The Purge (2013)

Who would you kill first when this happens?

In the year 2022, the United States is a nation reborn. The economy is good. Employment rates are up and crime rates are way down low. This is all because the government has approved a law called The Purge, wherein for 12 hours, all criminal activity is legal. The Purge acts as a way for the people to cleanse themselves of all the hatred and negative emotions in their hearts. All the victims of the Purge are then given thanks for sacrificing their lives for the betterment of the country.

The very first thing I like about this film is the concept that fuels it. Though the thought of it alone is highly improbable, one really can't help but think of what they will do if they are in the shoes of the characters in the film. More than its genre of being a thriller, it is a film that challenges society's value and morals. The thought of the purge may be very unlikely now but one will never know if it can really happen in the future. The establishing sequence of the film which is a series of CCTV footage of various crimes and murders alone is gruesome enough that one may actually consider the purge as a solution to the problems of society. The film questions the morals of man: would you be a realist or an idealist?

The film, aside from being thematically driven, is character driven as well. It offers a variety of different characters that have their different beliefs and perspectives with the concept of the Purge. James Sandin (Ethan Hawke) is a successful security developer that has gotten wealthy thanks to his sales of home security systems designed for the purge. His character is stuck in reality and is thinking of the practicality and logic of things. He is married to Mary Sandin who is the closeted idealist in the family. She follows what her husband says because she trusts him and she believes that it is the best for the family. They have two children, one of them is Charlie whose conscience and ideals have set the film in motion. It is this little dude that opened the door for the bloody strangers that is being hunted down. In a world inhabited by human beings, Charlie is the only character that is humane in it. Though his actions and decisions may be the cause of annoyance from the audience, it further shows his idealistic nature and humanity, in contrast to the people around him. The film has good characterization and character development. As the film progress, the characters that are initially blind and naive are shown to have learned what they needed to learn. The characters' attitude and personality have deeply changed by the end of the film. There is great contrast in their characteristics from the film's beginning until the end.

However, the film is mediocre in the field of thriller and horror. Though the concept may be new, it still relies on heavy cliches and old-fashion tricks and scares that fail to deliver. The film is actually a reminder of the thriller film The Strangers. Though they may differ in concept, the execution and technique is very similar. So zero points for originality right there. Not to mention, it was very anticlimactic. The build-up could have been better but it was good enough for a one hell of a ride climax, but instead it offers us cold and stale performances of the antagonists. I can't blame you if you would expect so much by the third part since you have been led to believe in the beginning that the villains are a force to be reckoned with. There is too much anticipation for nothing. There is a twist at the latter part of the film but that as well is only a slight improvement from its previous problem. 

Overall, the crazy concept of the film is the only interesting thing to see here. Don't expect to be blown away with its so-called thrills and horror. It's such a pity for an interesting concept to go to waste. Could have definitely been executed better. High hopes for the sequel perhaps? But do expect a good performance from Ethan Hawke though. The guy just knows how to do it.

Rating: 2/5

White House Down (2013)

Not even close to Die Hard but good try.

U.S. Capitol Police officer John Cale (Channing Tatum) dreams of being part of the Secret Service to protect President James Sawyer (Jamie Foxx). However, he doesn't get the job for not meeting the standards of what it takes to be a Secret Service agent. On that same day, he takes out his daughter Emily, who is a big nerd for politics, on a tour of the White House in hopes of building a better father and daughter relationship and to not let her down because of the bad news about his job interview. A typical day which could have ended normally is disrupted by a group of mercenaries who seize the white house and kill all of the Secret Service agents. It is now up to John Cale to save his daughter and the president before the attackers get what they want.

A somehow similar film was also released just recently which is Olympus Has Fallen, which I haven't watched yet, but they obviously have the same premise: the White House under attack. What makes a concept like this cool yet in the danger of being unrealistic is the fact that a highly secured place such as the White House can be breached. But I guess since Die Hard, almost everybody can now be fooled that terrorists can pretty much do anything they want and how they want it done. Let me repeat and clarify, this may not have been as good as Bruce Willis' Die Hard but that doesn't mean it was bad. White House Down has a share of its own strengths and weaknesses. But being the person that I am, I really prefer focusing on the weaknesses since it's easier to write a review that way :)

One of the questions that popped into my head during the first part of the movie, but eventually didn't bother with anymore, was whether the movie was an action-comedy film. I saw the trailer for this movie a long time ago and there were already a few punchlines in it but I didn't expect the entire film to be drowned in it. An occasional punchline here and there is acceptable. I understand that these punchlines serves as a comic relief to ease the tension and relax the audience so they won't feel burdened with the heavy action scenes but this film had one too many. Bad part is that some of them are not even funny. It tries hard to make the audience laugh, some of it works but some miserably fails.

The plot is actually interesting. On the surface, you see a man trying to save his daughter and the president from invaders. But if you actually analyze the plot and dig deeper, you would see that it is a character-driven plot with slight touches of politics. The protagonist and the antagonist have their own reasons for their actions and decisions. These reasons make the characters alive and would eventually get the entire movie running. Technically speaking, it has great potential for pulling off a great character development but sadly, it fell short. Character development was present but barely noticeable. In addition to critiques with regards to the plot, the build up was dull and half-baked. It didn't give you the feeling of excitement. Most often it was even cliche and predictable. All you need to do is just wait for the characters to do what you have already thought.

On the bright side though, I really liked the chemistry between Channing Tatum and Jamie Foxx. Although I wasn't really convinced in the beginning, they grew on me as the film progressed. Despite the fact that not all jokes are funny, the humor of Tatum and Foxx rarely fails. Watching the two of them together is already amusing. More than that, they complete one another and is a perfect couple. No this isn't a gay film but what I mean is that because one of them is a president while the other is a police officer, they have their own strengths and weaknesses which might get them killed if they're by themselves but unstoppable when together. However, the duo's likability is not present with the other characters. I really don't like the antagonist of the movie. Some say that when you hate the villain, then that character is the perfect villain. I beg to disagree. Though not really related to the movie, for the sake of debate, let me give a few villains that are loved: Hugo Weaving's Agent Smith from The Matrix, Heath Ledger's Joker from The Dark Knight and of course, Ralph Fiennes' Voldemort from...well I'm sure you know. Case closed. The villains of White House Down were a complete letdown. One is a common thief; another is out for revenge, and finally, a mastermind who is morally challenged. Each of the villains has a specific purpose of their own and are only connected to one another by a thread that can easily be broken. 

On the technical side of things, I appreciate the use of CGI but there was a heavy use of it throughout the movie. It was also a bit questionable in terms of looking realistic. They looked too fake at times. But being a Roland Emmerich film, I guess it isn't much of a surprise anymore. So I'll let this one slide but one thing I won't is its lighting. I wasn't even halfway in the movie and I was already complaining a lot with the lights already. There were scenes wherein they were too dark that you can barely see the faces of the characters anymore. I don't know if they did that on purpose but I didn't like it. 

White House Down is a good movie if you wanna see what the White House looks like before and after it's bombed and seized. Expect a few laughs and giggles but remember, not all laughs are good, some laughs are for the sake of ridicule and insult.

Rating: 2/5

Oldboy (2003)

An overwhelming revenge film that is definitely not for the squirmish.


For some unknown reason, Oh-Dae-Su finds himself abducted on the night of his daughter's birthday and he is locked away in a mysterious hotel for fifteen years. His only connection to the outside world is a television and his daily ration of dumplings for sustenance. He eventually learns to live his life inside his prison and the longer he stayed, the more vengeful he became. He plans to escape using a tunnel he has been digging for a long time using chopsticks, but before he can make use of it, he is suddenly released for no reason. He starts on a search for vengeance against his captors but soon finds out that he is swimming in an ocean far deeper than he imagined. 

One of the main reasons I wanted to watch this was because I liked the last film I saw by Park Chan-wook which was 'Stoker'. This South Korean director definitely knows how to spice up the revenge genre while successfully disturbing our minds at the same time. Another good reason why I watched this movie was because Hollywood is planning on a remake of the film and is set to be released within this year. I'm not really a fan of Asian to American remakes but I'm willing to give the remake a chance.

When I watch a movie, I always look for the character development. I want to see the character alive and see him transform from one person to another. This film did not disappoint at all. There is emotional attachment from the character to the viewers. Throughout the run of the entire film, it would be perfectly understandable for you to switch alliance from the protagonist to the antagonist. But by watching it, you might also end up asking yourself who is the hero and the villain. What I love about the movie is that it challenges the audience' morals and their views about revenge and what's right and wrong. 

The movie runs in a theme-driven plot and does not fail to deliver its message in a twisted and disturbing way. The movie highlights how solitude and the passage of time can change a man in different ways unimaginable. Oh Dae-su (Choi Min-sik) is a man who introduces himself as a womanizer with a strong personality but at the same time manages to amuse us. After his captivity, we see him grow into someone darker and violent. Such traits must have been present within him for a long time but the confinement surely made the inner violence surface.

But the theme that fuels the entire movie is revenge. Oh Dae-su seeks revenge to those who held him captive for fifteen years while the captor Lee Woo-jin (Yoo Ji-tae) is also driven by revenge or something that has happened a long time ago. The twists and turns will manage to keep you at the edge of your seat. You wouldn't know who is one step ahead of the game until the very end. The concept of revenge is challenged whether it is righteous to get even to the people who have done you wrong. In addition to this, the question of 'what will you do after you carry out your revenge' is raised. 

Story-wise, the movie is beyond perfection. If I continue to talk more about the morals and themes of the film then I might end up digressing. 

The acting is superb. Choi Min-sik is a national treasure. No inhibitions when he acts and always makes sure to give it his best. He delivers so well that you can feel his emotions and his character's hunger for vengeance. One of the most memorable scenes of his would have to be when he ate a squid alive. No CGI here. It was also said that four squids were used to take that shot. I could barely stomach that part but I still managed to get through it. 

The editing and the cinematography of the movie also deserve a big round of applause. There were numerous scenes that are memorable to me. The hallway fight scene which was shot in one continuous take was well choreographed, well executed and very entertaining. What I loved about it is like watching a real life fight happen. No cuts pure action. I also loved the part where he went back to his high school to search for answers and we enter a flashback sequence where his old self and his past self is are present in the sequence. It's a great execution of the concept 'tracing back your footsteps'. 

In conclusion, Oldboy really deserves to be called as one of the best films in Asia. Well crafted, well directed, and well executed. This film would definitely be  a winner for horror and gore fans out there. If you're not then don't worry, you can still relate to it. Definitely a film to watch before you die. Or at least before you take revenge on someone.

Rating: 5/5

World War Z: Toned Down

Great addition to the zombie film genre but the real essence of the novel got lost along the way.

Retired United Nations employee Gerry Lane (Brad Pitt) reluctantly leaves his family behind in order to find a cure for the zombie pandemic that is plaguing the whole world. Simple as that actually. The novel on the other hand is much more complicated.

One of the main differences between the film and the novel is the way it is presented to the viewer/reader. In the film, we watch Gerry Lane travel the world in search for the cure. It all happens in the present. The novel on the other hand is a collection of different stories from different people who lived throughout the ten year war against the zombies. So it's flashback vs. real-time. Another difference is that in the novel, there is no main character. Lots of stories, different people, one war. So fleshing out a character from the complicated novel must have been quite difficult but worth the effort. Lastly, the most important difference would probably have to be the novel's social commentary on...society (duh...) The movie was an action film while the book was a satire. So sadly, I did not enjoy the movie as much as I wanted to. I expected so much from it since I liked the book so much.

To be clear, the movie was good, just not a good adaptation from the book. The only thing that the movie and the book share in common is the title. It would have been better to make a movie separate from the book but stated that it was inspired by it. It makes no sense to make a movie based on a book but not staying faithful to the novel's content.

As earlier mentioned, one of the things that I appreciated in the film was them fleshing out a solid character from the book. After reading the book a few months ago, it really made me wonder how are they going to tell the story and who will be the character to tell it. Brad Pitt greatly plays the role of a retired UN employee, Gerry Lane. Gerry is our eyes and he shows us how the world would turn out to be if ever such catastrophe happens. Through him, we see how the world reacts to such threat. The movie might not have been satirical enough like the book but it is not entirely void of social criticisms. 

World War Z is definitely bringing something new in the genre of zombie films. It's different and unique unlike the repetitive, and some even unoriginal, zombie films that have been released since George Romero's Dawn of the Dead. I really love how the film approaches the Man vs. Nature concept. What made this entirely different from most of the other zombie films out there is that for once, we have protagonists that use their brain against the undead who don't. 

The film is pretty good in keeping the audience at the edge of their seats. The thrilling scenes definitely make up for the movie's lack of gore and blood. Choosing the 'eerie silence' for the thrills keep the heart pumping and the audience vulnerable. The film tries to connect the character and the audience. It makes the audience want to feel what the character is feeling. Once the moment the silence is broken and the zombies would pop out will definitely surprise everyone. Okay maybe not everyone, since some of them fall into cheap scares territory but most of them are pretty effective nonetheless.

One thing I noticed about the movie is that it feels racist. I'm pretty sure it's not just me. As usual, in the end of the world scenario, the Americans are always the hero. I have nothing against Americans but majority of Apocalyptic films consider America to be the hero. Can't really blame them though since this is a Hollywood film after all. Again, I'm going to use the novel as my reference but in the book, USA had it real tough during the first few years of the war against the zombies, but in this movie, it only takes a few days for an American to find something to turn the tide against a global threat. My concern is not only the American influence in the movie but also the portrayal of the other countries' fates on the hands of the plague. But if I have to choose one scene where it showed racism would probably have to be the scene in Israel where the zombies managed to scale through the wall because of the noise made by the Jews. 

Brad Pitt's acting on the other hand is worth praising. Although I'm pretty sure that if the character is played out by another actor then it wouldn't work. Why? Well, character development is present but it isn't exactly stressed out. It's almost unnoticeable. Having Brad Pitt as the lead actor might have just been its saving grace.

The cinematography and editing were nice. The score was haunting as well. Perfect fit for this movie. Have to at least give a few rounds of applause to Director Marc Forster for being able to pull off such a film. The movie, if you guys don't know, suffered a lot of setbacks and changes to it before it's finally shown to us. From changes of scripts, to changes in schedule and budgeting, the movie production was probably a hellish nightmare for everyone but kuddos for them for surviving their own plague.

All in all, the movie is good but the title 'World War Z' from the novel is just dead weight.

Rating: 3/5

The Place Beyond the Pines (2013)

This movie is beyond me! I cannot even...

Explaining the synopsis of the movie without spoiling you is very difficult but I would try nonetheless. The film tells three different stories but are all connected to each other. The first story is all about a motorcyclist named Luke (Ryan Gosling) who finds out he has a son from his former lover Romina (Eva Mendes). He starts robbing series of banks in order to provide for his son and somehow be a part of the family he once left. The second story is about a police officer named Avery (Bradley Cooper) who crosses paths with Luke. Avery has some troubles of his own as he struggles with the corruption inside the police department. The third story is about two troubled teenagers who become friends after sharing similarities but are unaware of something greater that connects the two of them.

To be perfectly honest, by the time I finished watching this movie, I seriously did not know how to feel about it. It has a simple storyline but it can be complex at the same time. I feel like watching Cloud Atlas all over again but this time on a smaller time frame involved and less CGI.

My favorite part of the movie is probably the first one. This is the most exciting yet presented in a very subtle tone. We see how Luke badly wants to provide and be with his son even though he has so much little to work with. But at the same time, we see his happy moments where he can be with his son and trying to patch things up with his former lover Romina. The character development of Gosling's character is very well done. We see from a being a famous motorcyclist in a circus to a bank-robbing daddy. The former, though it sounds more appealing, he had nothing to live for. He was living a routine that didn't seem to cut out for him despite his God-given motorcycling skills. The latter however, though he may have gone downhill and his job isn't exactly legal, he lives for something greater than himself. 

The second part of the movie is okay for me. Cooper's character is ambitious and luck for him, his character gets what he wants. But as soon as his fifteen minutes of fame is over, he is faced with the reality of how dirty the world is even when you are inside the police department. Cooper's character, Avery, is well portrayed and we feel the emotions of the character as he faces numerous decisions that can either make or break his life. What I didn't like about the second part though is that it was starting to get a bit predictable. You would be able to easily guess what's going to happen next and it definitely lacks the suspense that the first one had. Nevertheless, it was still good.

The third story was when the predictability in the second story is quite noticeable. It's really sad though since this can be considered as the climax of the story yet we are given something that could have been thought of as a fan fiction. What only makes the last part interesting is the decisions that the character has to make in order to reach the ending. Two possible ending but we are given only one. I actually like the ending but it left me hanging somewhere and I don't even know where.

Decisions, decisions, decisions. Basically this movie runs on a theme-driven plot and if you watch it by heart, you might actually learn a thing or two. Lots of themes but the one that struck me the most would probably be about the decisions we make. Our decisions would greatly affect other people even if we are long gone and sometimes, they would even come back and haunt us in the future.

In conclusion, you can either hate this film or love it. People may have different opinion from mine but that's what makes life thrilling.

Rating: 3/5

Side Effects: May Include Brain Damage

I don't really mean the title in a literal sense and not even in a bad sense. The movie was great and it would make you think a lot, hence the brain damage. Unless of course you like these types of movies.

Emily (Rooney Mara) is reunited with his husband Martin (Channing Tatum) who was imprisoned for four years due to insider trading. Hoping to start a new life with her husband does not go smoothly since for some unknown reason, she's going under depression and almost killed herself. Dr. Jonathan Banks (Jude Law), a psychiatrist, takes Emily under his care and prescribes anti-depressants but none of them seem to work at all. Dr. Banks visits Emily's former doctor (Catherine Zeta-Jones) and suggests that he give Emily a new drug called Ablixa. Dr. Banks, knowing Ablixa is still new and experimental, reluctantly allows Emily to take it after another suicide attempt. Miraculously, the drug works on her this time and she manages to live her life normally again with a minor side effect which is sleepwalking. The movie doesn't end there though since all hell breaks loose when Emily kills her husband while sleepwalking. Emily is confined to a mental hospital and not prison since she was not fully aware of her actions when she killed her wife. Dr. Banks career however starts to crumble since he was the one who prescribed the faulty drug to Emily. With his pride and name on the line, he investigates to know what went wrong and as he digs deeper, he finds himself in a bigger mess and the truth behind all the lies.

This movie reminds me of the medical thriller movie Contagion which was also directed by Steven Soderbergh. Both films are great in their own extraordinary way. Personally I couldn't really relate to the concept of the movie. We Filipinos don't really make use of anti-depressants that much since we are happy in nature and if we're depressed, family and friends are always there. On the bright side, I appreciate that Soderbergh introduces the culture of a country reliant on anti-depressant drugs when coping up with, of course, depression. Correct me if I'm wrong but that's one of the themes I saw in the movie; a country reliant on these types of drugs that they have an advertisement for it on television. The fact that I mention this means that here in my country, we don't have those types of ads. 

Cultural differences aside, I really appreciate the build-up of the story. The first thirty minutes really shows Emily struggling with her depression. Very realistic and convincing. Rooney Mara's acting is so good that even her character, Emily, acts so well (you'll get what I mean when you watch it). Jude Law and Catherine Zeta-Jones also give stellar performances in this movie. The way they bring life to their characters is amazing. The characterization was well done. Each character had his/her own distinct and strong characteristic that leaves a huge first impression but this impression is constantly challenged as the film continues to unravel.

The story is very interesting and even has a Hitchcock vibe into it. A dramatic and thrilling build up followed by a twist and turn of events will keep you at the edge of your seat and keep you guessing as well. The first half is focused on Emily and her struggles from depression while the second half follows the struggles Dr. Banks on his quest to clear his name. There is an attachment from the viewer to the character as the characters struggle with the conflicts they have. You are no longer a mere viewer of the film; you are part of the film.  The first half would make you sympathize with Emily as she goes through her depression and confinement and by the second half, you investigate and find clues with Dr. Banks as he tries to clear up his name. By the time the big surprise is revealed, the sense of accomplishment is not limited to the character but in you as well.

Soderbergh is really a great director. What I really love about him is his consistent and noticeable directing style. Having watched Behind the Candelabra and Side Effects in succession made me appreciate it more. You don't really need to see both films to notice it since watching one would already prove my point. The way he wants it edited and shot is very apparent. He does this jump cuts from one sequence to another which actually works. He sure knows how to make the audience remember him. 

The cinematography is awesome as well. The simple use of depth of field gives a whole new meaning to a shot. I took notice of a scene in a cruise ship where Emily starts crying and goes out to the ship deck for a fresh air. The camera is still inside the party hall but pans through a transparent glass where we see Martin follow and comfort her and while this is happening, the reflection of the guests inside the room is seen on the transparent glass as they look at the couple outside. Genius, rather than having the camera outside and see the guests from the inside looking at them.

The musical score was eerie and mysterious, a perfect fit for a movie like this. Not over the top and domineering. Just right.

In conclusion, Side Effects is a great thriller film. May not exactly be for everyone since it requires a great load of patience and analytical skills. There may be a few dull moments but it's not really worth fretting over. Might not be a good idea to watch this when you're depressed though since it might give you ideas.

Rating: 3.5/5

Now You See Me: The Closer I Looked, The Less I Saw

Just say the magic word. 

Whatever that word is and no matter how many times I say it, I just don't see the magic happen in this movie. It had an interesting premise, but it failed to deliver the final act into something magical and memorable.

The movie is about four magicians who call themselves "The Four Horsemen" who sets up a series of bank heist and give all the money they get to their audience. Not everything is as easy as it seems though since they now find themselves in a game of cat and mouse against the FBI. The Four Horsemen must now always stay one step ahead in order to complete their mission and avoid getting caught.

Although the movie did not satisfy until the very end, it was not all that bad. The movie's star-studded cast was one of the things worth praising. The different actors and actresses who made a name for themselves in Hollywood didn't fail to deliver with their acting despite having cardboard cutout characters to portray. They managed to bring life to the story of the movie and were definitely not overshadowed by the special effects which were also magical. The special effects used were extraordinary and above normal for the average tricks of your magicians. The editing were good as well and didn't disappoint. These things are actually given and expected especially from a movie with magic as its gimmick, so it was a job well done for them to have executed it nicely. 

With regards to the plot of the movie, it actually showed great potential and could have been a great movie if not for its problematic ending. What makes a mystery thriller film like this one work is its buildup of clues throughout the film which encourages the audience to throw in their guesses for the big surprise. In addition to this, the surprise must not only make complete sense by the end but it should also bring conclusion to all doubts and questions by the audience. Sadly, the movie's final trick failed to mesmerize the audience. Technically speaking, the big surprise did make sense if you look back but it doesn't give justice to the story. Rather than feeling awe and wonder after this magic ride, you'll actually feel like you've been cheated. All those magic, action and story, wasted into something trivial and petty.

Now You See Me is a movie that I'm not exactly thrilled to see twice. Their famous line in the film is "The closer you look, the less you actually see." Forgive me for looking closer and trying to see depth and meaning in an otherwise shallow movie but even the farther I go, I still don't see much from it.


Rating: 3/5