End of Watch

Ratings: 6.9/10

Film Class: C

Genre: Crime Drama

End of Watch follows closely the routine checks/busts of two LA police officers, who's the cream of the crop, but as a result lands themselves into trouble when they continually bust a criminal lord's mega illegal human-trafficking operations, forcing themselves to come face to face with brutal enemies who wants them dead.

This documentary-style like movie is raw, grainy, and at certain times, pretty boring with the seemingly everyday dialogue. Not one to keep you up at night, but it does have a few tense moments here and there. Heard a lot of talk about the realistic chemistry between the 2 leads, no doubt it was present, but as much as the random conversations were important in creating a convincing sense of realism between the characters, it added little value to the enjoyment of the film. 

*major spoilers ahead* There aren't many movies out there glorying just and righteous police officers, but when one of those few movies' finally made, it's not unreasonable to think that a tragic ending is imminent. Ie., the plot was predictable. It's just a matter of "when". However, the ending scene did end with a "bang", a mentally replayable scene which I'm certain will haunt many audiences' minds. And that, morbidly is a plus point for me. Well, at least there's a part of it which creates a deep impression... 

Django Unchained

Ratings: 9.4/10
Film Class: B
Genre: Action Drama

My only complaint about this film, is that the title is an absolute turnoff. Even though there's a pretty darn good reason for it, it metaphorically refers to the transformation of the black male protagonist (Jamie Foxx), Django turning from slave into a kickass cowboyish bounty hunter, the title lacked the coolness rampant in the movie, even more disguised by the cheesy-looking poster. Hmm... is that 2 complaints then? 

Quentin Tarentino's movies are slowly, but surely, gaining the respect of the mainstream audience. His previous films used to be on the senseless gore charts, excessive unnecessary brutality and his trademark blood splatters. Not that I'm complaining, because most of the time the exaggerated blood splatter scenes added twisted comic relief, but has an adverse effect of making his movies seem less brainy. 

I feel that he has dumped some of his old styles behind to fine-tune those which better attract a wider audience. I've caught many of his films, my first being his From Dawn to Dust (he wasn't a director but was one of the writers and actors), when he was still a fairly unknown (to me) name in the movie industry. For crying out loud, I didn't even know about his Pulp Fiction only after a few years later, and had to study a bit of him in my film appreciation class. Tarentino's filming styles are more distinct and pretty unique compared to most other directors, he sure isn't a Blockbuster-type director, but an artsy one. 

Can't believe I've spent 2 whole paragraphs on him without even reviewing the movie proper, but bottomline is, if you're one who is familiar with his style, you more or less know what to expect. Unlike his previous films  where there's a big twist in the storylines, and where the good and bad guys switch roles and vice versa, Django Unchained's plot is more "stable" and more conventional. *major spoilers ahead* The kicker lies in wiping off some of the main characters, somewhat similar to Inglourious Basterds, so for first time viewers, there's still a little "twist" in there, provided you're not already reading this post. 

Christoph Waltz is now officially one of my favourite actors. He was able to match his Inglourious Basterds stellar acting, this time more of a hero than his usual villainous roles. Jamie Foxx still didn't impress me that much, but was one of his better performances, and as for Leonardo DiCaprio, I feel such injustice that he hasn't won an oscar for his unparalleled performance. Leonardo DiCaprio is such a cream of the crop versatile actor that I don't think he has ever failed in any of his roles. And to show that to the world, he has taken the role as a villian this time round... and he was absolute badass. 

I read a couple of trivia on imdb before viewing it, which kinda enhanced the movie experience. I kept a look out for the "original Django", Leonardo's bloody hands, and Jamie Foxx's horse. In brief, for you lazy folks out there, the title and setting of this movie was inspired by a 1966 film Django, and the original Django actor Franco Nero cameoed in this, with him asking what Jamie Foxx's name was, to recieve a reply "Django" spelt out, and Jamie informing him that the "D" is silent. And Franco Nero said "I know". Such a deceivingly scripted easter egg reference for those in the know. 

When Leonardo DiCarpo exposed Christoph Waltz and Jamie Foxx plan, he smashed a glass, and was really bleeding. However he chose to ignore it and stayed in character. And finally for Jamie Foxx, he was riding on his own horse, and there was even a display of his own horse tricks. 

Django Unchained has a fairly predictable storyline, but I love how it's clearly broken down into different major scenes and features different showcases of the cast. From the start the focus was on Christoph Waltz, about how he freed Django and taught him the ropes. We get to understand him better, and once the director's "mission" of doing so was completed, the focus shifted to Jamie Foxx, about him rescuing his wife from a ruthless plantation owner. That's when Leonardo comes into the picture (about midway in the film) and steals the limelight. Next in line, was Samuel L. Jackson, Leonardo's loyal senior house slave. Samuel L. Jackson was also hilariously exchanging spiting lines with Django. 

All in all, it was an absolute delight to watch these veteren, highly acclaimed actors on screen, all in one non-blockbuster-like movie. Kerry Washington, Django's wife's acting looked so amateurish in comparison with these powerhouses. 

The plot, though simple, touched on a sensitive topic, in a professional, entertaining manner in which only Quentin Tarentino could pull off without offending his audience.

With loads of hilarious punch lines, unexpected cameos (did I mention Jonah Hill and Quentin Tarentino was in as well?), star studded cast, edge-of-your-seats mood setters (cos' you'll be sitting in anticipation of sudden gun draws), old school cowboyish cinematography/film style with old school OST and the director's trademark blood splatters, this movie would easily make its way into anyone's top 10 list who appreciates good ol' cinema. Intense, yet light-hearted, and highly entertaining. Django Unchained is a must-watch for 2013!

Ruby Sparks

Ratings: 6.7/10

Film Class: C+

Genre: Teenage Drama

What if an imaginary girl of your dreams (literally) were to suddenly appear in your life, to have already fallen so deeply in love with you, and whom you can control her to do as you demand? Sounds too good to be true? Well, that's Ruby Sparks for you, in a nutshell. A one-time hit wonder novelist suffers from writer's block. Desperate, he creates a fictional female lead for his new novel out of this one vague dream of her. He creates a fictional relationship between himself and the female lead, only to discover one day that, "She's out of his mind (tagline for movie)".

What's intriguing is that the lead actress, Zoe Kazan, is the one who also wrote the screenplay for this movie. An original, yet twisted romantic story of a teenage couple. However, this is no chick flick (I find this catchy term rather sexist, but have used it in this context for the purest of intentions - to mean that the film genre mainly deals with love and romance and designed to appeal largely to female target audience [as defined by wikipedia]). Instead, there's some dark, cultist, "emo-ing" content to this. 

There was a particular scene which could easily have passed off as a scene in a horror film. It was so disturbing it's still stuck in my head even after catching it more than 2 weeks ago. I was expecting more of a feel-good, light-hearted Little Miss Sunshine mood sprinkled with teenage romance kinda movie. This just reminds me of The Perks of Being a Wallflower. Catching 2 such movies within such a short span of time sure brought out the "emo-ness" in me... so, be warned. 

Oz the Great and Powerful

Ratings: 7.4/10

Film Class: B+

Genre: Fantasy Action Drama

Director Sam Raimi's film style is reflected once again in his latest movie, Oz the Great and Powerful. Considering he directed the classic Evil Dead Trilogy, his horror takes still lingers even in apparently unhorrorable movies directed by him.

Take for example, Spider-Man, initially I hated the sudden shock scenes of the green globin, but have now come to terms with his style. The same is true for this one. *spoilers ahead* Coincidentally, there's also a green globin in this movie, the she-globin, aka green wicked witch. She's the witch play fans would be familiar with, since there's a play all about her, Wicked.

There were several jump-up-in-your-seats scenes, and of course there's also his classic "scary grandma" character (wonder who that will be?).

Oz the Great and Powerful is the back story of The Wizard of Oz. It tells of the origins of Oz, how he turned from a carnival magician into the new ruler of the fantasy land of Oz.

Liked the color changing transition scenes, from black & white opening sequences, changing into "technicolor" cinematography. Brought back the good 'ol feel of the technicolored Wizard of Oz.

There's a good cast, James Franco and 3 gorgeous Hollywood actresses, Mila Kunis, Rachel Weisz and Michelle Wiiliams who all acted as witches.

However, the 2 good points about it were all lacking. Despite the seemingly impressive CG, it still looked somewhat fake. The characters didn't blend in with the setting because of an almost imaginary halo surrounding them which separates them from the fantasy world. And despite having famous stars dominating the screen, their overly exaggerated acting made it too cheesy.

Perhaps I'm being too critical, since afterall, The Wizard of Oz is a children's fantasy novel/movie, but because of its demerits, the film didn't feel classy.

However, I did like the fantasy characters Finley, the talking flying monkey and a talking china girl. No, not a girl from China, but a porcelain girl, literally. Both of them added different levels of funny into the film.

*warning, major spoilers ahead* What I find puzzling is the reference of characters from Oz's "real world", to the characters in the fantasy world. First there's his abled assistant, whom he takes for granted, then there's this girl who hoped that Oz could heal her legs while sitting through one of his magic performances, believing that he does indeed have magical powers.

Both Finley and the talking china girl from the Land of Oz are another version of those characters. Why the similarity? Does it mean that The Land of Oz is just a figment of his imagination? That he is indeed already dead? Furthermore, there's even his love flame, Annie (acted by Michelle Williams), whom he loves in his real world, but didn't find the courage to prevent her from marrying someone else. When he's in the Land of Oz, Michelle Williams appears once again, this time as the good witch. What a puzzling coincidence.

Needless to say, the coincidences were all intentional. Considering the cast who acted as the characters in the real world were also the voice overs for the fantasy characters in the Land of Oz. Because of this, I have a huge question mark hovering over my head, wondering if the fictional Land of Oz is even fictional in it's own plot?

This can't be Oz-ception could it?

Still, I'm intrigued by the "artistic allusion and technical parallels" (wow, what fancily impressive words, but they're not mine, it's a direct quote from Wikipedia) to the prequel The Wizard of Oz. My knowledge of The Wizard of Oz isn't that strong, so whatever I'm about to type, isn't what I ingeniously came up with. The only thing which I observed, was how the initial opening sequence was in a smaller aspect ratio when he was in the real world, compared to when he flew into the Land of Oz. I believe this was so for the earlier film as well?

Trivia: Interestingly, the guy that Annie was going to marry bears the same name as Dorothy's parents, implying that Dorothy is Annie's daughter. In case you're wondering who Dorothy is, she's the protagonist in The Wizard of Oz. The Scarecrow, Tin Man and Lion were also all referenced in this prequel.

The Scarecrow was introduced as a scare tactic in this film, and would seem that he was built by the townspeople in the next film. The creator of the Tin Man is the Master Tinker, the same guy who built the hot air balloon for Oz and was supposedly able to build literally anything. Finally, the Cowardly Lion who, or it was scared away by Oz earlier in the movie lost his/its guts and so had to find courage in the sequel. And if you're wondering why Mila Kunis tears burns her skin, it's because water is her Achilles heel (though in theory it doesn't make that much sense as tears are mostly saline isn't it? But there's a scene in the novel where Dorothy dumps a bucket of water over the wicked witch and she melts away...).

I liked the last part where Oz gave each of the main characters a present, even though I wasn't exactly convinced that Oz was a much better person. The gift that Finley the talking monkey got was probably the most meaningful, indirectly implying that Oz has finally learnt to appreciate the "people" around him. As for the others, the rationale behind the gifts they got were more direct and less abstract.

Because of the interesting trivia, perhaps the film deserves a 0.3 increase in rating. Well, I'll leave it to you to decide. While it's not that great a film, it's still rather impressive to uncover so many easter eggs in the movie.

Wreck-It Ralph

Ratings: 7.2/10

Film Class: B+

Genre: Family Animation

Wreck-It Ralph is an old school video game bad guy who's like a human-version of King Kong. He smashes things, buildings in particular, and the player gets to control Fix-It Felix, the good guy who repairs what Ralph destroys.

Ralph is a lonely envious bad guy who on the game's 30th anniversary decided to change his fate and goes in search a medal - something only heroes can win.

It was fun to watch video game villains come to life, so at least more animated than their usual video game selves - such as the monster in pacman, and street fighter villains M. Bison and Zangief.

Though Ralph isn't your usually good guy, he sure makes a convincing villain trying hard to be good. His problem, actually it isn't his fault, is that he's too "good" a wrecker. *spoilers ahead* However, predictably, you know that wrecking's gonna come to "good" use sooner or later.

He wasn't likable only until the very last part... Concept wise, the fantasy world of video games was ingenious, reminded me a little of Pixar's very own Toy Story franchise. I'm a little conflicted because I didn't like the setting of the plot, why the game Sugar Rush of all games to be the main basis of the plot? But yet I still like the twist.

The twist wouldn't have gelled that well if not for the car racing video game, Sugar Rush.

I thought the movie lacked something, not originality cos they sure have that, not the characters nor the story development, but perhaps the scripting cos nothing was too funny, too brilliantly said or even too memorable for the likes of me.

Warm Bodies

Ratings: 7.8/10

Film Class: B

Genre: Horror-less Zomance Comedy

R is a zombie who falls in love with a human, Julie (Teresa Palmer). Gradually, he, or it starts to feel a heartbeat, and forms a relationship which could make him human again. This infectious miracle promises a change in a world highly populated with the undead...

Most of what you see in the trailer already shows the best bits of the movie; the novel plot, the funny scenes, thus making the predictability of the plot like an open book. Still, the humorous narration by the lead zombie injected a warm hearted mood into the "lifeless" movie.

I didn't know the lead actress was Teresa Palmer, who reminded us (my wife and I whom I watched the movie with) of a blonde version of Kristen Stewart. I was blown away by her gorgeousness when I first saw her in Bedtime Stories, then still a fairly unknown actress, but somehow didn't quite recognise her in this movie. Most of the time, her wardrobe was a rugged, beatup state which made her slightly less attractive than how I had remembered her to be.

*major spoilers ahead* I love how there's a subtlety about the lead character's names, made obvious only at the point where R went into the quarantine zone to look for Julie, to find her getting some fresh air at her balcony. The scene was reminiscing of the classic Romeo and Juliet balcony rendezvous, how cheekily cute. His actual name was probably Romy, Romeous or something like that.

The part where zombies could relive the memories of a dead person by eating his/her brain was also a very interesting and well thought of possiblity, which opened up to more areas of plot development and expansion.

Overall, the movie triumphed in the details, well thought of "what-if-I-were-a-zombie" scenarios. All the way from how the Bonies evolved (further manifested from a zombie) to the "chance" zombie-remedy because R is a collector of items, everything just seemed to fit right in place. Even the makeup transformation of R from a zombie to a more human-like figure (mostly facial) also didn't go unnoticed. It's mostly funny, a few scenes to make you jump up in your seats but none too graphically haunting.

Orginal zombie jokes with an original zombie plot, add some zombie romance into it and what do you get? A revolutionary genre, an infectious miracle which promises a change in filmography.

Ps.: It's trivia-ly funny that even the movie poster is intentionally made to look like an unrolled crumpled up poster... Apocalyptic-like...

The Thieves

Ratings: 7.2/10

Film Class: B

Genre: Comedy Action (Korean)

Featuring a star studded cast, The Thieves is about 2 professional groups of thieves joining forces to rob a casino of a high value diamond called the "Tear of the Sun" (where have I heard that before?). One group of thieves are from Korea, the other from Hong Kong. Joining the gang of thieves from Korea is *drum roll* Gianna Jun, best known for her role in My Sassy Girl (Korean version). Well, she's the only famous Korean star I know, whom I didn't quite recognise only until after the movie. Thanks to her, she brought testosterone spiking hotsomeness to the movie... 

As for the group from Hong Kong, there's Simon Yam and Angelica Lee (Malaysian actress who acted in Singapore's very own horror movie, The Eye). It was refreshing to see such a diverse group of stars acting together, and the 5 stars who really stole the limelight were lead star, Yun-seok Kim as Macao Park, the mastermind of the heist, Simon Yam, Gianna Jun, Angelica Lee and Hye-su Kim, Macao Park's old flame. Everyone has their own agenda in the heist, and there's more than meets the eye than simply the Tear of the Sun.

Expect lotsa double crossing action, twists and cheekily funny scenes. *major spoilers ahead* I love Simon Yam's "going down" scene the most, followed by Macao Park's suave mighty mouse's "Here I come to save the day" attitude. Even the ultimate villian, Wei Hong's presence was intimidatingly cool. First I've seen a villain so cool-ly walking through scenes of flying bullets (without much corniness) and shooting with dead-accurate zest. Also, there was even a never-before-seen action scene of building-scaling fights.

The Thieves is like a Korean version of Ocean's Eleven, with a hint of Mission Impossible. Despite having a star studded cast and an interesting plot, I didn't give it such a high rating because it lacks class. There's nothing about it which wows me, yet everything about it makes the viewing a fun experience.