.

If you can't tell already, this movie is a mess. I never once felt Salma Hayek and her crew (led by creepy Benicio Del Toro) were menacing. Sure they decapitated heads and lit people on fire, but it seemed so unreal and fake that I couldn't really feel any terror. It didn't help either that Harold and Kumar never really seemed to freak out ever during this movie. "Oh hey man, did you see that video the drug cartel sent us of decapitated bodies?" "Yeah. Hey! Let's smoke some pot!" "Cool." Yeah, the movie was like that.

I'm disappointed in all parties involved in this movie - Oliver Stone is way better than this - I think he hit his peak in the mid-90s with Natural Born Killers and it has been a slow descent from there. And the cast? They all seemed to have missed the point that this was an action/crime movie and thought they could load up on cheese at the craft service table and forgot to bring some energy. It's a dumb movie and you will be made dumb if you watch it!

Rating: Avoid Like the Plague!

Most Anticipated Review: The Hobbit: An Unexpected Journey

7. The Hobbit: An Unexpected Journey (PG-13) - Runtime: 169 minutes
Starring: Martin Freeman, Ian McKellen, Richard Armitage
Director: Peter Jackson
Writers: Peter Jackson, Fran Walsh, Phillipa Boyens, Guillermo del Toro

I had a falling out with the LOTR trilogy a few years ago. I hadn't watched the movies since I purchased the extended editions when they originally came out. So about 2004 was the last time I had seen any of those movies. It wasn't until my brother asked me to go sit in the theater for a whole day (13 hours) to watch all three extended editions of the Lord of the Rings a couple of weeks ago that I remembered why I loved these movies so much. I can't put my finger on it, but there's just something magical (pun intended!) about these movies. It's the combination of the story, characters, music and the sprawling vistas that melt my brain. I can't help it - these are fantastic movies, despite me not enjoying the source material that much.

But I cannot say that for The Hobbit - it's a great book that I've always loved it way more than the LOTR trilogy of books. It's just more playful and adventurous than those installments. So when the movie finally got greenlit, I was super stoked to see how awesome del Toro would make these two movies. And then he dropped out of directing and Peter Jackson was on board. And then they decided to split up the book even more and make it a trilogy. I became utterly despondent - this seemed like a major cash-in for the studio and not a creative license to fill in holes in the story to connect to the LOTR trilogy.

And I was further dismayed at less than stellar reviews it was getting. My heart hang heavy. Going into the movie I expected to be bummed out for at least a third of the movie knowing that most of it was just filler and fluff. But that same Middle-Earth magic began to make its way out of the screen and into my brain again. It was so nice to come back to this world again! The music, the sprawling vistas and the delightful characters once again had me fall in love. I swooned, for sure. And I wasn't disappointed at all. Sure, there were scenes that could have been left on the cutting room floor, but it didn't bother me - I was back in Middle-Earth!

Don't get me wrong - the movie has some flaws to it, but it's just such an entertaining ride throughout. I honestly didn't get bored with this movie at all. Only afterwards, upon reflecting, did I think that a couple of action scenes could have been cut. But I didn't notice it the first time around - it may get worse upon multiple viewings. But that aside - there's a lot to love in this movie. The dwarves are all very fun, but Ian McKellen as Gandalf is once again, fantastic. He's the glue in this movie and he's the reason why this whole series goes from good to great. Martin Freeman as Bilbo is great, too! He's done the British hat trick - he's played three great British icons - Dr. Watson, Arthur Dent (from Hitchhiker's Guide to the Galaxy) and now Bilbo! That's astonishing and here he's amazing.

I'm not going to bore you with too many details about this movie. You're either going to love it or hate it. If you are a fan of the LOTR, you just have to see this movie. You may not like it as much as the other movies, but you'll still enjoy yourself. If you do not care at all about this franchise, than you're probably better off sitting this whole trilogy out as well.

Rating: See It!

Most Anticipated Review: Django Unchained

1. Django Unchained (R) - Runtime: 165 minutes
Starring: Jamie Foxx, Christoph Waltz, Leonardo DiCaprio
Director: Quentin Tarantino
Writer: Quentin Tarantino

I don't think I realized how big a fan of Tarantino I was until I watched Inglourious Basterds. During that film, the whole time I was completely enthralled - the real world didn't exist and I was completely beholden to the story unfolding in front of me. And then I started to look back at his film career and there really hasn't been a misstep as far as directing goes (as for slapping his name on every awful, schlocky horror/action/martial arts movie, well...). And Django Unchained is no different - this is at times, a tough film to watch, but also very rewarding in both its joyful glee at revenge fantasy (much like Basterds) and its comic timing. It's definitely one of my favorite movies this year!

It's a simple revenge story - Django gets hired by a bounty hunter named Dr. Schultz, to take down some nasty outlaws in exchange for finding his wife, whom he was separated from at a slave auction. I thought the movie was going to be all about finding these outlaw brothers and Django and Schultz becoming buddies while taking out a bunch of racist slave owners. But the movie went in a completely different direction than I thought - Django and Schultz find the brothers quite quickly and take them out within the fist half hour of the movie. The rest of the movie is all about finding his wife and what happens when they do find her at Leonardo DiCaprio's Calvin Candie's residence, Candieland.

The movie is over two and half hours long, but not once did I feel it drag. Tarantino knows how to keep a movie going and every minute of this movie was fun and exciting! The movie does slow down a bit - but it's completely terrifying during the last half of the movie when they attempt to deceive Calvin Candie into selling Django's wife to them. DiCaprio puts on his best performance since The Departed. He's a completely demented slave owner and you're never too sure what he's capable of and it's truly horrific and intense. Playing the complete opposite of DiCaprio's deranged Candie, Christoph Waltz is the most charming and well-intentioned character in the film. Never once does he stray from his moral high ground, which is a complete surprise. He's the idealistic and romantic hero that we all wish were more prevalent during this troubling time in American history. Waltz and DiCaprio deserve at least some consideration for an Oscar - they're both the driving forces behind this movie, even more so than the lead character.

Which is quite interesting to read into - even though this is a revenge fantasy about slavery, even the lead black guy cannot overcome the power of white people in this movie. This has a lot to do with the performances more than the writing, so read into that what you want. Django does have his moments and in the end he is the last man standing and gets the last laugh. Jamie Foxx is Django and completely convincing as he progresses through being a submissive slave to owning his role as a free man.

I want to take a minute about the violence in the movie. Tarantino has been getting a lot of flak for the violence in his films and it all came to a head when he got blindsided by an NPR interview (read the synopsis here). It seems like more and more people are joining this chorus of criticism of our violent culture and how films and video games, while not being linked to violent behavior, somehow has numbed us to violence and glorified bloodshed and guns. I don't understand this - anyone who has watched Django and hasn't been disgusted at most of the violence portrayed in it. It's not an easy film to watch and the glorified shootout at the end is not exactly realistic and purely fantastical for a reason (much like the completely over-the-top shootout in Basterds). When someone boils down such a complicated issue to these talking points, it ruins the conversation and drives the focus away from the real issues.

Spoiler alert! I also found the ending to be something to think about - the last person Django kills in the end is Samuel L. Jackson. Jackson plays a very loyal butler who ends up telling Candie about Django and Schultz's nefarious plan. He's as much a villain as Candie (in a different way) and it's interesting to think about what this means in the grand scheme of things. A simple interpretation is that even slaves can become part of the problem. There's even a moment where Django talks about the most despised slaves are the black slave drivers and head house slave. I think it might be more complicated than that and I can't wait to delve into the movie again to tackle this issue. End of Spoilers!

If you don't mind uncomfortable violence and a lot of verbal abuse, than you'll love Django. It's a fun film and one of Tarantino's funniest for sure. I never once lost interest and that's a testament to great filmmaking. It's surely going to be one of the most talked-about movies this year and you're doing yourself an injustice by not seeing this movie. Wonderfully cast and exceptionally directed - this is a contender for best of the year!

Rating: See It!

Most Anticipated Review: This is 40

21. This is 40 (R) - Runtime: 134 minutes
Starring: Paul Rudd, Leslie Mann, Albert Brooks
Director: Judd Apatow
Writer: Judd Apatow

I'm a big fan of Judd Apatow. He knows comedy and has, I think, been growing as a director through each of his first three films. Unfortunately, his fourth outing is somewhat of road bump (at least I hope it's only a road bump). What could have been a stroke of genius with making a sort-of sequel to Knocked Up, This is 40 ends up being a funny mess of a movie. It has its moments - and I laughed hard in some places - but as a cohesive movie, it does not work at all.

I can't really explain the plot to This is 40 - basically it's a look into the life a somewhat dysfunctional family and their trials and tribulations. What bothered me the most about this movie is there's this forced conflict of money problems. Of course Paul Rudd's Pete has been losing money - his business is failing, he's lending out money to his chump father and he doesn't say a word to his wife about this! This is basically the same plot structure of the most laziest comedies/sitcoms. The whole plot hinges on this dishonesty and I cannot believe that a couple that has been together this long could be so uncommunicative with each other. The movie tries very hard to show us these are real people but this is not how real people react in real life. I found this to be a very hard pill to swallow.

The other problem with the movie is the characters themselves. As side characters in Knocked Up, they were nice comic relief. Here, everyone is a complete asshole with pretty much no likability. Almost every character, including one of the kids, are such selfish jerks that the movie made me feel no sympathy for their problems. These characters don't develop - at the end of the movie, I felt that nobody learned anything - they're all still going to be a bunch of assholes living under a different roof.

It's a movie that seems stitched together - there's no real advance in the story. It's like Apatow had a few great comedic scenes he wanted to film, but decided he could extend into a feature-length film. So there's no development of a plot whatsoever - it's extremely frustrating because the movie is OVER two hours long! There's absolutely no reason for this movie to be more than an hour and a half. It suffers from poor editing (or no editing) and a lack of progress from an actual plot. Even the acting isn't top notch - Paul Rudd and Leslie Mann defintely inhabit their roles really well, but everyone else seems like they half showed up to this movie. John Lithgow, Albert Brooks, Chris O'Dowd and Jason Segal all seem to be phoning it in; they don't seem present within the movie.

Don't get me wrong, I laughed a lot - that 's a testament to how well the jokes land in this movie and how Apatow can still make me laugh despite not making a great film. It's just a terribly plotted movie and the characters are completely unrealistic. Some of the movie is just lazy filmmaking and bad editing. I cannot recommend this movie, even as a rental - there's just nothing really memorable about it!

Rating: Not Worth Paying For!

Review: Paranorman

Paranorman (PG) - Runtime: 92 minutes
Voiced By: Kodi Smit-McPhee, Anna Kendrick, Christopher Mintz-Plasse
Directors: Chris Butler, Sam Fell
Writer: Chris Butler

I couldn't muster up too much excitement for this movie. I love stop motion animation and thought Coraline was a brilliant movie, but everything I saw about this movie made me think "meh" and maybe I'll check it out on DVD. I'm happy I did, because this is a wonderful film that is one of the best animated movies to come out this year.

Norman can see dead people. But instead of being a family-friendly retread of The Sixth Sense, the movie is more of a homage to old school horror flicks and filled with a lot more action than any of Shyamalan's films. He's an outcast and is ridiculed, but soon finds out that his power to see dead people will be the only thing to save his small town from an evil witch. Where the film ultimately ends up is amazing - I did not see it coming and I thought it to be more fitting than some spectacular action sequence that would have been fun to watch, but less fulfilling.

The characters are charming and the voice work is excellent. I loved the side characters just as much as Norman. It has a lot of funny moments and the movie is well-paced. It has a great message along with the paying homage to horror films in a cute way. This movie hits all the right notes - it's worth watching!

Rating: Rent It!

Review: Ruby Sparks

Ruby Sparks (R) - Runtime: 104 minutes
Starring: Paul Dano, Zoe Kazan, Chris Messina
Directors: Jonathan Dayton, Valerie Faris
Writer: Zoe Kazan

I feel like I was getting a bit of deja vu while watching this movie. I remember a film called Stranger Than Fiction coming out a few years ago and completely loving that movie. It was a bit odd and off-center, but fun and heartwarming all at the same time. And here we are with Ruby Sparks - a story very much similar to Stranger Than Fiction, but it's told from the opposite viewpoint - that of the creator, not the creation.

Paul Dano plays Calvin - a once-successful writer (really a one-hit wonder) who after succumbing to a bit of writer's block, stumbles upon a brilliant story and character that viola! comes to life! Ruby is his creation and his real girlfriend, but she doesn't know it. Whereas Stranger Than Fiction mostly dealt with having no control over your life, Ruby Sparks looks at the idea of having control over someone's life and relationship. The other major difference from these two movies is that STF is more light-hearted, sometimes comedic and Ruby Sparks is simply a dramatic drag at times.

Don't get me wrong, I enjoyed the movie, but boy does it try to hit you over the head with it's MEANING and SYMBOLISM. The problem stems from the main character - Calvin. He's an overly pompous and unlikable twat. He's so full of himself and thinks his life is so miserable even though his book is getting made into a movie and he basically doesn't have to worry about money at all so all he has to do is write every now and then. It's completely off-putting and the film is intentional with this, but to a fault. I didn't care too much if he found true love. I just felt really, really sorry for Ruby and that she had to deal with Calvin.

What surprised me the most was his family - Calvin has an awesome family. Who wouldn't want Chris Messina as a brother? And Annette Benning may be a tad to hippieish for my tastes, but she loves her sons. Antonia Banderas shows up Calvin's mother's boyfriend who's also a hippie and I totally did a double take. This isn't your typical Banderas - he has a beard and white hair! It's crazy, but I totally dug his character - he made a chair for Calvin and my heart grew ten sizes! And although the shit Calvin puts Ruby through is pretty awful, I liked the ending. It was fitting and certainly made up for all the brooding and ostentatious dialogue. It's a movie worth checking out - it doesn't overstay its welcome and you'll end up with a smile on your face at the end and what more could you ask for?

Rating: Rent It!

Most Anticipated Review: Moonrise Kingdom

29. Moonrise Kingdom (PG-13) - Runtime: 94 minutes
Starring: Jared Gilman, Kara Hayward, Bruce Willis
Director: Wes Anderson
Writers: Wes Anderson, Roman Coppola

Let's just get this out of the way: I really, really enjoy Wes Anderson's movies. In fact, there hasn't been one movie I haven't enjoyed that's he's done. I've been a fan since he made Rushmore and even though he's pretty much not grown as a filmmaker, he's still one of the more imaginative and creative filmmakers out there. I'd call Anderson comfort food - you know what you're going to get and it won't ever surprise you, but it won't disappoint you either.

Moonrise Kingdom isn't a disappointment either. The story follows two young lovers who have a myriad of problems at home. They decide to runaway together and set up camp in the wilderness on their home island in the face of a breaking storm. Like most Anderson films, the characters are quirky and slightly off from reality but there's a certain charm and likeability to their traits. And the cinematography and design of the whole movie is gorgeous. What's a little different from most of his movies this time around is the story is always driving forward to this inevitable ending confrontation with the kids and the authorities that is also represented by the storm hitting the island. Usually Anderson's movies meander a bit and linger on certain scenes. But here, there's this drum beat of a pace that keeps pounding until the climax of the movie.

And although the pacing and story is quite refreshing from this perspective, there's still the always charming and oddly bizarre characters that seem somewhat familiar. There's a lot of stuff going on in this movie - there are a lot of characters and they all seem to carry their own baggage. And even if the cast is excessive, it's such a tightly wound movie that nothing really comes unravelling - the characters are all memorable and they all have their roles to play in the outcome of the ending. If I'm being vague with my description, Moonrise Kingdom is a hard movie to describe without telling the whole story and characters in great detail. You'll just have to trust me that this is a more rapid-fire, faster-paced Wes Anderson film than his previous installments and it's a fun ride the whole way.

The cast is exceptional, of course and I really think the standouts are the two lead kids. They totally sell their romance and I thought their whole relationship was truly romantic, if not a little absurd. They're both a little odd (and slightly mental - which after watching this right after the Sandy Hook shooting, it was interesting to see it from this mental health angle. At one point Suzy goes into a daze and stabs a kid that's attacking them! I really don't know what to read into this other than that it was more funny than serious from the film's perspective).

If you're not a fan of Wes Anderson this movie will not change your mind about him. Otherwise, if you like him or if you're just looking for a fun, quirky movie, Moonrise Kingdom will fill that void. It's an oddly romantic film and somewhat of a dismally cheerful movie (if that's a thing). It's really quite entertaining and I think multiple viewings are in store for this movie from me.

Rating: Own It!

Most Anticipated Review: The Twilight Saga: Breaking Dawn, Part 2

23. The Twilight Saga: Breaking Dawn, Part 2 (PG-13) - Runtime: 115 minutes
Starring: Kristen Stewart, Robert Pattinson, Taylor Lautner
Director: Bill Condon
Writer: Melissa Rosenberg

At long last I finally get to see how this all plays out. While I still think the first Twilight movie is the best (and probably the story should have just stopped there!), Eclipse was a fun movie, but the other two (New Moon and BD Part 1) could have been boiled down into twenty minute prologues before their subsequent sequels. It's a fairly satisfying ending to the franchise and I hope I never have to hear the name Renesmee again.

I'm not going to summarize the story - most people are familiar with it anyway and I don't feel like rehashing the fairly dull details. Suffice to say, the head vampires find out about the human/vampire hybrid child and want to kill it because it's like a metaphor for abortion, or something like that. So the whole movie is the build up to the end showdown between the Cullen family versus the Volturi. I honestly cannot remember too much about the rest of the movie except for the ending, which I will get to in a minute.

The first thing that bothered me about this movie was the CGI baby/toddler/child. Yes, instead of finding real, cheap babies and children to fill the screen with as Renesmee (seriously, the most effed up name on the planet! Gawd!), the filmmakers decide to throw away money (although it wasn't really well spent!) on a CGI baby. And it's disgustingly unreal and awkward in so many ways. I understand they wanted to show us how fast this kid will grow up (she goes from being a baby to like ten in less than a year), but it was handled so badly that I threw up a little in my mouth every time the kid was on screen. Seriously - they CGI'd a toddler's face to match the real (Mackenzie Foy) actor's face! Every time the kid was on screen it was completely distracting and I think I could have suspended disbelief just a tad more if the kid was real, just played by different actors at different ages. Although Maggie doesn't necessarily disagree with me, I don't think this absurdness bothered her as much as it bothered me!

And now onto the aforementioned big showdown. I really was looking forward to that wrestling-style spin and kick combo that Edward and Bella did in the trailer and this showdown did not disappoint! There was so much violence (but not that much blood! This is a PG-13 affair and think of the children!) that I was completely shocked at how much heads were decapitated and jaws were ripped apart without any real blood spilling or guts hanging out. I will spoil the whole ending here, so beware. The battle starts with Carlisle's head being ripped out! I was like, "Oh hell yes!" and shit started flying everywhere and the earth literally opened up to swallow wolves and vampires alike and so, so many people died. It was epic and awesome! The whole time Maggie's jaw was on the floor and at one point she was flipping off the screen and yelling obscenities at the movie. I asked her why she was so upset and she told me this didn't happen in the books AT ALL! I started laughing and couldn't help but revel in all the delicious carnage. It was really fun to see all those people die - it made the story seem more powerful - all of these martyrs dying for their cause.

BUT WAIT! Snap back to reality and it was all just a vision of the future from Alice! Nobody died! She shows this to the head Volturi dude and they all conclude it's not worth fighting over. So instead of the previous shitstorm becoming a reality, they all go their separate ways and Edward and Bella live happily ever after with their poorly named and creepy looking daughter. Who also happens to fall in love with Jacob in a way that just sends chills up my spine in a bad way. The whole ending is pretty awful.

Maggie was upset in a much different way. The movie totally punk'd her - she thought the whole overly dramatic battle was real and that the movie completely deviated from the book. Psyche! I don't think I've ever seen such a blatant and obvious scheme to lure in a male audience. They promise us with an epic battle and they deliver, but it's all not real! I felt a little bit shafted, albeit from a different perspective than Maggie.

So while I maintain the Twilight Saga is a decent to mediocre story, I think the universe Stephanie Meyer created is much, much more interesting than Edward's, Bella's and Jacob's silly little romantic story. Aside from the sparkly vampires, I'm way more intrigued by the history of the vampires, including the Volturi and how they came to power. That's a story I'd like to hear and I think it would be way more bloody and dramatic than a cheesy love triangle. Would I see these movies again? Probably not, but I was more invested into how the story would end and the movie does a fairly decent job of keeping my attention.

Rating: Rent It!

Most Anticipated Review: Safety Not Guaranteed

54. Safety Not Guaranteed (R) - Runtime: 86 minutes
Starring: Aubrey Plaza, Mark Duplass, Jake Johnson
Director: Colin Trevorrow
Writer: Derek Connolly

Much like Jeff, Who Lives at home, Safety Not Guaranteed is a small, quirky comedy that packs a lot of warmth and heart into its characters. It's a charming movie that runs under an hour and a half. It's hard not to at least like this movie, if not completely fall in love with the characters. It's surely high praise, but when a movie does so many things right, it's easy to forget some of its flaws.

The premise is simple - Darius (Plaza) is a Debbie Downer intern at a magazine and gets sucked into a story that "journalist" Jeff (Jake Johnson) wants to write about - a classified ad that reads: WANTED: Someone to go back in time with me. This is not a joke. You'll get paid after we get back. Must bring your own weapons. I have only done this once before. Safety not guaranteed. Jeff is a major toolbag and just looking for an excuse for a paid vacation and maybe make fun of the dude. But Darius (not the best name on the planet!) starts to question her intentions when she begins hanging out with Kenneth (Mark Duplass).

It's not a movie that has a lot of belly laughs - it's a bit more subtle than that. But it's clever and just quirky enough to make you smile. I wouldn't go so far as to call this a "hipster" movie, but it definitely has that hipster sensibility. The great thing about this movie is you really have no clue where it's going and the ending is masterful. I don't want to spoil the story too much, but it's an ending that a few will loathe and most people will smile and say "fitting."

The performances are great - Duplass is quickly becoming a favorite dude of mine (he can act, write and direct - triple threat! Watch out, ladies!). Aubrey Plaza plays pretty much her role in Parks and Recreation here and that's not a bad thing. But once again, props to Jake Johnson for stealing every scene he's in. Even though he's a complete douchebag, you grow to love him for all of his flaws.

The movie does feel a bit rushed and the love story that develops between Kenneth and Darius seems a bit out of left field to grasp. I wouldn't say I didn't see it coming, but felt it needed more time to sink in for the audience as well as the characters. But this is a minor quibbles in an otherwise charming and quaint movie.

Rating: Rent It!