The Many Delayed Films of 2013

2011 was the year of sequels; a year that saw a record 28 sequels come out. You could call 2012 the year of the superheroes, as Marvel and DC brought out their big guns in 'The Avengers' and 'The Dark Knight Rises'. 2013 is shaping up to be... an interesting year in movies but not for the reason you think. In reality, 2013 will be the year of the delayed movies. This year, there are 27 films, 2 of which have already been released ('Gangster Squad' and 'Hansel and Gretel: Witch Hunters'), that are set to come out after they were pushed back from an earlier release date. There could be a few reasons why a film got pushed back. It might have had to go into re-shoots or the studio backing it decided to push it back a bit because there was too much competition from other films. Either way, a lot of films this year ended up with that fate so now let's look into some of the most notable delayed films of 2013.

Probably the most common reason for a film's delay would be if the film goes through re-shoots, which leaves a bit of doubt over whether or not the original product was any good. But would you ever believe it if a film was pushed back just a few weeks before it was originally supposed to come out because one of its stars suddenly became an A-Lister in Hollywood and the first version of the film killed his character off at the beginning? That is the case with 'G.I. Joe: Retaliation', which is probably the most intriguing delayed film of this year. The sequel to 2009's 'G.I. Joe: The Rise of Cobra' was first set for a June 29^th release date. But just five weeks before the film was to hit theaters (press junkets had been planned and toys were already on store shelves), it was suddenly pushed back to March of 2013. There are a few conflicting reports as to why this happened.

When the delay was first announced, it was reported that the film was going to be post-converted to 3-D. But then, there were new reports that the film was to go through re-shoots Apparently, in the original cut of the film, the character of Duke (played by Channing Tatum, reprising his role from the previous film) was to be killed off early in the film, something that was clearly evident from the first trailer that was released before the film's delay. The re-shoots were done with the intent of strengthening the relationship between Duke and the new lead Roadblock (played by Dwayne 'the Rock' Johnson) but more importantly to avoid the early death as this was right around the time that Tatum had become a huge star with box-office hits 'The Vow', '21 Jump Street', and 'Magic Mike'. In fact, the latter film was released the same weekend Retaliation would have come out.



But recently there has been reports that contradict what has been said. In an interview with Collider in late January (link will be provided below), director John M. Chu mentioned that “We didn’t re-shoot anything. We didn’t go in and [add] Channing. I’m not going to say what happens to Channing in the movie. You have to watch the movie.” Producer Lorenzo Di Bonaventura also added that “We never shot another frame.” But I don't know... something tells me that they did do re-shoots for two reasons. First of all, Dwayne Johnson did mention in a May interview (right around the time the delay was announced) that re-shoots did happen in order to design “new scenes to enhance 3-D”. Plus, take a look at two posters for the film, one that was released when it was coming out in June and the other one for its current March date. Notice a certain person who is on one poster and not the other? Really, if they didn't do re-shoots, than I feel Paramount just wasted nine months just to convert the film to 3-D.

Pre-delay poster without Tatum

Current poster with Tatum



While it's questionable whether or not GI Joe 2 went through re-shoots, there is one film coming out this year that has gone through re-shoots, showing signs of a rather troubled production. The film in question is 'World War Z', directed by Quantum of Solace's Marc Forster, starring Brad Pitt, and based on the popular book of the same name by Max Brooks. Originally the film was set to come out in December 2012, but then re-shoots were announced. However, probably the biggest news from this delay was that it was also reported that Damon Lindelof (Lost, Prometheus) was hired to do rewrites for the final act of the film. However, due to scheduling issues, Drew Goddard was hired instead. This is easily one of the riskiest films this year because if these writers were brought on just to re-write the ending, then this movie might be in trouble even before it comes out.



Disney's 'The Lone Ranger' is another film that had a few problems during its production. The film was originally supposed to be released during the summer of 2011 but was shelved and replaced by Pirates of the Caribbean: On Stranger Tides. Ironically, the director of the first three 'Pirates' films, Gore Verbinski, was hired to direct and the film was then set to hit theaters in December 2012. However, the film went through a production delay when concerns began to arise over the budget because in the wake of 'John Carter', Disney was trying to scale down the budget of 'The Lone Ranger' in case of another flop. But then, once production began, the film went over budget. The current budget is reportedly 250 million, and The Lone Ranger will finally hit theaters during this year's Fourth of July weekend.

Re-shoots aren't the only reason why a film is pushed back. It could be because the studio decided to release it at a later date in order to have less competition. After all, in today's age of movies, films don't have much time to get their money back at the box office. One of these films was director Baz Luhrmann's adaptation of F. Scott Fitzgerald's classic novel 'The Great Gatsby'. It was originally supposed to be released on Christmas Day in 2012 but was then pushed back to May 10^th, 2013 because another film starring star Leonardo DiCaprio (Django Unchained) was set to hit theaters the same day. The remake of Stephen King's novel 'Carrie' starring Chloe Moretz was moved from its original March date to October in order to capitalize on the Halloween box office. This was also around the time of another horror film, the remake of director Sam Raimi's 'The Evil Dead'.

Some films could be pushed back just so that the filmmakers could have more time to complete the film. Three films this year went through such a situation. 'Star Trek Into Darkness' was pushed back from a 2012 release date because director J.J. Abrams had not yet committed to the project and a script had not been completed yet. 'Jack the Giant Slayer', originally named 'Jack the Giant Killer' (the name of the original source material the film is based off of) was moved from a June 15^th release date in order to have more time for post-production and marketing (tough competition could also be a reason for the film's delay). Finally, there was 'Man of Steel', which was originally supposed to be released the same year as its fellow DC film 'The Dark Knight Rises' but it was then moved to Summer 2013. This delay occurred before filming even began.



Those are just a few of many films that will come out this year after they were pushed back from their original release dates. In the end, I can't really say much else about a film if it is delayed aside from the fact that it could either help or hurt a movie. For me, whenever a film gets delayed, I always want to hear the reason why the studio made this decision because that is a sign as to how the movie may turn out. Films like 'The Lone Ranger' and 'World War Z' may be in trouble due to the production troubles that both films came across. As for 'G.I. Joe: Retaliation', I'm just interested to see if the rumors were true and the film went through re-shoots to feature more of Channing Tatum. But it's going to be a while before some of these movies come out, so we'll just have to wait and see what happens.

Collider Interview with Jon M Chu: http://collider.com/jon-m-chu-gi-joe-retaliation-interview/

Thoughts on J.J. Abrams as director of Star Wars Episode 7

Ever since Disney purchased Lucasfilm and the rights to Star Wars back in October 2012, and then announced that a new trilogy of films were coming out, everyone was anxious to see who Disney would hire to helm the first film, Episode VII, which is set to come out in 2015. Well, Disney has found their guy as it has just been announced that director J.J. Abrams (Star Trek, Super 8) will be directing the film. This is quite the news considering how much Abrams has been involved with the other major space-based film franchise out there in Star Trek. Of course, some are not too happy about that because Abrams has been involved with Trek, but as someone who is a huge fan of Abrams' work, I couldn't be any more excited about this news and what it means for the Star Wars franchise.



First off, let me start by saying that I didn't really grow up with Star Wars. Sure, I saw all of the movies when I was a kid, but it wasn't actually until last year's re-release of 'The Phantom Menace' when I actually saw one of these films in the theater. As for my thoughts on the films, I am one of those who is a big fan of the original films. Of course by original, I mean the first trilogy of films that came out from 1977 to 1983 and were not altered in anyway (seriously Lucas, put 'those' films on Blu-Ray, damn it!). It's one of those rare trilogies where each of the films are superb in their own way. Its biggest strength is in its writing, especially when it comes to character development as each of the main characters has a story arc which follows them through all of the movies. 'A New Hope' was the one that started it all, of course, 'The Empire Strikes Back' was one of the greatest sequels of all time with one of the best twists in film history, and I feel that 'Return of the Jedi' is actually kind of underrated mainly due to the final fight between Luke Skywalker and Darth Vader that has so much at stake.



As for those prequels that everyone loves to hate, I don't think that they are bad films but compared to the original trilogy, they obviously don't stand a chance. 'The Phantom Menace' suffered from a weak script and had so many characters in it that there was no clear main character. That problem was fixed with 'Attack of the Clones', but we still had to suffer through some bad writing and a really, really bland romance. 'Revenge of the Sith' was a huge improvement over the last two films except for, once again, weak writing and dialogue. When you look at it, it was the writing that killed these prequels. The characters were rather bland, the dialogue was too cheesy, and these films were clearly more focused on the visuals than actually telling a story.



But back to Abrams and Episode VII. When the news first broke out that this film was happening, I was waiting to see who would be directing the film. After all, with a project as big as this, sometimes it all depends on who is the director. I mean, imagine if someone like Paul W.S. Anderson or Brett Ratner was directing this film. I would be very worried because they're not good directors. J.J. Abrams, on the other hand, is one of the best directors working today. Even though his directorial career up to this point has only consisted of four films (one of which being the upcoming 'Star Trek: Into Darkness'), he has yet to make a bad film. Mission Impossible III was the first in the series to actually focus more on the team than lead Tom Cruise, his Star Trek reboot appealed to both fans and non-fans of the series, and Super 8 was one of the best original films of the last decade.



The fact that he did direct a Star Trek film and is now directing a Star Wars film is just mind-blowing to me. In all my years, I believed that we would never see something like this happening but this is real and it's going to happen. Of course, some people aren't too happy because of Abrams' involvement with Star Trek, but this is a really good thing when you think about it because of his work on Star Trek. He took a franchise that was, in a way, on life support and resurrected it and you know what, Star Wars is kind of on that level after the whole controversy of the Special Editions and the much-maligned prequels. With Abrams on board, I believe that he can resurrect Star Wars to what it was back in the late 70's and early 80's.



But now of course, the big question remains, what is this new trilogy of films actually going to be about? I for one don't want to see another trilogy revolving solely around the Skywalker family. Sure, if you have to include them, feel free to do so but I want to see the filmmakers explore more into this universe and to not just copy what was done before; Perhaps they could do a film based around the bounty hunters of this galaxy far, far away, or maybe even one from the view of the Empire. But most importantly, Abrams, don't let Lucas change a damn thing about your film like he did his own films. Make sure that when we watch it, we are watching your own vision of Star Wars the way you intend it to be. I eagerly await this new Star Wars movie, especially now that Abrams is directing it. Mr. Abrams, May the Force be With You, and Live Long and Prosper!

 

(That's right, I went there!)

Gangster Squad (2013) review

Gangster Squad is one of the many films of 2013 that will hit theaters after being delayed from their original intended release date for various reasons. In the case of Gangster Squad, it was pushed back from its September 2012 date following the Aurora shootings last July. The first trailer for the film, which originally debuted last May, was pulled from theaters due to a scene where gunmen fired upon a crowd in a theater, so the crew went back for re-shoots and a new scene in Chinatown was put in the place of the theater scene. But what about the film itself? Well, as a whole, it's an entertaining gangster film but there are a few glaring problems with the movie, namely the writing in regards to character development.

 

In 1948, post-WWII Los Angeles is under the tight control of ex-boxer turned gangster Mickey Cohen (Sean Penn), who has a firm grip on the underworld of the city, and even a couple members of the city's police, meaning that the LAPD has no way of stopping him. With nowhere else to go, Chief Bill Parker (Nick Nolte) enlists Sergeant John O'Mara (Josh Brolin) to form a secret team of cops with the intent of stopping Cohen. Along with fellow Sergeant Jerry Wooters (Ryan Gosling), Mara enlists Detectives Coleman Harris (Anthony Mackie), Conway Keeler (Giovanni Ribisi), Max Kennard (Robert Patrick), and Navidad Ramirez (Michael Pena) as members of 'the Gangster Squad', an off-the-books team with the goal of taking out Cohen before he expands his criminal enterprise.

There's no denying that this film has a distinct visual style, but that comes at the price of some weak writing, primarily when it comes to character development. While this movie is supposed to be focused on the Gangster Squad, the fact of the matter is that only Brolin and Gosling's characters are the only two that the movie actually focuses on. Mackie, Ribisi, Patrick, and Pena are left in the dust except for one distinguishable character trait for each of them. Harris throws knives, Keeler's the tech guy, Kennard's the old gunslinger, and Ramirez is Kennard's partner. On the other side of the spectrum, we have O'Mara, the hard-working, no-nonsense cop and Wooters, the wise-cracking playboy who soon has to 'grow up' when the going gets tough. They're the only two characters of the Gangster Squad who get any real character development.

But that doesn't mean this movie is bad. For one thing, despite some weak character development, the film does have a solid cast behind it, from Brolin to Gosling to Emma Stone as Grace Faraday, Cohen's etiquette tutor and 'lover' who soon becomes involved with Gosling's character as well. Like in 'Crazy, Stupid Love', Gosling and Stone work well together and have great chemistry. That is enough to ignore the fact that Stone's character also falls victim to poor character development, really being nothing more than just a damsel in distress. Of course, we can't forget Sean Penn as the sadistic mob leader Mickey Cohen, and yes, Penn does have quite the presence in this role and does steal the spotlight whenever he's on screen. Because this is such a good cast, their camaraderie is the greatest aspect of the whole movie.

 

In the end, 'Gangster Squad' is a pretty entertaining movie if you can ignore the rather weak writing/character development. I won't go as far as say it's completely style over substance, but believe me when I say it almost reaches that level. The characters of O'Mara and Wooters are the only members of the actual Gangster Squad that actually get any real character development while the other members aren't so lucky. That does make me rather worried about a certain upcoming movie with a large cast because the writer of this film is writing that film as well. All I can say is that I would be worried, DC Comics fans. But still, director Ruben Fleischer's first foray into action, having previously helmed two comedies, is an enjoyable popcorn flick.

Rating: 3.5/5

THE TOP 3 FILMS OF 2012

At number 3, it's the long-awaited return of one of cinema's most iconic franchises. I am of course referring to...

 

3. SKYFALL



After spending half of the year preparing for this movie by watching every single James Bond movie since 1962's 'Dr. No', the good and the bad, I ended up calling 'Skyfall' the best Bond film yet. Considering that this is the 23^rd film in the longest running film series to date, that's quite a lot to say about just one film. But there are many reasons why I consider 'Skyfall' the best, and a lot of it comes from how director Sam Mendes takes Bond to new levels where he hasn't been before. While this may not be the only film in the series that starts with Bond's supposed 'death', this film doesn't ignore a key question. In the modern technological world that we live in today, is someone like Bond really needed anymore? It's established in this film that Q (now played by Ben Whishaw, a very worthy successor to Desmond Llewellyn) is perhaps superior to Bond, being able to do more on his laptop in his pajamas before his first cup of Earl Grey than Bond can do in a year. Pretty much the way to sum it up... is that Bond may be getting too old for this s***.

Of course, you can't have a great Bond film without a great villain, and Javier Bardem's Silva is easily one of the franchise's best. Overall, his motive and background is similar to that of Alec Trevelyan from Goldeneye, but I feel that Silva is a more compelling villain. He's almost like the Joker from 'The Dark Knight' in that he is always one step ahead of MI6 no matter what they try and do. Bardem isn't the only great actor in this movie, which has probably the best cast of any Bond film yet. The film also establishes new iterations of old characters, including Q, a new Moneypenny (played by Naomie Harris, who does have great chemistry with Daniel Craig), and a new M. Ralph Fiennes takes over as Judi Dench makes her final appearance in the Bond franchise and while Fiennes is a great actor to take on the role of M, he follows in the footsteps of the series' best M.

 

Daniel Craig is excellent once again in his third outing as Bond, continuing the fine line of work he has done in 'Casino Royale' and 'Quantum of Solace' (Craig's performance being the best part of the underwhelming latter). 'Skyfall' also serves as the first film to go into Bond's back story, as he and M travel to his old childhood home, Skyfall (hence the name of the movie), in Scotland on the run from Silva. The film's biggest strength is the relationship between Bond and M. Not only is Judi Dench given her most substantial role yet, but she and Craig work off each other extremely well. In the year that the Bond franchise celebrates its 50^th anniversary, it is blessed by a film that is not only my pick for the best Bond film ever, but the number three spot on this list.

 

For my Number 2 film, we have the third film from another director who's becoming a force to be reckoned with in Hollywood. This film may just be his best yet...

 

2. ARGO

After two Boston-based crime thrillers in a row with 'Gone Baby Gone' and 'The Town', Ben Affleck leaves the comfort of his hometown for the dangerous city of Tehran in the late 70's with 'Argo', based on the true story of the CIA's bold attempt to rescue diplomats trapped in Tehran during the Iranian Revolution by posing them as a film crew shooting on location. The thing about this movie is that in a way, it's almost two movies in one. Aside from the tense opening sequence, the first half is mostly played for comedic effect as Tony Mendez, played by Affleck, tries to get the 'fake' movie idea up and running. After doing so, he heads off to Tehran to help the diplomats get out of Iran and that is when the movie shifts to a full-fledged thriller.

This leads to my biggest praise of the movie in that it keeps you at the edge of your seat. That is especially great when considering the fact that this is all based on a true story. Before seeing the film, I did read about the whole situation and how the diplomats were rescued so that puts Affleck at a bit of a disadvantage. Still, the finale of the movie is quite thrilling as Mendez and the diplomats attempt to get out of Tehran, with Iranian guards on their backs. Affleck manages all of this without going overboard with the violence. The movie is just genuinely thrilling, even when it is based around something that actually happened.

 

Of course, Affleck also continues to prove how great he is when working with actors. In the lead role, he is pretty subdued and allows his co-stars to shine in the spotlight, most notably John Goodman as makeup artist John Chambers and Alan Arkin as producer Lester Siegel. These two pretty much steal the show and they both do a great job. But another key factor in this movie that works to its advantage is the portrayal of the six diplomats who Mendez attempts to rescue. They're not just side characters who don't play a integral role to the movie. We are given reason to care about them getting out of Iran alive. That is Argo in a nutshell, a film that might just be Ben Affleck's best film as a director yet.

So because 'The Dark Knight Rises', a film that many have put as their pick for the best film of the year, is only at number 6 on this list, you've probably guessed what my Number 1 is going to be so without further ado, my pick for the Best Film of 2012 is...

1. THE AVENGERS



There's a big reason why 'The Avengers' was my pick for not only the best film of the year, but also the best superhero film of the year when compared to 'The Dark Knight Rises'. This isn't because 'Avengers' had more superheroes in it because that's not fair to 'Rises'. Also, aside from that, each movie is different from the other. While 'The Dark Knight Rises' was a more dark and intense film, 'Avengers' is a more lighthearted adventure. But when these two movies are compared in other categories, 'The Avengers' is just the better movie overall because it's proof of what happens when you take your time when making a project as unprecedented and big as this film.

 

Let's go back to 2008, when the first Iron Man film came out. I'm sure I'm not the only one who doubted the idea that an Avengers movie could work because there had never been a film quite like it before. So what did Marvel do? They took their time by making solo films for each of its main heroes: Iron Man, Thor, Captain America, and the Hulk. They didn't just go for the movie right away (unlike what DC is doing with 'Justice League'). Because of this, we are already connected to the characters and their endeavors right off the bat. But even with all of these heroes, director Joss Whedon, master of witty screenplays and large casts, gives each character ample screen-time. No one hero is more important than the others.

 

Whedon also makes sure that each of the main heroes' personalities are still the same. Tony Stark, AKA Iron Man, is still the wise-cracking 'genius, billionaire, playboy, philanthropist' who doesn't work well with others. Steve Rogers, AKA Captain America, is the noble 'leader' who struggles to adapt to the new modern world he is now in after the events of 'The First Avenger'. Thor, the god of Thunder and brother of the main villain Loki, is the noble hero who is conflicted by his brother's actions. There is also much stronger character development given to some of the other major characters, including Black Widow, Loki, and Hawkeye.

 

In Iron Man 2, agent Natasha Romanoff, AKA Black Widow, was more of an enigma and we weren't given much about her back story. Here, that back story is given and she is also given somewhat of a romantic subplot with Hawkeye. As for him, he is probably the Avenger with the least screen-time, because for most of the film, he is under Loki's control but his relationship with Black Widow makes up for it. Finally, there's the god of mischief himself, Loki. Now, Tom Hiddleston was great as Loki in 'Thor' but his motives in that film were rather weak. Here, there's no messing around and this film establishes as a great villain. Sure, when you get down to it, his plan is kind of weak as he tries to get the Avengers fighting each other, but he just has a great presence. He is hands down the best superhero villain of the year.

 

But of course, there's one character I haven't mentioned yet, and that is the Hulk. This is the Hulk's third appearance in a Marvel film, and also the third in which he has been played by a different actor. I would have liked to see Edward Norton play Hulk again, but quite frankly, Mark Ruffalo blows Norton out of the water. Like Norton, he perfectly captures the character of Bruce Banner, and also manages to make him a pretty calm and unsuspecting guy especially when considering his 'secret'. Whedon also utilizes the character of the Hulk extremely well, not having Banner transform into the Hulk until halfway into the movie. Of course, this leaves us wanting more, but what we got is just plain awesome. The bottom line is that if Marvel does another Hulk movie, DO NOT RECAST RUFFALO!

 

As I mentioned earlier, you can also hand it to Whedon for making one of the best-written screenplays of the year, that is just full of smart and witty dialogue, which lead to some great, memorable, and funny scenes. Of course, there's the scene where Loki is smashed up by the Hulk but the one that gets me every time is when after Hulk and Thor crash down into Grand Central Station on one of those giant alien space worms, Hulk just punches Thor off-screen, right out of nowhere. I mean, the scene with Hulk and Loki was hilarious but you can kind of tell that was going to happen. This moment, on the other hand, just catches you off-guard. I can just watch that scene with Hulk and Thor over and over again.

 

All in all, I can't really find any major problems with 'The Avengers'. Sure, the opening is actually rather slow and kind of boring, but the final hour of the film, where the Avengers fight Loki and the invading forces of the Chitauri in the middle of New York, makes it all worthwhile. Needless to say, I am pumped for all of the upcoming Marvel Cinematic Universe movies; Iron Man 3, Thor: The Dark World, Captain America: The Winter Soldier, Ant-Man, heck even that Guardians of the Galaxy movie. Why? Because Marvel has hit the jackpot with this universe that they have created and 'The Avengers' is the pinnacle of it all. That is why it is my pick for the Best Film of 2012.

And those are my Top 12 Films of 2012. See you next year!

BEST FILMS OF THE YEAR: #6-4

My pick for number 6... will no doubt piss many of its fans off because it's so low on the list. Don't get me wrong, I really do like this movie but compared to some of the other films on this list, this is as high as I could put it.

 

6. THE DARK KNIGHT RISES



Now before any of you DC fans kill me for this, let me just make one thing perfectly clear... I really do like this movie. In the end, is the Dark Knight Rises better than The Dark Knight? Probably not, but that's a tough act to follow and for what it's worth, Christopher Nolan delivered with the final entry of the Dark Knight trilogy. Of course, I can't talk about this movie without addressing what most people are saying is the biggest issue of the whole movie and that is its plot-holes and yes, there are a couple. There are two that stood out to me. One is when Bruce Wayne is in the Pit after Bane breaks his back. Apparently, all he needed to do in order to heal it was to have one of the inmates tie him up, hit his back once, leave him hanging there for a while, and that will do the trick. But then once Bruce escapes the Pit and returns to Gotham, a bigger question arises. How the hell did he manage to not only get back to Gotham so fast (this Pit he was in being located in a far-away country), but to also get back into the city when Bane has blocked off Gotham from the rest of the world?

 

But the way I see it, looking into these plot-holes any further would just ruin the movie. There are other reasons why I like it so much and the first is how the character of Bruce Wayne/Batman is portrayed. As this film starts, Bruce Wayne has become an enigma to the people of Gotham. After all that he has been through in the last two movies, he's a broken-down man and a shell of his former self as he looks to get back on his feet. This is also Christian Bale's best performance as Batman, as he captures the emotions that Bruce is going through perfectly. One scene in particular is extremely powerful and that is when Alfred tells Bruce that he's leaving because he knows that Bruce hasn't moved on from being Batman. While I'm sad that Michael Caine isn't in the movie much (though I understand why, as there's nowhere Nolan could really use the character after that), the emotions that him and Bale convey in that scene are extremely powerful.

You can't have a great superhero movie without a great villain, and this film has a great villain in Tom Hardy's Bane. While comparing Bane to the Joker is inevitable, it should be noted that Bane is quite different from the Joker. Bane's a more subdued villain than the Joker and is easily the strongest villain that Batman has ever faced. You really have to give Nolan credit for doing the following; he actually has Bane defeat Batman, which is then followed by him taking over Gotham. As far as I know, no other superhero film has had the villain actually defeat the main hero. I won't say Bane is the best out of the 'Dark Knight' villains, but needless to say this is a vast improvement over the portrayal of the character in 'Batman and Robin'. Speaking of better portrayals, Anne Hathaway nearly steals the show as Catwoman, and all while Nolan doesn't even refer to her as Catwoman in the movie.

But there are two characters in this movie who are sort of left in the dust. The first is Deputy Commissioner Peter Foley, played by Matthew Modine. In this case, this is only a minor character, but if his role was cut, then that wouldn't affect the movie as a whole. But the big one in question is none other than the woman who becomes one of the main antagonists, Talia Al Ghul, played by Marion Cotillard. Like Liam Neeson in 'Batman Begins', she goes through most of the movie under an alias of 'Miranda Tate' (and I'll be honest, I saw that coming as soon as her 'character name' was revealed back in 2011) until the end when she reveals her true intention. I feel that she should have first appeared in an earlier film in the trilogy. In fact, maybe she could have been Bruce's main love interest in 'Begins' and 'The Dark Knight' instead of Rachel Dawes but that's just me.

Even with the gripes I have, there's no denying that this is still a really great film. The most important thing to take from this is that Nolan ended the series at not only the right time, but in the right way, effectively ending the story arc of Bruce Wayne. More importantly, this film now leaves more to be desired, especially after the ending when Gotham cop John Blake, played by Joseph Gordon-Levitt, whose real name is revealed to be 'Robin' (not exactly the character we're familiar with, but a great nod by Nolan either way), discovers the Bat-Cave, effectively continuing in Bruce's footsteps as the next iteration of Batman. Too bad he won't be in the upcoming Justice League.

 

So what five films are better than 'The Dark Knight Rises'? Well, you may have already figured out what one of them is because it's from the same genre, but there are still four other movies to talk about, which brings us to Number 5 on our list. This one also happens to star 'Robin' from The Dark Knight Rises, Joseph Gordon-Levitt, in what is hands down the best original film of the year.

 

5. LOOPER

Like J.J. Abrams last year with 'Super 8', 'Looper' is only the third film for director Rian Johnson following 2005's 'Brick' and 2008's 'The Brothers Bloom' and yet it's safe to say this film makes him a force to be reckoned with. 'Looper' is one of the best-written films of the year, which is thought-provoking as much as it is edgy and thrilling. The whole movie revolves around these hit men called Loopers who execute targets that were sent from the future by criminal organizations. But when a Looper's contract is up, the next target sent to them happens to be their future self, therefore the Loopers 'close their loop'. But Johnson throws a curve-ball by showing that most Loopers celebrate after killing their future selves, even after they know that one day they will be the one that is sent back in time to be killed by their past selves.

 

As violent as the movie does get, there is still a emotional core to the whole story, particularly in the second half of the movie when the main character Joe, played by Gordon-Levitt, arrives at a farm run by a woman named Sarah, played by Emily Blunt, who is looking after her son Cid, played by Pierce Gagnon (hands down the best child performance of the year) . These two are the heart and soul of the movie, but of course we can't talk about this movie without mentioning Gordon-Levitt, whose performance channels that of his co-star, Bruce Willis. Willis is also well-utilized in this film, through a whole other subplot where future Joe is on a mission to stop the Rainmaker, the crime boss in the future. Looper is a film that can leave a huge impact on you, and that is why it lands the Number 5 spot on this list.

What do you get when you take an Academy-Award winning director, a star-studded cast, and one of the most famous musicals of all time? You get this next film, which takes the Number 4 spot on this list.

4. LES MISERABLES

I went into this movie having not read the original book by Victor Hugo and I did not see either the musical or any of the other Les Miserables films. But I have to say, in the end this will certainly end up as one of my favorites. The 2012 adaptation of Les Miserables from The King's Speech director Tom Hooper is a musical like no other and of course, this is due to the technique Hooper uses to record the songs. Instead of recording them months before shooting is supposed to happen and then have the actors lip-synch to the music, he has the actors sing the music live. Now obviously this means that the end result is going to sound a little different than what fans of the musical will remember, but this gives Hooper and the cast an advantage in that this allows them to really display the true emotions behind the characters. There's no better example of this than Fantine's solo, I Dreamed a Dream. As Fantine, Anne Hathaway avoids going for the pretty version and instead does it in a way that shows how Fantine is literally at her lowest low.

 

Of course, the performances themselves are stellar across the board. Anne Hathaway steals the show as Fantine, who is literally in the film for only 10 minutes. In the lead role of Jean Valjean, Hugh Jackman carries the movie on his back and like Hathaway also gives an Oscar-worthy performance. Heck, even Russell Crowe can belt out a tune as the main villain Javert. As a whole, there is not a single bad performance from any member of the cast, including Amanda Seyfried, Eddie Redmayne, Samantha Barks (who makes quite an impression in her film debut), Helena Botham Carter, and Sacha Baron Cohen. Overall, Les Miserables is easily the best musical to have come out in years and is well-shot, well-acted, and well-directed and that is why it lands the number four spot on this list.

Check back for my picks for the Top 3 best films of 2012

BEST FILMS OF THE YEAR: #9-7

At Number 9, it's another teen book adaptation, but this one is a bit more noteworthy. As the Harry Potter and Twilight franchises come to an end, this film is set to become the next big film franchise the same way those two franchises were. But while some say this is the next Twilight, I am more for the idea that it's the next Harry Potter because, well, saying something this good is 'the next Twilight' is a bit insulting, if you ask me.

9. THE HUNGER GAMES



After suffering through the Twilight movies, I am very much relieved with how this movie turned out, and for good reasons. Compared to Twilight, The Hunger Games is far better written with much more interesting characters, particularly the lead character of Katniss Everdeen. Unlike the selfish and pretentious Bella, Katniss is a strong and independent young woman who can easily fend for herself and is not male-dependent like Bella. As for the other two male leads, Peeta and Gale, they are also much stronger characters than Edward and Jacob who aren't just there to serve as Katniss' love interests. If I haven't got my point across yet, The Hunger Games has stronger characters than any of the characters from Twilight.

 

And with those strong characters also comes a great cast, most importantly Jennifer Lawrence as Katniss, who perfectly captures the fierceness and emotion of the character. Likewise, Josh Hutcherson and Liam Hemsworth do a solid job as Peeta and Gale, even when the latter is only in the film for about 10 minutes or so. You also can't go wrong with a cast that includes the likes of Woody Harrelson, Donald Sutherland, and Stanley Tucci. But of course, I can't talk about this film without looking into the rather controversial aspect of the movie, and that is the editing and camerawork during the actual Hunger Games themselves.

 

Even I have to admit, that is a problem when we get to the Hunger Games, as most of the fight scenes are shot close-up and through shaky cam. Editing is also rather fast as well, which as you might guess, was probably done this way in order to get a PG-13 rating because this is rather intense material we're dealing with here. Really, I can kind of ignore the editing and camerawork because The Hunger Games is a really violent story and this may be the only way it could have been brought to the screen without landing an 'R' rating. Also, I attribute this to the fact that director Gary Ross isn't really known for directing action films. Really, I do think Ross did a really great job at creating the universe, and in some areas he even expands the world of Panem. One of the things I really liked about this movie is that they actually show the Control Center of the Capitol where the Gamemakers control the Hunger Games, something that was only referenced in the book.

But there is another thing about this movie in that there are some things left out that were in the book. There's no mention of the Avoxes, servants of the Capitol whose tongues are cut out as punishment for treason, and unlike the novel, the film isn't told from the perspective of Katniss. But really, the same can be said for any other major book adaptation. The 'Harry Potter' films have cut some parts from the books, and this is no different. But I did notice one big change and that is how the ending plays out. (WARNING: Spoilers for those who haven't read the book). In the book, after Katniss and Peeta return home to District 12 after winning the Hunger Games, Peeta realizes that Katniss was 'faking' being in love with him to earn sympathy from the audience of Panem. However, in the movie, this doesn't happen and Katniss and Peeta just return home. I'm hoping this will be touched upon in 'Catching Fire', as this is a big part of the story and crucial to the development of Katniss and Peeta. Even with that, this was a rock-solid adaptation of a great book to follow in the footsteps of 'Harry Potter', and that is why The Hunger Games is in my Top 10. I must admit, though, that I am interested in seeing what director Francis Lawrence will do with 'Catching Fire' and 'Mockingjay' (the latter being a two-parter in the wake of 'Harry Potter' and 'Twilight'). Let's just hope he fixes the camerawork and editing problems.

For Number 8, we have the latest film from a director responsible for some of the most famous movies ever and if you're a fan of this man's work, then I assure you that you will not be disappointed with his latest effort.

 

8. DJANGO UNCHAINED

Django Unchained is a Quentin Tarantino movie in every sense of the phrase. It's bold and daring, showing how Tarantino is unafraid to show content that other directors wouldn't even dare to show. Of course, as with any Tarantino movie, it's also pretty bloody, evident just from the final shootout at the end of the movie. Needless to say, this is a very entertaining movie with a witty screenplay from Tarantino and well-developed characters. There are also some really Oscar-worthy performances here. There's Christoph Waltz, who is pretty much tailor made for a Tarantino movie, as bounty hunter Dr. King Schultz. But the standout performance here is by Leonardo DiCaprio as the main antagonist Calvin Candie, who is hands down one of the best villains of the year. If you're a Quentin Tarantino film, then this film will not disappoint.

Like 2011, there were some standout superhero films this year, and Number 7 is the first of three on this list. This one in question had me rather worried going in because it was a reboot of a popular franchise that was completed just a few years ago. But who would have guessed that I would end up liking this movie so much?

 

7. THE AMAZING SPIDER-MAN

Like I said, I was rather worried about this reboot, because we were only half a decade removed from director Sam Raimi's last Spider-Man film. I was also a big fan of Raimi's trilogy (heck, I could accept some of the many problems of Spider-Man 3) and I felt that Marvel was rushing Raimi to make a fourth film, which of course led to him leaving the project and Marvel instead deciding to start over, hence this movie. But I was surprised when I ended up liking this movie more than two of the Raimi films, Spider-Man 1 and 3. I can't really say that it is as good as Raimi's best, Spider-Man 2, but I do think that it's on the same level.

 

The big reason why this take on Spider-Man works so well is because it's more focused on story and character development. This is the first movie to show Peter Parker's parents, whose departure at the beginning of the film drives Peter's ambition to find out what happened to them. I must admit, however, that this does lead to my one solitary complaint with the movie in that this whole subplot of Peter's parents is rather underplayed, especially when considering that this was a key part of the marketing for the whole film. Really, all they go into this is to give us a brief glimpse of an article noting that they died in a plane crash. I don't know, perhaps they'll delve into this more with the sequel.

As for the two main leads, Andrew Garfield and Emma Stone are far more compelling to watch than Tobey Maguire and Kirsten Dunst in the Raimi trilogy. Garfield does an excellent job as Peter Parker, being the first actor to really give Spider-Man a sense of humor on film. As for Stone, she is both radiant and charming as Gwen Stacy, who also gives any other female comic book love interest a run for their money. Not only does she help Spider-Man develop a cure for those affected by the Lizard's serum that turns them into lizards as well, but she also wards the Lizard off when he tries to catch her by almost lighting him on fire. Finally, at the end after her father dies and Peter promises him to keep Gwen 'out of it', she realizes why Peter first tells her that 'he can't see her anymore'. Hands down one of the best movie girlfriends ever, if not the best.

 

That's the biggest reason why I like this new version of Spider-Man. Sure, when looking at it from a story perspective, this borrows a lot from the first Spider-Man film, but still does enough to be different. Gwen and her father, Police Captain George Stacy, are given more substantial roles than they were given in Spider-Man 3, and in this version, Uncle Ben and Aunt Stacy (both excellently played by Martin Sheen and Sally Field, respectively) are a bit more authoritative but still as caring as they usually are. In fact, I feel that in this version, the death of Uncle Ben is much more dramatic because unlike the Raimi trilogy, where most of it happened off-screen, we see it in complete detail which means that it leaves much more of an impact. All in all, 'The Amazing Spider-Man' is quite an improvement over the Raimi trilogy in regards to story and character development and I'm interested to see where director Marc Webb goes next. Heck, the sequel's already stacking up in regards to casting, including Dane Dehaan as Harry Osborn, Shailene Woodley as Mary Jane Watson, and Jamie Foxx as the villain Electro.

Stay Tuned for Numbers 6 through 4

BEST FILMS OF 2012: #12-10

2012 has officially come to a close and if you ask me, it has been one of the best year for movies... ever! After a rather forgettable year of films in 2011, 2012 has been a breath of fresh air as there has been so many great movies this year offering much variety to moviegoers. But, that also means that doing a list of the best movies of the year is going to be extremely hard. It was such a great year that this isn't a Top 10 list, this is a Top 12 list for 2012. It was a challenge just to condense this list down to that number because at one point, I had 17 different films that potentially contended for a spot on this list. So, with that said, I'll start off with a few honorable mentions before we get to the main list.

First off, I just want to mention that this will be a spoiler-filled discussion of some of the year's best films, so I recommend you see these films first before you read what I have to say. Second, like with any year, I did not see all of the critically acclaimed movies of the year, like 'Moonrise Kingdom' or 'The Cabin in the Woods', so don't expect those films to be on this list. Finally, if there's a movie on here that you did not like, don't post any comments saying that I suck for picking that movie. Be respectful as this is my opinion and it won't be the same as everyone else.

HONORABLE MENTIONS:



TED: After a weak year for comedies in 2011, 2012 was a far better year for the genre and while there may not be a straight-up comedy on my Top 12 list this year, it's just more proof of how great of a year it was for movies. The first comedy I want to talk about is 'Ted', the directorial debut for Family Guy creator Seth MacFarlane. While the show has been on a rather weak run as of late, the movie is easily one of the funniest films of the year. Mark Wahlberg and Seth MacFarlane work off each other very well, especially considering that MacFarlane's character Ted was only a visual effect that was added in post-production and even though the movie is very raunchy from beginning to end, it's not mean-spirited and the ending is a pretty heartwarming one.



21 JUMP STREET: The other big comedy from this year. I think this one caught a lot of people by surprise considering that it was based off of a show from the 80's that I don't think most people know much about aside from the fact that it starred Johnny Depp. But like Ted, this is another extremely funny comedy and leads Jonah Hill and Channing Tatum (boy, he had a great year) are great together.

CHRONICLE: Who would have thought that one of the year's best movies would have come out in February of all times? Well, Chronicle is that movie. I went into this movie a little weary because I wasn't a big fan of the found-footage genre but this film managed to avoid falling to the cliches of the genre with a steady camera and a well-written script that allows us to sympathize with the main character of Andrew (played by the next 'Harry Osborn', Dane Dehaan), even when he ultimately becomes the villain.



SILVER LININGS PLAYBOOK: This was a tough one to leave off the list. The latest film from the director of 'The Fighter' is a well-balanced mix of drama and comedy with truly Oscar-worthy performances from its cast, including Bradley Cooper and Jennifer Lawrence who have great chemistry together.



LINCOLN: Another Oscar-worthy performance here from Daniel Day-Lewis as our 16^th President Abraham Lincoln and while the movie itself is rather slow, it gives us a down-to-earth portrayal of Lincoln and his efforts to end slavery.

 

So with the Honorable Mentions out of the way, let's get started on the Top 12. I'm starting this list off with an animated film. I must admit, I feel that 2012 was just an OK year for animated films. No, there wasn't any bad animated film that I remember seeing this year, but I just didn't see any of the more critically acclaimed animated films that came out this year, like Pirates: The Band of Misfits or Paranorman. But I did manage to see one really great animated film this year. The one I am talking about came from Disney, and was based around a genre that is very near and dear to me.

12. WRECK-IT RALPH

Rhode Island Movie Corner may be a Movie blog, but video games have been a part of my life ever since I was a kid. So as you can probably guess, I was very excited to see this movie, and I'm glad to say that it did not disappoint. Wreck-it Ralph is a great homage to video games, new and old. In what is pretty much the video-game version of 'Toy Story', where video game characters come to life and interact when the arcades close, we follow Ralph, the main villain of a Donkey-Kong style arcade game called 'Fix-it Felix'. Tired of playing the villain, Ralph travels through other video games trying to his place in the universe. This whole idea of 'video-game jumping' allows the animators to be creative, and this is certainly some of the best animation of the year. There's of course the world of 'Fix-it Felix', where the characters move like they are really in an 8-bit video game, the world of 'Hero's Duty', a Halo-esque first person shooter, and 'Sugar Rush', a mix between Candy Land and Mario Kart. If I did have one minor complaint, it would be that the film could have gone just a bit further in exploring more of this video game universe that it creates. This isn't anything against the movie or anything, but those three worlds that I just mentioned are the only other worlds that the character Ralph explores. Still, this is certainly one of the best films of the year and one that definitely warrants a sequel.

 

At number 11, we have a prequel to one of the greatest trilogies ever made. Now of course, most prequels are never really that good and while I can't say this one is as good as the trilogy that it precedes, it still is a really good movie and a great return to the land of Middle-Earth.

11.THE HOBBIT: AN UNEXPECTED JOURNEY



The thing about this film is that it sort of feels like Peter Jackson is trying to combine the kid-friendly tone of J.R.R. Tolkien's legendary novel 'The Hobbit' with the epic nature of the Lord of the Rings trilogy. But that's where part of the problem lies. 'The Hobbit' was a children's novel, so the material here is fairly simple and not really along the lines of what Lord of the Rings was. Also, it was notably much shorter which leads to my main issue with this first film in that it feels just a bit too long. Now of course, each of the three Lord of the Rings movies were three hours long, but this film feels like we are already watching the Extended Edition of the film, as there are some scenes that just slow the movie down.

Really, I'm just worried about the idea of a trilogy as I feel that it would have worked better as two films, which was the original plan. It seems to me like this year's 'The Desolation of Smaug' will end the story of the Dwarves reclaiming their home from the evil dragon Smaug, so I wonder where 2014's 'There and Back Again' will go. From what I've read online (I haven't read the book), after the dwarves take back their home, Bilbo finds the Arkenstone, an heirloom of Thorin's family, and takes it. He then tries to ransom it, which strains his relationship with Thorin, and after a battle, Thorin dies but not before reconciling with Bilbo. I don't know, I'm not sure if that can serve as enough material for a film but that’s just me. Then again, Jackson is using material from the appendices that Tolkien wrote so who knows?

 

But with that said, The Hobbit is still a very entertaining fantasy film. No one can do a fantasy epic quite like Jackson. The film is also well-acted, with standout performances from Martin Freeman, Ian McKellen, Richard Armitage, and Andy Serkis. Another big thing about this film is the company of dwarves that Bilbo joins on their quest to reclaim their home. While admittedly some dwarves are focused on more than others (Thorin, Balin, Fili, and Kili are the four that are probably in it the most), they are what make this movie so memorable because you feel like part of the group. All in all, 'The Hobbit: An Unexpected Journey' is a very welcome return to Middle-Earth. I eagerly await the next two films.

At number 10, we have an adaptation of a popular teen book, directed by the author himself, about a teenaged boy's first year in high school and out of all the films of the list, this is a film that I can relate to the most.

 

10. THE PERKS OF BEING A WALLFLOWER

The best way to describe this film is to use a word that my friend Hannah used to describe it, 'life-changing' and I agree with that. Now I say that as a senior in high school, but really this is a film that I feel that a lot of people can relate to because director Stephen Chbosky, who also wrote the book, really did capture the ideal representation of what high school is really like. The main character of Charlie is incredibly relatable, and a lot of this also comes from Logan Lerman, as this is easily his best performance yet, definitely worthy of an award. But that can also be said for the two other leads as well, including Erza Miller, who pretty much steals the show as the eccentric Patrick. Finally, there's Emma Watson, fresh off of Harry Potter, who shines as the free-spirited Sam. That is why 'Perks of Being a Wallflower' lands the Number 10 spot on this list.

Check back soon for Numbers 9-7

Special Thanks to Hannah DeCelles

2013 Preview: January

Back in September, I did a four-part preview of the final quarter of films for 2012. Now, as 2013 has begun, it's time to look ahead to the lineup of films coming up in the following months. This is the first entry in a year-long preview of 2013. Expect new posts to come out during the first week of each upcoming month. With that said, it's time to look ahead for the year of 2013. Here is the lineup of movies coming out in January.



*The year starts off with a horror film, this one in question being 'Texas Chainsaw 3D'. This is the seventh film in the 'Texas Chainsaw Massacre' franchise and can also sort of be classified as the second attempted reboot of the franchise following the 2003 remake and its 2006 prequel, both of which were produced by Michael Bay. This new film reportedly will be set right after the original 1974 film directed by Tobe Hooper. Expect this film January 4^th.



*On January 11^th, there were be two films coming out that weekend. The first is 'A Haunted House'. This film, written by and starring Marlon Wayans, is a horror spoof film, parodying the 'Paranormal Activity' franchise and other films of the 'found-footage' genre.

*The same weekend will see the release of the film 'Gangster Squad' and this is after the film was originally supposed to be released back in September of 2012. However, following the Aurora shootings, Warner Bros pulled the first trailer for the film as it contained a scene of gunmen shooting inside a movie theater. The movie has since gone through re-shoots and it is unclear if that original scene will remain in the film. The film stars Josh Brolin and Ryan Gosling as members of an elite police force that takes on gangster Mickey Cohen, played by Sean Penn, in 1940's/50's Los Angeles. Emma Stone, Anthony Mackie, and Nick Nolte also star in the film.

*Three films are scheduled for release the weekend of January 18^th. The first is a crime-drama titled 'Broken City'. It's stars Mark Wahlberg as a ex-cop who becomes immersed in a scandal when he begins to follow the wife of the mayor of New York City, played by Russell Crowe.

*January 18^th also sees the long-awaited return of action star Arnold Schwarzenegger with 'The Last Stand'. It is Schwarzenegger's first leading role since 2003's 'Terminator 3' and the first following his tenure as Governor of California. In the film, he plays the sherriff of a quiet town who must take on a drug cartel leader heading for the Mexican Border.



*Finally, there is 'Mama', a Spanish horror film based on a 2008 short film from the same director, Andres Muschietti. Guillermo Del Toro serves as executive producer and Jessica Chastain stars in the leading role.



*On January 25^th, another film that was originally supposed to be released in 2012 (note: the same will apply for many other films this year) comes out. 'Hansel and Gretel: Witch Hunters' continues the story of the original fairy tale from the Brothers Grimm. 15 years after their original encounter with a witch, the two become bounty hunters looking to take down witches. Jeremy Renner and Gemma Arterton star as Hansel and Gretel. Originally the film was supposed to be released in March of 2012, but was pushed back in the wake of Renner's two big films from last year, 'The Avengers' and 'The Bourne Legacy'.



*The final major release of January 2013 is 'Movie 43'. This movie is a compilation of 12 story-lines, all done by different directors including Peter Farrelly, Brett Ratner, and Elizabeth Banks. It also has a very large ensemble cast, including Hugh Jackman, Emma Stone, Kate Winslet, Kristen Bell, Halle Berry, and much, much more.

*The sole limited release of the month is Parker, an crime thriller starring Jason Statham as a thief who enacts revenge on those that he trusted after he is left for dead. Jennifer Lopez and Michael Chiklis also star in the movie, which be released the same week as 'Hansel and Gretel' and 'Movie 43'.

Check back next month for the next '2013 preview' entry.