Showing posts with label james marsden. Show all posts
Showing posts with label james marsden. Show all posts

Sunday, January 21, 2018

"2 GUNS" (2013) Review

2-Guns-9-010


"2 GUNS" (2013) Review

I have been a major fan of both Denzel Washington and Mark Wahlberg for years. But when I first learned that the pair would be starring in one of those "cop buddy" action flicks called "2 GUNS", I did not greet the news with any real enthusiams. And I had a few reasons for my lack of enthusiasm. 

As much as I admired the two, I could not envision the both of them as an effective screen team. I thought they would either cancel each other out or simply lack any real screen chemistry. There have been less and less "cop buddy" movies in the past decade. The genre is not as popular as it used to be during its heyday from the late 1980s to the mid 1990s. Also, the movie was released during the month of August, which the Hollywood studios use as a dumping ground for their second-rate summer fare or for movies they are uncertain of any success. And if I must be brutally honest, the movie's title - "2 GUNS" - did not particularly ring with any originality or zing. I did the math and concluded that this movie would be, at best, a sample of cinematic mediocrity. But . . . this was a movie with Denzel Washington and Mark Wahlberg and decided to see it anyway.

"2 GUNS" began in the middle of the story with the two main characters - criminals Robert Trench and Michael Stigman - plotting the robbery of a local Texas bank that holds the money of Mexican drug lord named Papi Greco. The story rewinds back a few days to Trench and Stigman's meeting with Greco in Mexico, where the latter fails to give Trench the cocaine that he wanted. As it turned out during a stop at the U.S.-Mexico border, Trench is an undercover D.E.A. agent who needs the cocaine as evidence to convict Greco. Trench decides to continue his cover and assist Stigman in robbing Greco's $3 million dollars from a Texas bank. Unbeknownst to Trench, Stigman is an undercover U.S. Navy Intelligence agent who is ordered by his commanding officer, Harold Quince, to kill Trench and take the $3 million so that the Navy can use it to finance covert operations. Upon robbing the bank, both Trench and Stigman discover that Greco had $43 million dollars in the bank. Even worse, the money actually belongs to a C.I.A. official named Earl, who has been using the money given to him by Greco for C.I.A. black operations. Stigman finds himself in trouble with Quince for failing to kill Trench. And before the latter is framed by Earl for his superior's murder, he is instructed to get the money back or face prison. Trench and Stigman team up to find the money.

Just as I had expected, "2 GUNS" proved to be a typical "cop buddy" movie that was prevalent during the late 1980s and the early 1990s. However, I was surprised how complex it proved to be. Instead of two police officers already established as partners or being forced to become partners, "2 GUNS" featured two intelligence agents unaware of each other's profession and mission, and forced to become partners when they find themselves ostracized. I was also surprised to discover that both Washington and Wahlberg managed to produce a first-rate screen chemistry. Not only did they work well together as an action team, but also proved to be quite funny. And thanks to Blake Masters' screenplay, the movie featured some top-notch action scenes that included the actual bank robbery, Trench and Stigman's encounter with Quince's shooters at Trench's apartment, and an encounter with Grego's men at the home of Trench's fellow DEA colleague, Deb Reese. Apparently, Masters and director Baltasar Kormákur saved the best for the last in a blazing shoot-out between the pair, Quince's shooters, Earl's killers and Greco's men at the latter's ranch in Mexico. Despite my observation that the movie evolved into a complex story, both Masters and Kormákur made it clear for me - aside from one or two scenes.

One of those scenes that confused me centered around Trench's DEA colleague and former lover, Deb Reese. I understood that she was involved in a scheme to get her hands on Greco's money with Quince. But after she found herself a hostage by Greco, she immediately gave up on the idea of Trench and Stigman finding the $43 million she had hidden, despite giving Trench a clue to its location. It seemed as if her character seemed to be in some kind of conflict over the issue . . . and an unnecessary one at that. Another scene - or I should say plot line - that confused me concerned Stigman's position with the U.S. Navy. He managed to infiltrate a naval base in Corpus Christi and informed an Admiral Tulway about the mission, Quince and the missing $43 million dollars. Although Tulway declared Quince a wanted man, he also disavowed Stigman from prevent the scandal from tarnishing the Navy's reputation, which would have required Stigman's arrest. Does that mean by the end of the money, Stigman remained wanted by the Navy, while he helped Trench take down the C.I.A.'s other bank stashes at the end of the film? Why did end Stigman's situation on such a tenuous note? And why would Trench even bother to go after the other C.I.A. money stashes? Were they connected to Greco's drug operations? If so, the screenplay failed to make the issue clear.

The cast gave first-rate performances. This is not surprising, considering the names in the cast. Both Denzel Washington and Mark Wahlberg were not only excellent as the two leads, but also seemed to be having a lot of fun. Paula Patton made a rather subtle femme fatale as Trench's double-crossing colleague. Bill Paxton proved to be a very scary adversary as the malevolent C.I.A. official trying to get his money back. Edward James Olmos proved to be equally effective as the ruthless, yet soft-spoken drug dealer, Greco. And I was surprised to see James Marsden portray an unsympathetic role as the ruthless Harold Quince, whose scheming got the two leads in trouble. And he was damn good.

I might as well say it. Aside from a rather complex plot, "2 GUNS" is not exactly a memorable action movie that will rock your world. It is also marred by some vague writing in its second half. It is entertaining, funny and has plenty of exciting action scenes, thanks to director Baltasar Kormákur. But the best thing about this film proved to be its cast led by the dynamic duo of Denzel Washington and Mark Wahlberg.

Thursday, December 21, 2017

"2 GUNS" (2013) Photo Gallery

3213574-mark+wahlberg+2+guns+5th+annual+summer+sony+fcochydx_c7l

Below are images from the new action movie, "2 GUNS". Based on the graphic novel of the same title and directed by Baltasar Kormákur, the movie stars Denzel Washington and Mark Wahlberg: 


"2 GUNS" (2013) Photo Gallery

2-guns_01


2-guns_02


2-Guns-9-010


080113guns


3214297-2-guns


ba1fc4e6-14ed-40a9-a39a-be568f14f6e5_2guns_patton_blog630


ejo-2guns-2


James-Marsden-in-2-Guns-2013-Movie-Image


picture-2-guns-01


2-guns_01


2-guns_02


WEK_2Guns_0801

Wednesday, April 9, 2014

"X-MEN" (2000) Review



"X-MEN" (2000) Review

If anyone had asked me what was the first genuine superhero film, based upon Marvel Comics characters, my choice would be the 2000 flick, "X-MEN". In fact, I suspect that it was the first Marvel film ever shown in the movie theaters. Its success spawned a series of superhero films that continue to this day. 

Based upon the Marvel Comics series, the plot for "X-MEN" began first in 1944, at a concentration camp in German-occupied Poland. Thirteen year-old Erik Lehnsherr is separated from his parents, upon entry to the camp. And in an attempt to reach them, he causes a set of gates to bend with a magnetic force and is knocked unconscious by the guards. The story jumps several decades later when a 17 year-old girl from Meridan, Mississippi named Marie aka Rogue is flirting with her boyfriend. They kiss and her boyfriend goes into a coma, thanks to Marie's ability to suck an individual's life force. Instead of immediately killing a mutant, Marie's ability manages to suck his or her ability before dying. Upset over the harm she had inadvertently caused, Marie runs away from home and ends up in Laughlin City, Alaska. She meets Logan, an amateur fighter known as "The Wolverine" at a local bar. He also possesses superhuman healing abilities, heightened senses, and metal claws that extend outwards from between his knuckles. Marie hitches a ride with Logan. While on the road together, they are both attacked by Sabretooth, a fellow mutant and an associate of the adult Erik Lehnsherr, who has become known as Magneto. Two mutants - Scott Summers aka Cyclops and Ororo Munroe aka Storm arrive on time to save Wolverine and Rogue, and bring them to Charles Xavier's mansion in Westchester County, New York. Xavier is an old friend of Magneto's.

Xavier's mansion serves as headquarters for Cyclops and Storm, the two mutants who had rescued Rogue and Logan. They are part of a group called the X-Men, who try to seek peace with non-mutant humans, educate young mutants in the responsible use of their powers, and stop Magneto from starting a war with humanity. While Xavier, Cyclops, Storm and a fourth member of the X-Men named Jean Grey try to figure out the reason by Magneto's attempt to kidnap Logan and Marie; Magneto sets his plan in motion with the kidnapping of an anti-mutant politician named Senator Robert Kelly by Sabretooth and another minion, a shapeshifter named Mystique. Kelly is behind a Federal legislation called the "Mutant Registration Act", which would force mutants to publicly reveal their identities and abilities. Magneto uses Kelly as a subject for a machine that artificially induces mutation. He plans to use it on the entire non-mutant population. But a mutant has to generate the machine's power. When it weakens Magneto during his experimentation on Senator Kelly, it becomes clear to the X-Men that Magneto wants to use Rogue's transferring ability and the Statue of Liberty to power the machine.

I never saw "X-MEN" at the movie theater. In fact, I had never heard of Marvel's "X-MEN" comic series, until I saw the movie after its video release in late 2000. Needless to say, I became an immediate fan. I found the idea of a group of people with psychic abilities divided by moral compass and political beliefs, and who are regarded by others as freaks, rather fascinating. I realize that the movie is not particularly faithful to the comic book series that it is based upon. However, director Bryan Singer and screenwriter David Hayter did a pretty solid job of using the comic source to create their own cinematic version of the series. The movie also featured some first-rate acting and excellent production values.

After seeing the film, I saw how the original costumes for the X-Men looked in the comics. And all I have to say is thank goodness Louise Mingenbach designed a more uniformed look for the superheroes . . . even if it involved black leather. Newton Thomas Sigel's photography struck me as solid. His best work seemed to be featured in the Liberty Island sequence. Ann Brodie and her team did excellent work on the makeup for some of the characters - especially Logan, Sabretooth, Toad and Mystique. Mike Fink and his team received an Oscar nomination for the film's visual effects. Fink later expressed dissatisfaction with his work and I can see why. They struck me as . . . okay, but nothing more or less. I found the visual affects used during Logan's fight against Sabertooth atop the Statue of Liberty as somewhat clumsy. And considering that most of the movie was either set indoors or at night, I cannot honestly say that "X-MEN" was a visually stunning film.

Most of the performances featured in "X-MEN" struck me as solid. There were a few exceptional ones. The movie made a star out of Hugh Jackman and it is easy to see why. Jackman is obviously a talented actor and he had the good luck to be cast in one of the comic franchise's most memorable characters. I could also say the same about Ian McKellen's performance as Erik Lensherr aka Magneto. What I found fascinating about McKellen's take on the character is that he managed to convey Magneto's willingness to pretend that his heinous actions were for the benefit of his fellow mutants, whom he believe should rule the earth. Patrick Stewart gave a fine performance as the more tolerant Charles Xavier, who would rather mutants and non-mutants to live side-by-side, instead of engaging in eternal conflict. I was also impressed by Anna Paquin's poignant performance as the young Marie aka Rogue, who seemed desperate to make some kind of connection to others, despite her ability. Bruce Davidson gave an excellent and complex performance as Senator Robert Kelly, whose fervent anti-mutant stance eventually softens from a traumatic experience and a conversation with Ororo Munroe aka Storm.

Among the movie's solid performances came from James Marsden's Scott Summers aka Cyclops, Famke Jenssen's Jean Grey and Rebecca Romijn as Magneto's hench woman, Mystique. I suspect some might be astonished by my description of Romijn's performance as "solid". I stand by my word. Mind you, I found the Mystique character rather striking - especially physically - but Romijn's performance merely struck me as solid. I wish I could say the same about Ray Park's portrayal of another of Magneto's minions, Toad. Honestly? I found the character cartoonish and one-dimension. Unfortunately, Park failed to rise above the material. I hate to say this, but I have to say the same about Halle Berry's performance as X-Men Storm aka Ororo Munroe. Most fans tend to blame Berry for the poor portrayal of Storm in this film. I cannot, considering her more positive portrayals of the character in subsequent films. Frankly, I blame Bryan Singer and screenwriter David Hayter. Poor Storm was merely used as a background character, except in a few crucial scenes. And Hayter wrote one of the worst pieces of dialogue in Hollywood history for the character. However, there was one scene in which Berry gave an excellent performance; and it featured Storm's poignant conversation with Senator Kelly.


As much as I liked "X-MEN", I feel that it is very overrated by many critics and the franchise's fans. I can honestly say that it is probably my least favorite X-MEN film. The main problem I have with this film is the number of plot holes or lack of logic in the story. I could say that it is indicative of the franchise's growing reputation for plot inconsistency. I never understood how Magneto learned about Rogue's ability to absorb a mutant's ability. I realize he must have learned about what she had done to her boyfriend David. But how did he learn about her ability's impact upon mutants? How did he or Sabretooth discover that she had traveled all the way from Mississippi to Alaska? I was also unimpressed by Logan's first scene at Xavier's school in which he woke up, heard voices in his head and ended up roaming all over the place in confusion. I am confused. Did Professor Xavier used telepathy to awaken him? Or did Logan simply hear voices, thanks to his enhanced hearing? 

The one sequence that really puzzles me was Mystique's activities at Xavier's School. The scene began with Mystique shape shifting into Rogue's new boyfriend, Bobby Drake aka Iceman in order to convince the adolescent that Xavier was angry at her for using her ability on Logan to heal herself and that she should leave the school. Why? So that Magneto could have an opportunity to snatch her. Later, Mystique transformed into Xavier in order to infiltrate Cerebro, Xavier's telepathic enhancing machine and sabotage it. Why on earth did Singer and Hayter create such a convoluted situation? They could have easily allowed Mystique to first sabotage Cerebro and then snatch Rogue from the school, herself. I also realize that Jean Grey, being both telepathic andtelekinetic, could have easily rescued herself and her fellow X-Men from Magneto's trap inside the Liberty statue's interior. I have already commented on the clumsily shot fight scene between Logan and Sabretooth. The former's fight against Mystique was somewhat better and probably enhanced by slow motion. And if I must be honest, I found the movie's writing and pacing almost episodic. Every time I watch "X-MEN", I get the feeling that it is a first-rate "B" or television movie . . . or a second-rate "A" movie, even if it is entertaining.

In the end, my opinion of "X-MEN" has diminished over the years. It is still an entertaining film with a decent story, and a mixture of solid and first-rate performances from the cast. And I have to give it credit for successful kick-starting not only the X-MENfranchise, but also spawning a reemergence of superhero films - especially from Marvel. However, I believe the movie is tainted by some very questionable writing and a style that nearly strikes me as slightly sub par. I still like the movie, but it has become my second least favorite X-MEN film in the entire franchise.



Friday, March 21, 2014

"X-MEN" (2000) Photo Gallery

mutants-x-men-2000-

Below are images from "X-MEN", the 2000 adaptation of the Marvel comic book series. Directed by Bryan Singer, the movie starred Patrick Stewart, Hugh Jackman, Ian McKellen and Anna Paquin: 


"X-MEN" (2000) Photo Gallery

3603_1893


174433__xmen_l


27889657-27889669-large


anna-paquin-and-rogue-costume-from-x-men-gallery


james-marsden-scott-summers-cyclops-and-famke


kinopoisk.ru-X-Men-240013


kinopoisk.ru-X-Men-1366581


kinopoisk.ru-X-Men-1366582


Ray-Park-as-Toad-whose-tongue-can-extend-up-to-fifteen-feet-in-20th-Century-Foxs-X-Men-2000


vlcsnap_2012_05_30_17h37m26s71_large


x1stills_001


x1stills_006


x1stills_007


X-Men


x-men3


x-men-2000_wolverine-02


X-Men2000-02


X-men-2000-15-g


X-Men-2000-lede


x-men-movie-2000_hugh_jackman


x-men-movie-jean-grey-famke-jannsen-cyclops-2000

Wednesday, August 7, 2013

"ENCHANTED" (2007) Review




"ENCHANTED" (2007) Review

I found myself experiencing mixed emotions regarding Disney’s new live-action film, ”ENCHANTED”. On one hand, the movie – more or less – turned out to be exactly how I had expected. The trailer had pretty much revealed the gist of the movie. Yet, when I finally saw it, I ended up enjoying it a lot more than I had expected I would.

The story is basically about an animated heroine named Giselle (Amy Adams) who lives in the blissful animated world of Andalasia, where magical beings frolic freely, animals are talkative companions and musical interludes punctuate every interaction. Giselle becomes engaged to the handsome, valiant, and bumbling Prince Edward (James Marsden). Her fate takes a turn for the worse when his stepmother, the villainous Queen Narissa (Susan Sarandon), throws her through a magic portal, apparently to her doom, in order to keep her son single and thus remain queen. Giselle's plunge into darkness lands her in the strange and chaotic world of New York City. As the cruelty of this new place wears down the fairy-tale idealism of the once carefree princess, such as a homeless man stealing her tiara, the frightened Giselle meets the pragmatic divorce attorney Robert Philip (Patrick Dempsey), who takes her into his apartment despite belief that she is a little crazy. Robert also has to deal with his own fiancée, a very attractive When Giselle’s chipmunk friend, Pip, reveals to Edward of her whereabouts, Narissa orders her henchman Nathaniel (Timothy Spall) to accompany Edward and Pip to New York and prevent her stepson and the missing bride-to-be from reconciling.

”ENCHANTED” is basically a predictable story. Even before the last reel, I knew that Giselle and Robert would fall in love. From the moment Edward met Nancy at the ball, I knew those two would also become a couple. I knew that Nathaniel would eventually realize that Narissa viewed him as worthless and betray her. And I knew that Narissa would end up in New York and nearly kill Giselle. But what I did not expect was how I would enjoy the way the cast – especially Adams, Marsden, Spall and Sarandon, screenwriter Bill Kelly and director Kevin Lima poked fun at the Disney animated fantasy legacy. They did it with fun, color and gentle humor. Okay, the humor was not always gentle. Jodi Benson (the voice of Ariel of ”THE LITTLE MERMAID”) caustically made fun of Giselle’s ”fairy princess”. Giselle’s talent for making friends with animals of all kinds was definitely a spoof of several Disney princesses’ friendships with . . . animals. Only Giselle may have taken it to an extreme by summoning them to clean Robert’s house. I do not know about you, but I would be freaking out at the thought of birds, mice and cockroaches inside my home. The ”happily ever after” for most of the characters seemed a little saccharine, but on the whole I enjoyed the movie very much.

I have heard a lot about Amy Adams in the past, but this is the first time I have ever seen her in action. And quite frankly, I am impressed. Not only did I admire her singing voice, I especially admired how she maintained Giselle’s perky ”fairy princess” personality up until the end – even if it suffered bumps from Robert’s more cynical views on love, her disappointing reunion with Edward and her encounter with Narissa.  I realize that Patrick Dempsey’s career has bounced back with the TV series, ”GREY’S ANATOMY”, but since I do not watch the show . . . this was my first time in seeing him in action since his days as a leading man during the late 1980s and early 1990s. And it was nice to see that his talent has not waned one bit. He is still as charismatic and professional as ever. I must admit that it was a bit strange seeing him portray a character less extroverted than his roles from the past.

James Marsden. Dear James. I think his talent was wasted in the ”X-MEN” movies and ”SUPERMAN RETURNS”. He really shone in his role as the valiant, yet slightly pompous Prince Edward. Hell, the man was perfect. And he was also charming enough for me to be happy that his character had a happy ending with someone in the film. It was good to see Timothy Spall again, after his appearances in two ”HARRY POTTER” films. Actually, his role as Narissa’s henchman, Nathaniel, strongly reminded me of his other famous role – Peter Pettigrew. But unlike Peter, Nathaniel proved to have more balls . . . and something of a moral compass in the end. But his performance was thoroughly first-class as usual. And of course there is Oscar winner Susan Sarandon, who portrayed the villainess h- the conniving and greedy - Queen Narissa. Sarandon spent most of the movie peforming Narissa's voice in the animated sequences. But she was deliciously evil as her flesh-and-blood counterpart arrived in New York City. One could tell that Sarandon was enjoying herself. And for a brief moment, we got to see how she had manipulated Prince Edward all of those years, pretending to be his loving stepmother. I have only one complaint - I did not really care for the platform shoes she wore. Visually, it did not exactly mesh with the rest of her image.

If you are expecting surprises from this charming spoof of Disney fantasy animation, you are going to be disappointed. As I had stated before, it is a rather predictable movie. But if you are expecting first-class entertainment, laughs, music and a good story, then ”ENCHANTED” is your movie and I suggest that you see it as soon as possible.

Wednesday, July 17, 2013

ENCHANTED" (2007) Photo Gallery



Below is a gallery featuring photos from the new Disney comedy-fantasy, "ENCHANTED". It stars Amy Adams, Patrick Dempsey, James Marsden, Timothy Spall and Susan Sarandon:

"ENCHANTED" Photo Gallery