Star Trek Into Darkness (2013)

Director: JJ Abrams
Notable Cast: Chris Pines, Zachary Quinto, Benedict Cumberbatch, Karl Urban, John Cho, Zoe Saldana, Alice Eve, Simon Pegg, Anton Yelchin, Peter Weller

*Note: This review contains spoilers. Read if you want, but know for me to amply talk about this film - I have to spoil some of the film's "surprises."

Let me be upfront. I've been a "Star Trek" fan since I was little. Some of my earliest memories are watching "Star Trek" films and I, for one, loved JJ Abrams ridiculous reboot of the long time franchise. It kept the spirit of the original series, maximized the action for newer audiences, and still somehow balanced characters and science fiction into the film. The long awaited sequel "Star Trek Into Darkness," does not quite find that same concoction of making it all work. The film is, indeed, quite the action film, but too often it lacks the 'darkness' and 'freshness' that it needed to be as good as the original.

Capt. Kirk (Pine) and Spock (Quinto) come to a disagreement when the captain breaks the Prime Directive on a foreign planet to save his First Officer's life. This argument becomes quite the case for Starfleet and Kirk finds himself demoted on his starship Enterprise. When a terrorist act by a top agent John Harrison (Cumberbatch) kills a horrendous sum of civilians and leaves many of the seniority of Starfleet crippled, Admiral Marcus (Weller) sends Kirk and the Enterprise an a military mission to find the villain. Not all is what it seems though and Kirk will have to make some sacrifices to finish his mission.

With a title like "Star Trek Into Darkness" (if anyone bitches about it not having a colon, I will find you and headbutt you into unconsciousness - who gives a shit?) and the epic looking trailers with an Enterprise cascading down to Earth and the icy stare of Cumberbatch, I was stoked for this film. It looked to really delve into some dark matter that made some of the original "Star Trek" films as good as they were. Here's looking at you "Part VI." Yet, as I walked away from the theater and the the multi-million dollar credits rolled - I couldn't help but feel a bit cheated. What darkness? Where was the epic nature promised by the title and trailer?

But let us start with what the film does well, which is action. Damn if JJ Abrams doesn't know how to do action like a champion. Even if the introduction seems a bit cheesy with its colorful trees and over the top erupting volcano (this sequence was an obvious throwback to the style of the TV show with its goofy moments) the film is in full warp drive when it comes to action and pacing. The film almost never breaks as it piles on plot and action for the audiences and I was entertained as hell with the film. Klingon war party? What the hell, let's have a gun fight with them! Giant ass war geared Starship called the USS Vengeance? That travels faster than warp speed? It seems a bit over the top, but fuck it - that's awesome. As a popcorn flick, "Star Trek Into Darkness" delivers.

That's just the problem though. A great "Star Trek" film doesn't just deliver fun action. It has great characters, silly but thoughtful political/moral commentary, and plenty of science fiction moments to deliver. "Star Trek Into Darkness" only delivers on some of these. Not all of them.

As it turns out for a science fiction film, "Star Trek Into Darkness" was far more action then science fiction and it's littered with the same lightheartedness that made the film so much fun. Except this time around, the film rarely finds the balance of character work and plot that made "Star Trek" so effective. Half the time I felt the film thought it was much smarter than it was with its half explained political war subplots and ill explained plot devices. Here come the spoilers folks, but it's quite obvious that this film takes a lot of elements from "Star Trek II: The Wrath Of Khan" and unfortunately is unable to top it in any way.

To make matters worse, all of this plot that thrust at us takes away from the one key element that always makes a "Star Trek" film so awesome: the characters. Granted I appreciate the fact that Scotty gets a slightly bigger role and the spatting bro-mance between Kirk and Spock is as spot on as ever, but the rest of the crew and cast sort of get the shaft. Sulu, Chekov, and Bones all sort of get thrown in as almost limited cameos with little in the way of character work - and the new girl, Marcus is essentially a plot device and nothing more. Even the fan infuriating romance between Spock and Uhura seems negated to being a comedic element rather than something expanded upon. It's rather frustrating for the fan in me.

If there was anything that saves this film when it comes to character writing, it's the unique way that they go about delivering use the villains of the film. That's right. Villain...s. With an 's.' While the media focused down Cumberbatch as this ultimate baddie, which I will admit delivers some awesome moments, the appearance of a war bound Peter Weller as an Admiral covering up his tracks is pretty enticing. Weller has always been a man with a demanding screen presence and his owns his role here.

This in turn, brings me to the most controversial and largest spoiler of this review. Khan. It's revealed in the film that Cumberbatch's Harrison is actually a young Khan out to tear shit up. Now far be it for me to criticize the use of Khan here, in fact, I quite like how they go about making him an anti-hero for a good portion of the film, but the finale with Khan seems a bit tacked on. I actually would have liked for the film to end before the final act where Spock and Uhura somehow overpower him (when he previously destroyed an entire Klingon kill squad and took a vicious beating from Kirk with little to no reaction) and everyone good wins. Where the hell is the darkness in that?!

Perhaps my severe reaction to the film comes from holding it in such high regard. The first one was a stunningly effective effort with a fantastic cast and wonderful director. This one is just...a disappointment. It lacks the epic scope and darkness that was indicated from day one and many of the classic "Star Trek" elements are surprisingly missing. It definitely has it's moments here and there including some stunning action sequences...but I just can't shake my disappointment. Perhaps others will be willing to overlook the elements I found distracting, but I found "Star Trek Into Darkness" to be just slightly better than mediocre. A definite step down.

Written By Matt Reifschneider

Quick (2011)

Director: Jo Beom-goo
Notable Cast: Lee Min-ki, Kang Ye-won, Kim In-kwon

Despite the relatively crappy cover art work that graces "Quick," a handful of reviews prompted me to investigate the Korean action flick. To be honest, I kept my expectations low. I mean, South Korea has been known for some stunning thrillers and the occasionally great martial arts film, but a big special effects driven action film? I was hesitant. "Quick" ended up being both a solid surprise and a somewhat disappointing affair. Yes, the film is an entertaining leap into all out over the top action with plenty of explosions to showcase it's Michael Bay influences, but it also happens to be only half way logical in its "twists" and oddly placed humor. "Quick" is the kind of film that entertains, but doesn't stick.

Han Ki-su (Lee Min-ki) lives a simple life. After a horrific accident, he has left being the young leader of a young motorcycle gang and uses his ample bike talents as an efficient and well paid messenger. When he is paid to pick up a unique package in the form of a popular pop artist and ex-girlfriend Chun-shim (Kang Ye-won) he feels like his old life and his new one are colliding. Too bad this isn't his only worry. The helmet he gives her is hooked to an explosive device. To save her, he must deliver bombs to very specific targets with very specific instructions and time limits. It's a race against time and the authorities to save an old flame, can he do it?

"Green light is go. Red light is stop. Yellow light is go VERY FAST."

"Quick" is ridiculously over the top in its concept. It also happens to be ridiculously over the top in its execution. I made a previous comparison to Michael Bay and I stick by it. Like that over rated American block buster director, "Quick" focuses on being a film of pure entertainment by any means necessary. That action that's injected into the film is of very high quality and it's hard not to say that I wasn't on the edge of my seat rooting for our hero the entire time. Whether its explosions he's racing from, dodging gas canisters rolling down the highway on his motorcycle, or a rather fun fist to cuffs encounter with the film's villain on a speeding train set to detonate - "Quick" delivers on its title even if that means sacrificing any kind of logic in the process.

As an action fanatic, I was hooked on "Quick." Unfortunately, the film, like the Michael Bay films it aspires to be, is about as deep as a kiddie pool half drained. The obvious romantic subplot created from trying to save an old flame from a rather nasty head-splosion is fun when the chemistry works, but overall their banter and the ridiculous amount of "flashbacks" used to tell a story of sacrificed love tends to fall flat. The humor falls flat too half the time (although when it works, I was digging it - like when she is trying to jump from a van on his motorcycle at high speeds in traffic) and there seemed to be far too many subplots and dropped characters that its fairly long run time felt occasionally padded. Even the villain of the film is relatively too cheesy for his own good, although I have to admit I'm okay with that, and when he shows up at the end and explains who he is there might be some forehead slapping going on.

The script said, "fire." So they did.

In the end, I have to give "Quick" the benefit of the doubt here. It's mostly illogical, silly, and the character work forced - but dammit the film was entertaining as hell and that counts for something. Action fiends will find plenty to love in its over the top mannerisms and B-grade storytelling so it comes suggested for my friends in that field. Otherwise, it might be more of a rental for the rest.

Written By Matt Reifschneider

Cold Prey (2006)

Director: Roar Uthaug
Notable Cast: Ingrid Bolso Berdal, Rolf Kristian Larsen, Tomas Alf Larsen, Endre Martin Midtstigen, Viktoria Winge

I have always been a sucker for a cold weather slasher (just look at my recent review for "Blood Runs Cold"), so when I stumbled across the Norwegian slasher "Cold Prey" I needed to jump into my snow shoes and dig in right away. Too bad this little indie horror film simply caters to the cliche and plays it far too safe...otherwise there might have been something more here instead of just another run-of-the-mill slasher.

It was supposed to be the best weekend ever. Five friends, fresh Norwegian snow, snowboarding, and getting to relax. That is until one of them accidentally breaks his leg and they are all forced to take shelter in an abandoned resort and inn. Well, a place they think is abandoned. Now they are going to find a means of escape before a cold blooded killer takes them out, one by one.

Isolation. The best way for friends to get to know each other better. Or get killed.

Five youthful kids trapped in an isolated cabin with a mysterious killer out to slaughter them? Welcome to slasher 101 folks and it's "Cold Prey" on the docket today. Ironically, I just reviewed a wintery slasher this same basic concept with "Blood Runs Cold" and oddly enough, despite its massively inferior budget and acting - I enjoyed that one much more.

Not that "Cold Prey" is bad by any means, it just happens to be far more mundane and by the numbers. The production values are pretty strong with some effective moments towards the end including a pretty intense finale featuring our lead heroine having to play dead on a sled full of her dead friends, but sharp set work and a solid enough cast can't make up for unoriginality of script. And it is this unoriginality that bogs this film down.

Can't hear her screams cause of loud music? Oh well.

For a slasher, "Cold Prey" misses out on many of the essential elements that even the most cliche slashers need to work. In particular it's two things that make this film feel flat. Firstly, the kills are utterly predictable and rather...well, uneventful. Nothing all that unique despite a setting ripe for weird kills. A couple of vicious beat downs and not a whole lot of tension to jack up the suspense either to make the rather basic kill sequences work. It's not all that scary and the suspense of "who's next" or "how will they survive" needed to be increased heavily to make any of these moments work. "Cold Prey" also misses out on being gratuitous in any manner. Not that I'm criticizing the film for lacking gore and nudity (although I am sure many slasher fans will), but it needed to really embrace something. To really go for the gold in one aspect. It doesn't. The gore is minimal. The atmosphere starts off with potential, but falls to the wayside. Even villain seems about as basic as they get. There wasn't any cool traits to the killer beyond his bundled hulking look to make us remember (outside of the final "twist" that was so obvious it hurt) and our characters, despite some strong moments of character work, feel like they are simply dropped into the film rather than being a "part" of it.

The problem that "Cold Prey" runs into is not about how 'bad' it is, but how unmemorable and mediocre it is. I would much rather have a film be bad and laughably entertaining, then one that tries to be good and just ends up mundane. "Cold Prey" ends up being the latter. Considering they made a sequel and a prequel to this film, there must be a following that enjoyed it. I just found it disappointing.

Written By Matt Reifschneider

Gamera vs. Gyaos (1967)

GAMERA VS. GYOAS

Aka "Gamera vs. Gaos", "Return of the Giant Monsters", "Giant Monster Mid-Air Battle: Gamera vs. Gaos"

This third entry into the “Gamera” series introduces one of our gigantic flying turtle’s most interesting nemesis’s, a Rodan inspired flying bat-like creature that has the ability to shoot destructive sound rays. The problem with this entry, one that always seem to plague “Gamera” films, is that the filmmakers fail to intertwine the human and monster plots in a provocative manner making this entry a step down from the enjoyable second film “Gamers vs. Barugon”.

Gyaos appears from a volcano in the middle of a major highway construction site. While eating a newspaper reporter and kidnapping a kid, Gamera shows up out of the blue to save the day but not before almost getting his arm blasted off by Gyaos’ sound ray. While healing at the bottom of the sea, Gyaos is destroying Tokyo so the Japanese government decides to come-up with an asinine plan to hire a chemist to create synthetic human blood to attract the beast and kill it with electricity (even though Gyaos has demonstrated to like livestock blood just as much but let’s pay a smug scientists thousands of dollars anyway). This of course fails and it’s left to Gamera to save the day.

 

This is truly the first entry to display Gamera as a hero from the start of the film and to be honest I miss the anti-hero nature that he could turn on the human race at any moment. The filmmakers also opt to pander this film more to children, even having a child as a main character but this entry doesn’t pander it nearly as much as sequels to come. As I mentioned the human and monster plots intertwine poorly with our construction site/farmer fued subplot falls into the monster sinario purely by coincidence.

 

THe special effects, though shoddy by today’s standards, are on par with previous Gamera films with Gyaos having a vicious look about him with his wedge-like head (I also dug a scene where Gyaos slices a helicopter full of reporters in half). This interesting villains keeps one interested in this otherwise routine Kaiju giant monster flick but it is ohe of the better entries into the initial run of the Gamera franchise.

Written By Eric Reifschneider

Gamera vs. Barugon (1966)

 GAMERA VS. BARUGON

Aka "War of the Monsters", "Gamera Strikes Again", "The Great Monster Duel: Gamera vs. Barugon"

With the success of “Gamera: The Giant Monster” it was only fitting to follow the “Godzilla” suite by having our mammoth saber-toothed turtle fight another colossal monster for this sequel. Unlike the many sequels to Godzilla, “Gamera vs. Barugon” actually outdoes the original by marginally being a better and more entertaining film due to an overall larger scope to the project and for having our loveable rocket limbed tortoise appearing in color for the first time.

While being blasted to Mars, Gamera’s prison ship gets struck by an asteroid freeing his ass. He then turns back to earth and destroys a water dam in frustration. Jump to a group of men traveling to a remote pacific island in order to look for a legendary highly valuable opal in a cave. After double-crossing his partners, a man unwittingly leaves the so-called opal under a heat lamp where it hatches into Barugon, a giant ice breathing monster that has the ability to shoot rainbows out it’s back (you read that right). Can Japan trust Gamera, once villain of the human race, to defeat this bastard?

The addition of the antagonistic monster Barugon really adds to the whole larger scale of the project even if the name and look are just a knock-off the “Godzilla” monster Baragon from “Frankenstein Conquers the World”. The audience even gets graced with some unintentional laughter with Barugon’s ability to shoot ‘killer rainbows’.. talk about a killer ‘care bar stare’. I have also come to the conclusion that Barugon is a girl as it is drawn by the luster of a 1000 caret diamond and only a woman would be that attracted to a piece of jewlry. It is toyed with this entry that Gamera is becoming a ‘good guy’ but it isn’t full-fledged yet making Gamera more of an antihero, a character that seems it could turn on the human race any chance it gets before, while, or defeating Barugon.

What I appreciate about this sequel is that it is an adult orientated entry in the franchise. As the original run of the series moves on, it panders more to children with even children being the main characters. Not here my friend as it is adults all the way. This more adult approach, the addition of a fun antagonistic monster (even if it does shoot pussy rainbows out it’s back), an antihero Gamera and being filmed in glorious color makes this arguably the best entry into the initial run of the “Gamera” franchise. It wouldn't take long as the series would quickly drop in quality after this enjoyable sequel.

Written By Eric Reifschneider

Back To 1942 (2013)

Director: Feng Xiaogang 
Notable Cast: Zhang Guoli, Chen Daoming, Xu Fan with appearances by Adrien Brody and Tim Robbins

Normally, I am not one for war films. Most of them tend to be great films, but as films - rarely do anything for me beyond pull at heart strings and rehash many of the same ideas. That's what made my experience with "Back To 1942" such a unique viewing. Yes, it's a dramatic film that takes place during World War II as the Japanese invaded China. Yet it wasn't a typical war film. Rarely were there any "bad guys" or "good guys" in the film, there were very few cliches outside of stylistic choices, and the few 'action' set pieces were meant to be horrific and not intense in the usual American style of the thought. "Back To 1942" was a film dedicated to showcasing the struggles and desperation that war creates on civilians - particularly those under duress - and it succeeds in such a grand way that I was emotionally drained as the credits rolled. "Back To 1942" is a cinematic wonder in many ways and it redefines 'the war film' for a new generation of film seekers.

Master Fan (Zhang Guoli) has struggled to keep his village a float when a massive famine strikes the Henan province in 1942. To make matters worse, his home is ransacked by pillagers and burned to the ground so that he, his family, his friends, and his fellow people have to trek across China to reach a far city in hopes of finding food and shelter. Fighting off starvation, bandits, and an impending war Master Fan must fight to keep his family alive even in the harshest circumstances.

There are two words that kept swirling around in my head as "Back To 1942" played out: impactful and heart breaking. Very rarely do we glimpse into this side of a war film and Feng Xiaogang's epic telling of a family's struggle to just eat is eye opening and breath taking in its human drama. It leaves a film that is pretty unique as it rarely portrays any one as a 'good guy' or 'bad guy' as it dabbles in the gray areas of war and how its fought. A government scarce on resources and afraid to lose the war by helping its people. An invading army's tactics to use famine as a way to turn a country's people to their side. Even a priest whose faith is shaken by trek. Granted, there is a lot going on here with perhaps far too much as it wants to dabble in a lot of different aspects of the journey and its effect on people in a lot of supporting plot lines, but the effect is a dazzling and immersive experience guaranteed to shake you to the core.

This attention to the impact is established with strong performances and execution all around. Director Feng Xiaogang piles on a thick a dreary atmosphere that defined with stunning artistic design (although it lacks the glitz that usually gets praise for costume design, the look of the costuming is brilliant and effective here) and some stunningly powerful moments where his actors and actresses can truly strut their strongest performances. It's not the most grand in how it goes about its vision, the bombings by Japanese fighter planes seem to be some of the bigger sequences, but its those moments partnered with a sequence where the priest struggles to stop a child's bleeding stomach with his Bible is where it works best.

To be honest, "Back To 1942" is a film that must be experienced. I can write about all of the great moments and strong performances for days on end, but none of it will ever match the true force that this film accomplishes in viewing. It's unique in its approach to being a 'war film' and the execution is all top notch. It might meander a bit too much from the true heart of the film's worth in the refugee family, but even that seems to impress. Easily one of the most heart breaking films I have ever seen and one that will effect me for years down the road. It comes with only the highest recommendation.

Written By Matt Reifschneider

Trapped (1982)

TRAPPED

Aka "Baker County, USA"

After seeing the rad trailer for “Trapped” on the Code Red DVD for “Rituals”, I had to hunt down this glorious looking early 80’s hicksploitation flick for one reason and one reason alone… Henry Silva. Since the DVD was out-of-print it took a while to hunt down a copy for a reasonable price but since I’m here reviewing the film it’s obvious I did. So is the final results of this seldom seen early 80s backwoods suspense thriller as good as the trailer made it out to be? Well no but films of this nature rarely are… but it is still a nice slice of hicksploitation cinema.

Henry Silva is a psychotic backwoods hick who blows his top when he catches his hot young blonde wife in bed with another man. Him and the other townspeople tar and feather the poor bastard before killing him. The problem is a group of four young adults from the local college witness the murder and soon after telling the corrupt local sheriff, the group find themselves ‘trapped’ and at the mercy of this lunatic hell-bent on covering up the murder.

An impressive array of Canadian genre filmmakers are responsible for this entertaining drive-in picture including director William Fruet of “Death Weekend”, screenwriter John Beaird  of “My Bloody Valentine” and veteran David Cronenberg photographer Mark Irwin. However this triumvirate isn’t what makes this film a must see. That man is Henry Fucking Silva, whom cult fans may recognize from American A-grade films “Sharkey’s Machine” and “Code of Silence” and his numerous Italian genre offerings like “The Italian Connection”, “The Boss” and “Almost Human”. This guy is one of the end-all character actors when it comes to villains and he pumps up the volume on making his character beyond psychotic, even driving his his pickup truck THROUGH the town store to run down one of the witnesses. He more than makes up for our rather bland protagonists, one that even goes as far to tell his professor that he sees no reason to ever to take a human life... which he will obviously learn the hard way.

Overall “Trapped” is a pretty average backwoods thriller in the mold of “Deliverance” with our protagonists making stupid and insane decisions (why oh why the hell would they go back up in the mountains after witnessing the murders?) but what makes it raise a hair above is the insane performance by Henry Silva. His name alone makes this film worth the hunt for owning and the good stunt work and backwoods care chases are sure to entertain as well.

Written By Eric Reifschneider

Gamera: The Giant Monster (1965)

GAMERA: THE GIANT MONSTER

Aka "Gammera the Invincible", "Gamera", "The Giant Monster Gamera"

Giant monsters were racking in the cash at the box office and by the mid-sixties and Toho had a monopoly on the Kaiju genre with their “Godzilla” franchise crushing all the competition. It wouldn’t long before other studios wanted a piece of that big green guy's pie thus knock-offs began to sprout up and non-more than Daiei’s “Gamera” series (many times spelled “Gammera” for American release). Unlike many other Kaiju films, “Gamera” became extremely popular in its native Japan, so much it even sprouted its own franchise and gave Big G some serious competition at the box office.

With the cold war raging a plane goes down in the Arctic Circle causing a nuclear explosion thus releasing the ancient monster known as Gamera from his icy tomb. It isn’t long before he’s stomping his way through Tokyo, eating fire and gasoline and killing innocents along the way. In order to rid the country of this giant menace, the Japanese government devises Plan Z in order to trap Gamera and blast his sorry ass straight to mars… but will the insane plan work?

Since “Gamera: The Giant Monster” is a direct result of the success of “Godzilla” it’s hard not to make comparisons as there are similarities in the story, design and characters. Hell the poster artwork even has Gamera demolishing a train similar to the memorable scene in the original "Godzilla". The similarity doesn’t stop with the “Godzilla” franchise as there is even a light house attack mimicking the sequence in the popular American film “The Beast from 20,000 Fathoms”. However compared to Godzilla, Gamera is quite a bit dorkier. How could he not be when he’s a giant saber toothed, fire breathing turtle compared to a giant mutant fire breathing dinosaur. The silliest aspect of Gamera is that he has to be his ability to shoot fire out his limb openings, spinning around like a top flying through the night sky like a freaking UFO. The sight of this is hilarious beyond belief.

Like the original “Godzilla”, this first “Gamera” film was filmed in black-and-white, an odd choice as by 1965 most films had upgraded to color including the “Godzilla” franchise. However the choice was made as most of the crew involved were novices and the idea of filming such a complicated special effects feature in color intimidated them. The special effects, like the “Godzilla” franchise, utilize a guy in a rubber suit and miniature model sets. The special effects are an obvious step down from the “Godzilla” franchise but are fun in their own right.

Compared to the original “Godzilla”, “Gamera: The Giant Monster” isn’t near as good. Hell it isn’t even as good as most of the Godzilla sequels released in the 60s. However for a ‘guy in a rubber suit' film about a giant monster stomping the shit out of Tokyo, “Gamera” is damn entertaining and is easily the best of the knock-offs that “Godzilla” inspired. Audiences seemed to agree and “Gamera” was a hit at the box office and it wouldn’t be long before sequels would be churned out at an inane pace. The sequels go as follows: “Gamera vs. Barugon”, "Gamera vs. Gyaos", "Gamera vs. Viras", "Gamera vs. Guiron", "Gamera vs. Jiger", "Gamera vs Zigra", "Gamera: The Super Monster", "Gamera: Guardian of the Universe", "Gamera: Attack of the Legion", "Gamera: Revenge of Iris" and "Gamera the Brave".

Written By Eric Reifschneider

Iron Man 3 (2013)

Director: Shane Black
Notable Cast: Robert Downey Jr., Gwyneth Paltrow, Don Cheadle, Guy Pearce, Ben Kingsley

After the record shattering success of "The Avengers" and proof that the ambitious concept of separate films building into something more known as 'Phase One,' it was a tentative time for Marvel and Disney to see if their even more ambitious 'Phase Two' would work. Would audiences even want to see solo tales of our heroes anymore now that we were spoiled with how well Whedon pulled off the ultimate super hero film? The first film of 'Phase Two' proves that not only can they pull off a film where audiences would eat it up, but that it could be a great film too. Marvel at this point turns to the franchise that set all of this success up and delivers a knock out sequel in "Iron Man 3" that rivals as one of the best in the Marvel Cinematic Universe and also one of the best super hero films ever made.

Tony Stark (Downey Jr.) has had to rethink his life since the events in New York. Nothing is certain anymore and despite being at the most stable place in his life with a loving girlfriend Pepper (Paltrow) and a life free of worry, he can't sleep at night and he has become obsessed with building Iron Man suits for every possibility. When a terrorist known as The Mandarin (Kingsley) starts threatening the powers that be in the USA with bombings, the terror comes too close to home...and Stark will have to rethink how he does things to be able to fight an organization powerful and hidden.

It's a left/right combo!

The brilliance behind "Iron Man 3" lies in on one man: Shane Black. Although not quite as daring of a choice as some of Marvel's previous directors, Shane Black knows how to combine action and humor in the best of ways - just see his ridiculously awesome writing resume on IMDB for proof. That, and his directorial debut "Kiss Kiss Bang Bang" featured the Robert Downey Jr. that more than likely solidified him into the role of Tony Stark. Although Shane Black's directorial prowess is strong and he ably constructs action sequences riveting and visceral enough to rival "The Avengers" in scope and execution, his true MVP award comes from co-writing the script.

Rust in peace.

This is where "Iron Man 3" works best. Yeah, it has a ton of great action set pieces including the attack on Stark's Malibu home or the finale of massive explosions and vigorous beat downs on top of an shipping yard, but that's all fluff without the solidity of a good script. "Iron Man 3" delivers such a script. It focuses down on making Stark even more human despite the feats accomplished in three films previous and the darker streaks of character flaws that Black delivers with the right amount of sarcasm and one liners make for an film that not only follows in the "Iron Man" vein, but adds a whole new level of depth to the franchise.

This blend of action, humor, and human heart is ably portrayed with another round of superb casting from Marvel. Downey Jr. was made for this role and the chemistry that he and Paltrow have is infectious here in "Iron Man 3." Not only that, but the casting of Kingsley and Pearce as villains topped the charts for a cult film fan like myself (Pearce has to be one of the most underrated actors of all time). Although I could have done with a bit more of Pearce myself - I almost wanted more banter between him and Stark - the balance in the film is done just right.

He's seen better days...weeks even.

"Iron Man 3" is a comic book movie done right. The humor is quick firing and hilarious, the action is stunningly well paced and effective, the cast is perfectly done, and a smart script make this is must see blockbuster whether or not you enjoy comic book films. It's a near perfect blend of over the top concepts and thoughtful character development. Not only that, but Shane Black pushes some darker and more violent boundaries for the PG-13 rating which is what needed to happen with this franchise. I am a huge "Iron Man 2" fan, but I'll be damned if "Iron Man 3" doesn't inch it out as my favorite of the Marvel solo films.

Written By Matt Reifschneider

Marine 3: Homefront, The (2013)

Director: Scott Wiper
Notable Cast: Mike "The Miz" Mizanin, Neal McDonough, Ashley Bell, Camille Sullivan, Michael Eklund

In a weird attempt to save myself from being thrown into a black hole of crappy action film mediocrity, I decided that my exposure to "The Marine" franchise would be one where I go backwards. I would start with the latest entry, "The Marine 3: Homefront", and work my way to the first just to see if, by some miracle, they actually get better as they go. This plan seems to already be working because "Marine 3" is about as generic and forgettable of an action movie as they get. No, seriously, there is not a whole lot I even remember about the movie let alone anything good to say about it. Even for B-grade action fans this one might be a pass.

Sgt Jake Carter (Mike "The Miz" Mizanin) is returning home to his small town life after being on a covert mission. He is looking for some R&R with his two sisters (Bell, Sullivan) and just getting back to normal life for a bit. Normal life is about to careen off of a cliff when his little sister witnesses a shooting by a professor turned economic terrorist Pope (McDonough) and is taken hostage. Now its up to Carter to get her out when the FBI fumbles the ball.

The same reaction I had when I found out "The Miz" was the lead.

Never have I been a "fan" of WWE or many of its action films to start with. Nor do I even know who "The Miz" is or the weird drama that this film faced by casting him as the lead. So essentially, I was a blank slate going in - no previous experience with any element outside of some of the supporting cast. Now I know why. After watching "The Marine 3", I'm not going to remember any of them the next time they stumble into my reviewing queue.

As an action film, "The Marine 3" generally gives us the run down. Tough guy coming home and out of his element, gun fights in a cool setting (this time an an abandoned ferry - which really makes no sense but whatever), and a couple fist fights just to show off our hero's ability to throw people into breakable props. They even go as far as to make his inability to cope with regular existence as cliche as possible. Oh no, he just got in a bar fight and almost killed a guy! Well at least Nic Cage killed that bastard in "Con Air." So really there is nothing about the focus or the by the numbers directing to inspire dedication to this franchise or even this film.

Nothing says economic terrorist then blowing something up and wielding machine guns.

Yet there is nothing really great about the rest to counter act the generic plot. It tries to act smarter then it is by having our villain (Note: I love McDonough and he's probably the bright moment in this film) be a domestic terrorist making a stand against the rich 'fat cats' who steal the money from those deserving in America. It's not a concept that's sold well enough to work. It also features a very sub standard performance from our lead hero 'The Miz.' Although I am not privy to his WWE career, the guy obviously can't act in the dramatic scenes and lacks the screen presence to sell himself to the audience like many of his cohorts do from pro-wrestling backgrounds. He sort of just sits in the role and didn't inspire me to root for him all that much. He had the action scenes down...but not much more than that.

As a bonus annoyance, "The Marine 3" looks terrible in production values. It looks like it was made straight for TV, like a Spike Original or some shit, and the digital filming makes some of the action sequences blurry and unfocused. There is a sequence with the FBI storming the abandoned ferry that looked like a rejected sequence from Fox's "24." Not good when it comes down to it and often frustrating for a even a B-action fan like myself.

More or less, "The Marine 3" was made for WWE fans looking to see another one of their stars try to make his way into mainstream film success. I sincerely doubt that this film will do it with its by-the-numbers plot and terrible execution, but you never know. For action fans, this might be one to wait for on Netflix Streaming or as a borrow from a friend. Otherwise don't worry about seeking it out or doing the impulse buy at your local Wal-Mart.

Written By Matt Reifschneider

In Their Skin (2013)

Director: Jeremy Regimbal
Notable Cast: Selma Blair, Joshua Close, Rachel Miner, James D'Arcy

Home invasion films are getting to be a dime a dozen these days, whether it be more of a thriller or horror style, and by now it's getting harder to impress me. Had I seen "In Their Skin" even five years ago I would have thought it daring and tense. At this point, the film struck me as sluggish with a small portion of 'trying too hard' to go with it. The home invasion genre is just a little over-saturated with run of the mill features and "In Their Skin" comes off as simply one of the pack.

Mark (Close) and Mary (Blair) are struggling with their marriage. The untimely death of their young daughter has taken its toll on the whole family, so the couple and their young son head up to a family cabin to reconnect. The odd neighbor family seems to be a little too friendly when they arrive. A little too inquisitive. A little too forceful....

It's a bad day when you find yourself like this...

"In Their Skin" does have a couple of things going for it when it comes to strong film making aspects. Firstly, the acting is tremendous. There is a palpable awkward and dread filled atmosphere that the actors bring to the table throughout the film and the chemistry that they have with each other carries "In Their Skin" much further than the script does. Sans the two young boys who struggle compared to the adults, the acting is of remarkably high quality here - both protagonist and antagonist alike.

Secondly, "In Their Skin" has great atmosphere. The initial build, ripe with the awkward marriage issues, sets up a somber tone that only deepens as the film goes. Director Jeremy Regimbal cakes the film with a 70s aura of long static shots and lots of subtle character work (allowing the actors to do their best) and comparisons to the original "Straw Dogs" or the like could be made in this approach. Which, of course, is quite the compliment overall. Particularly from anyone who loves that older style of film making.

"I said I wanted Cooler Ranch Doritos, but Salsa Verde ones."

The problem with "In Their Skin" remains in the foundational script. Too often the film tries too hard to be disturbing. The idea of a murderous family 'stealing' your life is a very cool one, but this film tends to want to lean into some disturbing territory that seemed a bit ill fitting. While the film succeeds in unnerving the audience with creepy hints at a dinner party and a minimalist take on the background of our antagonists, when the film ratchets up the tension in the final act it wobbles. It then loses the slow burn (while still feeling quite slow) and moves towards just being straight up weird. "In Their Skin" lost me when our helpless family has the brother show up. At this point (although there are plenty of great ideas) the film just lacks logic. And then the film takes an odd turn straight towards grindhouse with an oddly transitioned sex scene, that although disturbing, is just...there. Fucked up? Absolutely. Fitting for the style of film? Not really.

So in the end "In Their Skin" is a film of fairly strong execution built on a faulty concept that meanders too much in its idea and yet remains clamped onto too many cliches. The performances are top notch and the atmosphere works, but this film could have been exponentially more impactful. This is a film mostly for those looking into more artistic home invasion films...otherwise its probably a rental at best.

Written By Matt Reifschneider