Looper

Ratings: 7.4/10

Film Class: B+

Genre: Sci-Fi Action Thriller

Set in a futuristic world where time travel exists, a dangerous mob sends future enemies back to the past where they would be killed by executioners called loopers. Looper is the name of the so-called employed executioners or killers, but there's more to the title than meets the eye. Time travel in itself is like a loop, and these loopers are supposed to close the loop. Things get interesting when Joe, the lead star in this film closes a loop that he never had coming... 

As with other time travelling movies, there's always loop-holes in them. The "best" time travelling movie I know till date that was the most logical was probably The Time Traveller's Wife. The first dialogue scene between Jeff Daniels (the mafia boss, alias "Rainmaker") and Joseph Gordon-Levitt (Joe) featured an uncanny young Bruce Willis. Not sure if it was CG-ed but Joseph Gordon's side-view of his face was long and "line-ny", similar to that of Bruce Willis. 

As for Emily Blunt, she kinda reminded me of Charlize Theron in the movie Monster, ie. unflattering. As for Jeff Daniels, he sure didn't have the menacing look as the ultimate villain. There's sort of a cameo by Piper Perabo (best known for her role in Coyote Ugly) which was rather refreshing. 

*spoilers ahead* There wasn't much chemistry between the 2, and it was quite puzzling to me how Joe couldn't even bother about his future self. Who in the right mind would want to kill his/her future self? Even so, Joe didn't even bother to ask about his future self about his.. future! 

The younger Joe was portrayed as a self-centered, reckless, irrational young chap, and the older Joe, only kept the "irrational" quality of his younger self. In a way, there was some consistency in the subtle depiction of the 2 leads. 

*major major spoilers ahead* Before I end off, it's important to revisit the blaring "loophole" in the film. There's not many occasions that I've warned audience to stop reading unless they've caught the movie and this is one of those times because I'm about to disclose the twist in the ending. Please DO NOT read on if you haven't caught the movie. 

---start of major spoilers---

The twist was indeed unexpected till the very last few seconds of it - when Joe had some "flash-future" about what would have happened if old Joe managed to kill the Rainmaker's mother. That was when I knew what was coming. However, after he finally manages to close the loop, the whole scene at the cornfield should have ceased to exist, or at least the existence of Joe since in the first place, his older self couldn't even have come back to hunt down young Rainmaker. It was a difficult call, even I didn't know how it should turned. Perhaps fade out the entire cornfield setting into a setting showing the Rainmaker and his mum happily having their breakfast in their house? 

However, there was some mention about "alternate" outcomes. Which was possibly why the director allowed such a blaring loophole to remain. Either that, or he ran out of ideas to "close the loopholes" that he conveniently added a few lines about alternate outcomes. So this means what we saw at the last scene, was possibly just a one-sided view of one timeline. 

Either way, the loophole didn't take away the impact of the ending scene. For young Joe to take a bullet to himself, was almost similar to him falling in love with his supposed Chinese wife-to-be... the defining moment which he was "saved". Since young Joe was a self-centered, reckless, irrational young chap, remember? 

----end of major spoilers---

I didn't think it was thhhaatttt gooodddd. But Looper still makes a decent addition to my list of favourite sci-fi movies. 

Sinister

Ratings: 8.1/10

Film Class: B

Genre: Horror Thriller

A crime novelist moves into a new house with his family, where the previous tenants of the house were murdered... with a missing child. Ellison Oswalt (Ethan Hawke) have had his 15 mins of fame with one of his books, Kentucky Blood, and is looking for that big break once again. Finding a box of Super 8 mm film (those old school roll mainly used for home videos) in his attic, he starts watching each roll, which documented the history, and the murders of several families. As he starts to examine and question the motive behind the murders, he gradually sinks into a hell-hole with the supernatural.   

Sinister is possibly one of the scariest horror movies I've watched. Solid suspense build up, decent plot, and great acting. The soundtrack was creepy too, and while most of the sounds (which is one of the most important aspect of horror films) tend to blend in as background sounds, there were at times weird sounds/noises/music which just prepared me for yet another good scare. So much so that at some points, I couldn't figure if they were background sound, or sound intended to add suspense to the scenes.

I possibly jumped up inches (as claimed from my horror movie buddy) from my seat thrice, which is one of the record-breaking moments for me. Usually, I would still be able to keep my cool, but the build up was that intense, coupled with abrupt loud sounds which really made me lose my nerves. To be honest, I was also squinting my eyes at several scenes, hoping to watch as "little" of the screen as I can while supposedly keeping my cool. 

It has the usual clichés, such as scary images on reflective surfaces, overrated sudden sounds to scare you, and before that, everything goes silent, scary looking children and dim lighting. What I wasn't too happy about was that most of the scenes were actually almost completely dark, 3/4 of the screen was just pitch black. Created too much "unnecessary" tension (horror fans won't complain) that something could be lurking in those parts of the screen. Somehow, the lead actor, Ethan Hawke, seemed to have excellent night vision. Also, the scary images & apparitions looked too CG for my liking. 

But other than that, everything else was near awesome. Sinister lies true to its literally meaning, and it's a refreshing mix of graphic horror and scary horror. Graphic horror for movies like Saw and Texas Chainsaw Massacre, scary horror for movies like Paranormal Activity and Insidious (both of which I've yet to catch) - a mix of sadistic horror and ghost horror. 

*major major spoilers ahead* While it's true that there are many murder-like horror movies out there, none is able to meet that balance... it's usually skewed towards the supernatural side. Sinister, however is different in the sense that it initially started out as a murder solving mystery, with hints of the supernatural but gradually evolved into pure supernatural horror madness... and finally falling back to the disturbing horror closure. 

I was almost certain I saw subtle images of the boogie-man on a couple of reflective surfaces which the camera quickly spanned past. Not sure if it was my imagination or that it was intended by the director. One scene was the one where Ethan Hawke and his wife were having a talk along the corridor with a brightly lit white curtained glass door in the background. Another was... I shudder to think about it but was sure there was another scene. Only managed, though I honestly didn't want to, to catch 2 such scenes. 

The first scary screen was his son creeping out of a cardboard box backwards, a scene totally absurd, yet is sure to stick... somewhat like the Exorcist. Thankfully, the fact that "he" was human made it less haunting. And this could possibly be one of the director's "trademark filming", like how director Quentin Tarantino likes to have scenes of feet and soundtrack of his previous movies. Well, the director, Scott Derrickson is the director of The Exorcist of Emily Rose afterall...

The suspense was so intense throughout the movie, I was impatiently waiting (hoping actually) for "lull" moments where Ethan Hawke would have a long (not long enough) dialogue with the other cast, such as a helpful policeman, and an occult investigator. There was also a "lull" moment where he argued with his wife, but that itself was a powerful scene. It put across some insightful priorities any family man should have. The scenes with the policeman and the occult investigator added some light-hearted humor to the perpetually tense mood. 

The problem with too-much-CG apparitions is that during prolonged scenes of them, it just feels more ridiculously unreal (which the ending scene was).

The ending was quick, just like the murders, which cut to the chase. I thought there could have been more build up back there. 

Sinister is a must see for horror fans out there, and for those who can stomach such scenes. For the faint hearted and those who easily have nightmares, I recommend you stay away from this film.  

Taken 2

Ratings: 7.7/10

Film Class: B

Genre: Action Thriller

Retired CIA agent, Bryan Mills (Liam Neeson) must once again save his family from the syndicate who kidnapped his daughter back in part 1. Now, gathering more men to hunt Liam Neeson down, and having the advantage of first strike, the father of the deceased lead kidnapper badly wants his revenge...  

*spoilers ahead* The opening scene was real intimidating, and for a moment there, thought Liam Neeson might actually lose this fight. But thank god, writer Luc Besson sure knows how to keep his fans happy. However, this time round, he's having a tougher fight because he's a step behind. For those of you who aren't acquainted with his character, fret not, regardless of the odds, he's always going to make the bad guys pay... 

*major spoilers ahead* This sequel is very different from the first. There's more "story" to it, and less explosive action. You could literally count them with 3 fingers (3 grenades). There's a stronger character feel and all the main characters were given a good amount of screen time, unlike the first where the movie was totally owned by Liam Neeson. 

His daughter, Maggie Grace, even though I can't stand her unconvincing acting, brought a new dimension to the plot as his unexpected "sidekick". Afterall, every hero needs a sidekick, eventually. The ingenuity of how he got his daughter to locate his whereabouts was super cool and super original. Though I didn't really rationalise if it even made sense, I'm sure most of you will feel the same way. The showdown between the head villain and Liam Neeson was a little disappointing, but was still a scene worth remembering. 

I hate to compare this with Part 1, but if you're wondering, I prefer the first because he was more invincible then. Less fast paced for Taken 2, but more brains exerted for Liam Neeson. There's in-the-movie talk about yet another possible sequel, but don't bother waiting for any after-credits scene because there're non. I sure hope the franchise stops here, the way I see it, the only possible direction to make it different is to down play Liam Neeson again, for him to suffer/tortured before rising up again. And that's not something I wanna see from my live action hero.

Something worth mentioning, not sure if it was intended, is that in Taken 1, his daughter was "taken". But in this film, Taken 2, him and his wife were "taken". I find it coincidentally apt that "2 were taken". So does that mean if ever a 3 were to come up, all 3 would be taken? I can only wonder for now...

The Cabin in the Woods

Ratings: 6.8/10

Film Class: B+

Genre: Horror Suspense

Despite the raving reviews about the ingenuity of the plot, this movie didn't wow me. It irritated me initially, because I've always hated "cheap scares" and The Cabin in the Woods uses it all the time. No suspense build up, just pure sudden loud sounds and abrupt visual pop-ups. Especially the introduction of the title, that was way unnecessary... 

*major spoilers ahead* The plot, is indeed quite unique and original, but felt like a remake of a video game. A group of friends stay over at a remote cabin, supposedly bought over by one of the leads' cousin, only to find themselves haunted by the supernatural. Unknowing to them, the chain of events is orchestrated by a group of observers. 

The story build up is fast paced, and the "lucky" folks didn't have to stay tortured for long. They get wiped out fast, probably a little too fast for my liking. The cabin isn't the main scene, the scene is what happens after... the real motive behind the chain of events. 

The plot spirals into the realm of the bizarre when they voluntarily walk into their own graves, pun intended. You'll have to watch the movie to understand what I mean. After that, you'll be led into a whole new world of your greatest fears, which you'll either love, or hate. 

It's an interesting one this is, but it didn't shock me of my senses. Who knows, given a little more time, I might actually grow to like it. But right now, I'll say the overall film felt rather cheesy for me. 

Men In Black III

Ratings: 7.0/10
Film Class: A
Genre: Action Comedy

Men In Black are back again, this time, Tommy Lee Jones, as Agent K has lesser screen time because one of his nemesis alien broke out of prison, and went back in time to assassinate him. It's up to Will Smith, Agent J to save the day. 

This sequel feels different. Even though there's continuity in the storyline, the scripting wasn't like the first 2. It has a more serious tone to it, and the lines aren't as cheesily funny. Doing a check on it, it seems they brought a new writer on board, even though one of the freelance writers have all along been with Men In Black since the start... just a change of partners. 

It makes a good stand alone movie, most of the "forgotten" aspects being explained, except for the talking bulldog. The last sequel came out in 2002, and that's a really long decade ago, so I have no idea how "he" died, assuming he did because there's no reason not to feature him in the 3rd. Unlike Toy Story or most other animated sequels, since there's lotsa animations in this, most of the nostalgic aliens are no longer featured in this episode. 

*spoilers ahead* No dancing roaches, no talking bulldog, no regenerating head alien but we have a 5th dimensional being able to look into the future. He's awesomely cool, and thanks to him, good will inevitably triumph over evil once again. 

There's a mystery to the plot this time round, with a rather heartwarming ending. Josh Brolin as the younger Agent K just seems off to me, since he doesn't look any much younger than Tommy Lee Jones. But it makes sense, since the time travel wasn't too far back, and Josh Brolin did good his role. I liked the acting of the villain as well, Boris the animal, who's a badass creepy-crawly alien with the smarts. 

Men In Black III is less funny compared to its sequel, but feels more intellectual. There's more story, more character feel, but it doesn't feel refreshing anymore. Give and take, it's still a good movie overall.