The Hobbit: The Battle of the Five Armies

Hobbit was good, but not great. Reminds me of The Who in retirement. Just can't live up to its own past. In truth, Peter Jackson started going downhill in the third installment of Lord of the Rings, but no one would admit that. Much in these movies now seem too similar to Disney. Probably the worst scene in this one is when Legolas walks on falling brick in mid air, like he is climbing stairs. You would have to be five years old to think physics could permit that. Like when Bugs Bunny jumps up in the air inside a falling elevator, avoiding the crash. It is no wonder the Tolkien heirs won't let Jackson touch any more work. That's probably a good call.

The Amazing Spider-Man II

Saw Spiderman. Very complicated response. The movie was better than the first installment. It does some things well: web shooters, action scenes and the casting for Peter Parker, which I now like. The development of Parker's alter ego, a duty-driven wise-cracking personality, is done pretty well. I liked the way they did spider-man's jokes and ridicule. But the casting for Gwen Stacy remains abysmal. Aunt May is also not cast properly, and neither is Norman Osborne. And for the second straight movie we don't even see J. Jonah Jameson, Betty Brant, Flash Thompson, Robbie Robertson or even, dare say, Mary Jane. The dialogue is at times very corny and stupid. The movie tries to switch back and forth from action to sentiment like it is turn-taking. At times it does exactly that: you get an affection scene, usually with poor dialogue, followed by some pretty neat fighting or action.

Like the last movie, the villain is interesting because it is not the most obvious. The first movie gave us the Lizard; now we get Electro. But the movie does this really strange thing. It's like they made an Electro movie and Sony decided to change the ending. That's what it feels like. Because, out of nowhere, you get the Green Goblin and the dreaded Gwen Stacy ordeal. It almost looks like they had planned a fight with Electro, with Stacy leaving for London as the real ending. That's in the ballpark of what happened in the comic: Stacy fled to London after her father died tragically (with Spiderman accidentally causing it), shown here and here. That would have left the Stacy-Goblin ordeal for flick 3. But, like I say, it feels like the movie overlords didn't want to risk a slow train. So in comes the Goblin, like a rabbit out of a hat, and Stacy becomes the finale. The film is either looking to cover its flaws at this point or was simply misconceived from the beginning.

I also don't like what they did with Norman Osborn – his role in the story is all screwed up.

Interestingly, one could argue that the Stacy ending has some integrity. I mean, certain things are completely foolish: like only she could reactivate the grid, etc. But ignoring all of that, how the movie has her fate determined is honorable in light of the original comic, which is shown here. But then, the next few scenes have the whole matter rendered quite facile when a feel-good ending has Parker doing what Parker does, as if the whole ordeal was just a ride at a Disney park. I've said this before: the recent Batman trilogy was much better, because it took the subject matter of a lesser comic much more seriously, and therefore made a better movie. The subject matter for all of the spiderman movies has never been taken seriously. It's all just an amusement ride. I was entertained, but my expectations were low. Grade: B+

Godzilla

Saw Godzilla. Very opinionated about this. First, the story was very good. I liked the plot. It was very suspenseful. It kept my attention – I offer my missing nails as proof. But I don't think the casting was great. I have a small complaint with the ending, something having to do with a b.o.m.b. But my biggest complaint – the thing that really hurt the film from being an unquestioned success – was that they messed up Godzilla's look. I mean, it was much better than the Matthew Broderick film, which tried to make the monster a T-Rex. At least this film had Godzilla rightly conceptualized from the neck down – or at least, part of the neck down. The difficulty was the overall size of the neck and, much more importantly, the very strange face. What the creature really became was an extremely large lizard-bear. I don't know why the hell they did that. The thing that makes Godzilla special is not how he would look if science were to actually make a large animal that could be called “Godzilla,” which is the mistake that all of these recent movies make. Rather, it is that he became his own sort of persona – the way Alf did on his show, or the way Peter Parker is for Spiderman. That's what they don't understand: you aren't really getting a “Godzilla” flick if you take the personal look out of the star creature in the name of something more scientific. Godzilla simply cannot be a lizard-bear.

And all I am saying is that the face of the creature needed a little more resemblance to the goofy costume guy (and maybe a neck job). I also cannot understand why they tortured his growl, when his opponents had an absolutely perfect bark in the old tradition of Toho monster flicks. I also don't think the design of the opponent monsters was well conceived. They looked, well, just weird. (Mosquito weird). Also, I was going to criticize the film mercilessly for Godzilla not having his radioactive breath (or whatever that is), until, at last, it came toward the end. And I have to say, when I saw it, I was so moved – it was very well done! Completely knocked away the festering indictment I was going to levy for felony offense. And so, the only thing that kept this otherwise very promising Godzilla flick from being an unquestionable success was, ultimately, the face of the hero. As I have said, Godzilla was never a lizard-bear. Grade: B+/A-

The Monuments Men

Saw The Monuments Men tonight. First movie I have been to in about six months (I think). Screen picture was poor, because I saw it in a dollar theater. Was a little bland and unimaginative. Great cast, though. Story was interesting because it was loosely based on historical events. I liked the movie; it just wasn't great. Grade: B/B+

The Wolf of Wall Street

Disappointing. Felt like a poor imitation of a contemporary cross between The Great Gatsby and Casino. (More like the latter). Crude at times and one dimensional at others. Still, there are moments when the characters and dialogue deliver. Just not enough to cover the painful scenes. Grade: B-.