Pelmeni

http://www.youtube.com/v/qXHQ5Yo7NcU?version=3&autohide=1&autohide=1&feature=share&showinfo=1&attribution_tag=QiHgtiqRF8cehY9IE16lWQ&autoplay=1

In the Theatre with Kevin Murphy - X-Men: First Class - 20th Century Fox

As hard as it is to believe every wise teacher was once a student full of questions, every rivalry has its roots and every story has a beginning. The X-Men showcase their beginnings on the big screen in ways nobody thought possible in incredible visual effects, story telling and a brilliant selection of actors that fit perfectly into the characters they will become. 

X at its best, this is a first class movie. 

In the 1960s Charles Xavier (James MaCavoy) is a young scientist and telepath publishing a thesis on Mutation and an activist for their rights as citizens. At the same time Erik Lensherr (Michael Fassbender) is a Holocaust survivor with a vendetta against Nazi Germany for killing his mother just to see the extent of his mutant powers. When the two meet up they form an alliance and friendship with the intent to train them to control their powers. However both have their own personal reasons for bringing the mutants together as an evil mastermind Shaw (Kevin Bacon) is planning to take over the world and start World War 3 during the Cuban Missile Crisis. The X-Men must now set foot on their first mission to save the world.

Whenever a prequel is planned its script must be looked at over twice as much as a sequel and thrice as much as a remake. To satisfy the many loyal X-men fans the climax of this film had to be what put the butterflies in peoples stomach. Once you hear one of the leading characters say or give away something that has a big connection to the first movie released in the series than the fans will realize “So that's how it all began.” Other hints and elements of the original must also be included from time to time in the movie without giving away too much or distracting the viewers from the present. X-Men First Class doesn't over glamorize the rest of the series with sudden references but rather just hits them on and the hints get bigger the further you go into the story.

While the effects are not as infamous as Transformers 3 or other big epics of the summer, it still showcases their visuals very well without making the movie look overproduced or just using the effects as a way to attract people who just wanna see explosions. There are many scenes in this movie with effects that are very gorgeous and put to good use. Raven is the best example, whenever she is transforming it almost looks like shes gracefully shedding her skin like a snake would. Her make-up is as it was in the past incredible.

The core of this X is the relationship between Charles and Erik or Professor X and Magneto in their golden years.We see both men evolve from best friends with a common goal to rivals with different ideas on where the mutants should stand in the world. Being young adults their characters fight a lot and eventually get into fist fights when their arguments get too personal (or use their superpowers.) Our two leading actors showcase that they both care about each other put Erik's dreams quickly become Charles worst nightmare and so like any best friends it comes down to get source of power that either multiplies or divides their love for each other. Their acting showcases the deadly fact that power and love are a lot like fire, both have incredible strength but can burn more than what you want to burn.

Like Transformers: Dark of the Moon real history plays an important role in this movie. In this case its the Cuban Missile Crisis, an event that almost sparked the third world war which may have put today in ruins. I thought incorporating the X-men into this axis point in Modern history was a good idea but I thought they got a bit too close and starting interfering with what really happened. When filmmakers do this they may upset a few people that lived through this. I think the X-men should have played more of a backseat role in this confrontation however that would mean less action. An argument like this locks the conflict in a stalemate.

So X-Men First Class is a first class movie. It has a good choice of actors, a well rounded story, stellar effects, the history and stock footage of JFK was good but i thought they got a bit close with real history. I will say its better than X-Men Origins; Wolverine (2009), and it is defiantly a good example of a strong prequel that leads into a story we all know.

My Rating: 3.5/4 Shamrocks

In the Theatre with Kevin Murphy - Transformers; Dark of the Moon - Paramount Pictures

Film Critics role out, its time for the review of the third and final member of one the richest and mixed film trilogies of the past four years. Once the world was done with the Spider-man series the Transformers came to the big screen. First one (2007) was pretty good, Revenge of the Fallen (2009) made me bored and almost made me walk out halfway through. The newest and final member so far Dark of the Moon kept me entertained but only enough that I wouldn't walk out of theatre or need a drink from my “magic potion” to keep me further entertained.

Album beats movie any day!

As the war for both Earth and Cybertron continue the Autobots discover the ruins of their old ship the Ark on the dark side of the moon. The discover was first made in the 60s and was the core reason for Apollo 11. With the ancient secrets stowed away in the Ark the Autobots and their enemies the Decepticons have now evolved their war into a very dangerous business transaction for the sake of their home world.

Well Transformers 3, its better than revenge of the fallen but I found it to be second rate compared to the original. The one thing I liked about this movie was that it had incredible visuals that you can really only see in 3D. Unfortunately I didn't see it in 3D, I saw it at the good old Paramount Theatre in Hanover, Ontario. Its was a good old theatre but a movie this gigantic must be seen on a big screen. Back to the visuals; they are epic, they are crisp and the are raw. That is everything you expect to see in a big summer blockbuster, and its clear Michael Bay wasn't cheap when he made this film. All the big important transformers looked good sound good and their action scenes are what made the film almost passable.

However the sad reality is, Transformers 3 didn't pass. There are a number of reasons why it didn't pass my inspection. The first and most obvious is the acting, the lungs of any motion picture. Most of the actors return except for Megan Fox who was fired for comparing director Michael Bay to a certain historical figure who shall remain nameless on this review. In her place we have Victoria Secret model Rosie Huntington-Whiteley. She's very pretty but that's about as far as she goes, her character really has no character, she uses her soft breathy voice all the way through the movie and what does it do; nothing really. Her character tries to act smart and tough but her personality really is just an air head and I think she should stick to modelling. But she's not the first model to start out bad with acting, and she wont be the last.

Shia LaBeouf returns as the lead once again, and he hasn't really changed that much. His character Sam has matured a bit more but he still a sapping little suck up who is trying to hit on a girl that is too good for him when he should be more focused on either trying to get a job without worrying about his relationship and helping Optimus save the Universe. I still think his character is very childish and since LaBeouf isn't doing transformers anymore we cant see his character evolve into a mature adult. I just hope his future roles will have a better sense of maturity. Josh Duhamel did OK and didn't change much so I cant really find anything wrong with his performance.

Like Jurassic Park, the special effect characters are the real stars of these movies. The Autobots and Decepticons that play the most serious roles played their parts well with their deep voices and powerful charisma and attitude. We also have a fun and respectable cameo from Buzz Aldrin who I thought showed a good mix of fiction meets history.

This movie was way longer than it should have been. 2 hours and 10 min is more than enough for a movie like this. They went way over the line with jokes, show stoppers and close ups of the female lead from all angels. We focus a bit too much on Sam and his new girlfriend when a bit more should have been spent with the Transformers. At least half the scenes with Sam and his girlfriend didn't seem necessary and could have saved the movie a good 20 min.

So apart from the effects, Transformers 3 isn't a very satisfying finish to the Transformers' series. Dark of the Moon has the fandom, popularity and science to make a good summer blockbuster but not the sense of character and life to be something Id call a motion picture. I would much rather be at home watching re-runs of Beast Wars than having to see this again. But what I really hope for in the future is that they just start over, come up with new ideas and new characters that can really breath out a good story than will leave more than just the loyal fans satisfied.

My Rating: 1.5/4 Shamrocks

In the Theatre with Kevin Murphy - Kung Fu Panda 2 - Dreamworks Animation

Oh great it's another Dreamworks sequel. Oh wait this is a Dreamworks sequel that I actually liked. I was at first skeptical to see the return of awesomeness knowing past Dreamworks sequels like Shrek the Third (2007) and Madagascar; Escape to Africa (2008), but the return of the lovable Panda Po made me rather pleased with a Dreamworks sequel that's not primarily trying to make money but instead tell a great followup to the 2008 blockbuster Kung Fu Panda. So boys and girls get ready for my review of Kung Fu Panda 2, the return of awesomeness. 

Pure Awesomeness! 

Following his ascension to the legendary Dragon Warrior, Po (Jack Black) is now working with the furious five to defend the Valley of Peace from danger. Po's life is going smoothly until he faces two shocking surprises. An evil peacock named Lord Shen (Gary Oldman) is planning on taking over China by using a weapon that can destroy Kung Fu, and that Po was apparently adopted (that really isn't so surprising). Po along with the Furious Five must journey across China to stop Lord Shen from destroying the noble art of Kung Fu and Po must face the horrors of his cloudy past if he is to attain inner peace and save China.

Kung Fu Panda 2 was a very fun movie. It had an excellent cast of characters, a good story, and animation that is triple that of its predecessor. If you compare Dreamworks to Pixar, Pixar almost always wins with sequels, especially after Toy Story 3 received a Best Picture nomination last year. But Dreamworks has matured a bit now with How to train your Dragon (2010) and now Kung Fu Panda 2. Kung Fu Panda 2 is not at all like the lesser Shrek sequels because its not trying to rip off or reference anything that really has nothing to do with the theme of the film, instead most if not all the references and ideas of this movie have something to do with Chinese culture or jack Blacks lovable sense of humour.

Like I said before the animation for this sequel is thrice what the first Kung Fu Panda was. There are many detailed explosions in this movie most of which come from fireworks. In the past an explosion or an instant in animation that has a lot of detail was very hard to pull off but Dreamworks is able to take every advantage they can to show a film that has no reason to be cheap or lazy with their animation. Its not just the 3D that's good in this movie but it also implies good hand drawn animation. A prime example is shown through the opening sequence with Chinese puppetry, which in itself has good detail and beauty.

Most of the cast is back and in my humble opinion Jack Black has more emotion as Po than he had before. He's faced with an even bigger challenge than becoming a Kung Fu Master, attaining inner peace when he is under the great pressure of his origins. We mostly know Jack Black as the funny guy but he does have a sensitive and serious side seen before but is still able to stay lovable and childlike in whatever situation he is in if you don't count King Kong (2005).

We also see that Shifu (Dustin Hoffman) and the Furious Five, especially Tigress (Angelina Jolie) have learned to be more at peace with themselves, show more emotion or have learned to lighten up a bit more compered to the last film. Tigress especially is shown to be more lighthearted and caring towards Po. This is shown several times throughout the film when she has a heart to heart talk with Po and later comforts and protects him from facing Lord Shen. Hoffman and the rest of the furious five play their roles just as well as they did before but add either more tranquility to their performance or more humour which doesn't harm the movie at all.

Our villain Lord Shen is played by Gary Oldman and I thought he made an excellent cold villain with a burning hatred deep in his feathered heart. He was animated far beyond what I expected Dreamworks or even Pixar to accomplish in. My only complaint about Kung Fu Panda 2 is that I thought they could have spent a bit more time with Dustin Hoffmans character to see how well he really is recovering from his problems in the last film.

So Kung Fu Panda 2 is defiantly a worth while sequel. It's a strong follow up to the original with the same lovable characters from the original and some fresh new characters that can be praised just as much. Animations good, story is good and overall its the best sequel Dreamworks has ever made and I hope that they keep making their sequels like this because that could very well make them equal to that of Pixar or more in the future.

My Rating: 3.5/4 Shamrocks.  

In the Theatre with Kevin Murphy - Pirates of the Caribbean: On Stranger Tides - Walt Disney Pictures

Ladies and Gentlemen, this is the day you will always remember as the day Kevin Murphy reviewed the reboot/fourquel/spin-off Pirates of the Caribbean; On Stranger Tides. Jack Sparrow is back, and this time theirs a lot more Jack than their was before. Will and Liz are not around anymore and now Jacks got a whole new crew as he sets of on his weirdest, drunkest and most slapstick voyage yet. But that doesn't mean at all that I liked it. 

Jack's back and badder than ever. 

After stealing the map that leads to the fountain of youth Jack Sparrow (Johnny Depp), is hired by King George II (Richard Griffiths) to act as a guide for his “old friend” Barbossa (Geoffrey Rush) to find the fountain before the rivalling Spanish Empire find it. Along the way Jack runs into and teams up with on of his ex-lovers Angelica, who is the daughter of the most ruthless pirate in history Blackbeard. Jack gets ready for his most action packed adventure yet, as he sets sail for waters unknown.

In 2007, It was announced that the series had come to and end, but later on we learned that Jack was back. So Jack is back, but not many others are back, The only two characters that really remain from the previous trilogy are Mr. Gibbs and Barbossa who are still played wonderfully by Kevin McNally and Geoffrey Rush. Orlando Bloom and Keira Knightly are not around anymore and frankly I'm glad because we've seen all we've need from those two love birds. Yet I'm pretty sad that we are left without the wonderful and lovable comic relief that is Pintel and Ragetti.

On the other hand we have some new faces and new challenges for our anti-hero, Jack. The new female lead is played by Penelope Cruz, and she is a much more feisty and more fiery leading female with a real sense of fun, action and adventure that was just all talk for the lovely but sometimes boring Ms. Swan. We also have a new and typical pure-hearted hero Philip Swift (sounds like a Prince Charming name to me) who is a man of god and enslaved to Blackbeard. He's a tad boring and what I really didn't like about him was that it seemed like he was too much of a replacement for Will Turner. They could have made him a bit more original if the character didn't have as a large a sense of pride as Will did.

We also have a new villain and this one is apparently even more blood thirsty, power hungry and ruthless than old Davy Jones was. The new bad guy is one that many people have read about centuries before the Pirates of the Caribbean was built at Disneyland; Blackbeard the pirate. What makes this guy so evil is that he is in fact mortal. He has not achieved eternal life like other villains in the series but instead is on a hunt for it and will go to incredible lengths to avoid the horrors of death. Ian McShane plays his part wonderfully as a man who literally has no compassion for any living thing but himself and his trophy ship. I haven't seen a Disney villain this obsessed or hell bent as the Horned King from the Black Cauldron (1985). Ian McShane I salute you as a superb antagonist.

Apart from acting, the choreography for the movie was really good. Once again Johnny Depp proves to great with a sword and getting from one sticky situation to another without it looking old or tasteless. He always presents himself with a new challenge. New members of the cast also catch on pretty well to the demands of the series with the stunts and safety of doing a movie like this. Penelope Cruz for one proved to be a highly skilled with all her weapons, especially against old Jack.

So I would say that this Pirates is OK, it can be on par with the first one, and its plot isn't as confusing as Dead Man's Chest or At Worlds End. Blackbeard's violent nature means I wont recommend this movie for young children but for most teens age 14 and over id say its acceptable and non-pirates fans may be bored by it. Some of the old characters I liked are not round anymore and have been replaced with rather lacklustre or suck – up actors, but some of the new characters i thought stole the show. But Its still did like it. Its good but its no perfect. So this is the day you will always remember as the day Kevin Murphy gave an OK review to Pirates of the Caribbean; On Stranger Tides.

My Rating: 2.5/4 Shamrocks.

In the Theatre with Kevin Murphy - Rio - Twentieth Century Fox/Blue Sky Studios

From the creators of Ice Age comes not another Ice Age sequel, or short film about that squirrel that I can't stand, but something new, fresh and original that I loved and I think kids and adults will enjoy as well. “Rio” is the newest project from Blue Sky Studios, and I gotta say I was not disappointed like I was walking out of the past two Ice Age films.

A Hit!

A macaw named Blu (Jesse Eisenberg) that has lived most of his life in Minnesota learns from an Ornithologist that he is the last male of his kind and a female has been found living in Rio De Janeiro. Blu's owner Linda reluctantly agrees to take him to Brazil so he can mate with the female named Jewel. Jewel does not take much of a liking to Blu and has an evan lower liking towards humans since they are primarily responsible for causing their species endangerment. Things get worse for the two when they are kidnapped by poachers and chained together. Luckily the two birds manage to escape and with the help of Birds from around the city the two starts to understand how each other feels.

Rio, much like the city its named after was a very fun and exciting film. It had great animation, good story telling and a good selection of actors. As stated before at the beginning of this review this movie was made by Blue Sky Studios who also produced the Ice Age trilogy, Robots (2004), and Horton hears a who (2008). The first Ice Age was good because it was original but afterwards Blue Sky studios looked like it was running out of original ideas and the animation was looking a bit cheap. Rio I thought was a good reboot to their company and actually saved it with its good animation, and story.

The main character Blu voiced by Jesse Eisenberg, who is now most notable for his role as Mark Zuckerberg in the social network (2010). Comparing the macaw he voices to the father of Facebook he played the two shares the fact that they are nerds who are trying their absolute hardest to do what they want to do with their life. Blu is obviously a nerd who has the worst social skills with his own species. His female counterpart is voiced by Anne Hathaway who i hourly enjoyed because she has a really fiery personality and her negative attitude towards humans given Blu all the more reason to win her over since he greatly trusts humans. Their opposite personalities make for great chemistry.

The other characters I thought were good but to me I thought it was the leads that made the film enjoyable. George Lopez who voices a bit of a knock off of Too Can Sam and Zazu was enjoyable but near the end of the movie I got tired of him because he was getting boring much like all George Lopez characters. Will.I.AM and Jamie Foxx are also it the movie, playing rapping birds who are just so annoying and unnecessary, this is a movie about Brazil, not about rapping in the streets of LA. But I do have to compliment on the fact that the movie has a great deal of diversity in its actors.

Birds have been animated before in film but I found Rio to showcase birds relatively well through flight. When the birds fly they fly just like they would in real life, but this is mostly when their flying, otherwise when they are on the ground they act more cartoonish. But this is Blue Sky Studios and you do expect cartoons from the creators of Ice Age.

Finally this movie really does capture Brazil. From its rainforests to the streets of Rio for Carnival. The source of this is because the director is from Brazil and he gives this movie a sense of home flavour from his point of view. If this film were directed by a non-brazilian it would seem like its from a tourist point of view. The film evan explores into the darker areas of the country with the slum neighbourhoods and the desperation of an anti-hero.

Rio, wouldn't be my #1 favourite movie I've seen but I found it to be colourful, musical, fun and entertaining. Kids will love it, adults will like it, Brazilians will certainly like much more ethan the Simpsons episode “Blame it on Lisa.” Go see Rio and it will be a most enjoyable evening.

My Rating 3/4 Shamrocks.

In the Theatre with Kevin Murphy - Arthur - Warner Bros.

What does the word remake mean? It means a piece of work that was made a long time ago has been upgraded with different materials to suit todays standards. The tale of Arthur was the story of a billionaire playboy from the 1980s with a good sense of humour but a bad sense of morals. Dudley Moore one of the United Kingdoms funniest comedians portrayed this lovable idiot Arthur in 1981, which he received an oscar nomination for the roll. 30 years have passed and Dudley Moore's classic character has been reincarnated into a little accident tI like to call Russell Brand.

Arthur is a billionaire play boy who has no sense of self discipline or common intelligence and can't do anything without the help of his nanny and surrogate mother figure (Helen Mirren). When his real mother blackmails him into the engagement to a wealthy but bitter eyries (Jennifer Garner) Arthur decides to prove himself as a common human being by doing what everyone else is supposed to do once they turn 13 (he's 30) get a job. As time goes by Arthur meets and falls for a local leaving Arthur with the life that was handed to him on a golden platter and a life he can carve out on his own.

Booze and Babies are a dangerous combination. Wait let me re-phrase that Booze and thirty year olds who wont wake up and feel the coffee. There are three types of movies I hate; 1) Remakes that are second or third rate compared to the original, 2) Pointless sequels that never needed to be made. 3) Movies that make references to better movies in an attempt to be either stupid or make a quick buck (Friedburg and Seltzer Im watching you). The new Arthur is #1, It was immature childish, bold and boring, and It was one of the few times I actually wanted to walk out halfway through a movie, before I thought of how my rival Jesse would think of me if I took the cowards way out and walk out halfway through, so i stayed and much to my dismay HATED this movie.

I feel as though I am wasting my time writing a review about a movie I hated so I will make this one quick. Russell Brand was awful in this movie; everything I ever loved about Dudley Moore has been choked out as leftovers for this piece of mouldy uneatable bread. Jennifer Garner on the other hand I found to be a queen of all dominatrixes and although she did scare me a bit like any good villain should do I still thought she bored me to death because she never gives up and doesn't come up with any new dastardly plans.

The only thing I really liked about this movie was the great Helen Mirren. She has a very dry sense of humour that manages to keep this movie from hitting a complete rock bottom. If it wasn't for her I would have died watching this movie do to its sheer boredom.

If you wanna see this cheap unnecessary remake thats your call to make, but please watch the original first, it will be much more enjoyable.

My Rating: 1/4 Shamrocks.