World War Z

Dustin: 3.5 of 5 stars Nick: 3.5 of 5 stars Average: 3.5 of 5 stars (Live canary)

Dustin: World War Z is a globe-trotting, PG-13 zombie flick starring Brad Pitt--or, as he’s affectionately known to his Japanese fans, Burapi--as an infallible former UN employee charged with the daunting task of locating Patient Zero in a zombie apocalypse in hope of finding the secret to stopping the spread.

Nick: So, what did you think of WWZ?

Dustin: I thought it was about as good as a zombie blockbuster with mass-appeal could get. What it had in PG-13 tameness (well, tame for the genre), it made up for with originality.

Nick: Original in the fact that massive amounts of fake blood were not needed on set?

Dustin: It did a good job letting some things be left to the imagination, yes. But I thought the zombies were original too. They moved with superhuman speed and strength, which made them more formidable than the usual, slow-moving, brain-dead zombies of the George Romero films. While there’s something inherently creepy about a walking corpse, it doesn't make for a very daunting threat.

Nick: Not a lone zombie, but as a horde you don’t have much of a chance to survive. Unless you’re as cute as Brad Pitt.

Dustin: (For an in-depth discussion on why a zombie apocalypse would quickly fail, read this truly inspired Cracked article: "7 Scientific Reasons a Zombie Outbreak Would Fail (Quickly).")

Burapi’s character was a little too perfect in this film. Not only is he ruggedly handsome, he’s right about everything. He doesn't even have incorrect first hunches, like Robert Langdon in The Da Vinci Code. He even knows things he should have no reason for knowing, like the rough background of a Mossad officer and the exact direction to a WHO facility after surviving a plane crash. I liked him better in his other globe-trotting film, Babel, where he played an obnoxious “ugly American.” I somehow found that character more sympathetic.

Nick: The film really doesn't build up sympathy for any of its characters. The only one I felt anything for was the female Israeli soldier. The movie kind of plays like a Bond film, where our hero is always jetting off to another exotic location in order to find the MacGuffin, which will lead to him saving the world.

Dustin: That’s a good comparison, which didn't occur to me.

I think we both had problems at times with instances that were a little too convenient for the story to move forward. I especially heard you laughing when after the plane crashed in some Eastern European country, he is about five minutes' walking distance from the WHO facility and is able to make a beeline to it.

Nick: Yes! That plane crash is in the trailer, so nothing is being given away, but he is on one of his Bond missions to go to the WHO facility, the plane crashes and two minutes after we see he survived the plane crash, while extremely wounded (though not his gorgeous face), he somehow traverses enough landscape to make it to WHO only for another mission to be awaiting him.

Dustin: One moment in the plane crash scene reminded me of the Bollywood zombie comedy from earlier this year, Go Goa Gone. The movie is an offbeat send-up of Hollywood action films, with a lot of cheesy one-liners. In one scene, a zombie is trapped in the seat belt of a car, and the main badass says, “Seat belts DO save lives... Our lives!” After the plane crash in WWZ, a zombie is stuck in her seat belt, and I was waiting for the same line. I'd like to think Go Goa Gone and WWZ are set in the same zombie apocalypse, with the Indian film being the prelude to the Burapi film.

Nick: An upside of the film is surely the hints of humor within scenes. They are not necessarily played for laughs, but there are small bits of humor in almost every scene, something I thought Man of Steel lacked. For example, after Brad Pitt shot a man who was robbing his wife in a grocery store, a cop runs in and Pitt puts his hands up, but the officer runs right past him and starts looting. Pitt doesn't laugh, though we are supposed to, and I think it is also supposed to show you how incredibly dire their situation has become.

Dustin: That scene was set in Newark, NJ. The establishing shot shows the city in chaos, and the masses are looting the grocery store. I thought there could have been a throwaway line like, “Just a normal day in New Jersey. Imagine how bad things will get once they realize there’s a zombie apocalypse going on.”

There was another funny part where art imitated life. They escape from a zombie-infested apartment building with the little brown kid from one of the apartments in tow. (The family was speaking Spanish, but I don't want to assume they were Mexican. That would be racist.) I thought, Brad Pitt can’t go anywhere without picking up another random child.

Nick: Since we started this review site we have complained a lot about the shaky cam. But here it works. The technique is used throughout the film, but when in a zombie uprising, your focus would not be still as you’re constantly running from a corpse or looking out for another.

Dustin: I agree it works when there’s an artistic reason for it. I don’t like it when they are just making a half-assed attempt to look more like a documentary. Here, what you don’t see is what’s scary, so it works.

I was a little apprehensive when I saw this was directed by Marc Forster. He’s a very interesting director visually, but I think his talent really lies in drama, and I didn't think he had much aptitude for action after seeing Quantum of Solace, where you couldn't tell which car Bond was driving, or which of the figures falling through the crummy CGIs was 007. I don’t have much complaints on this film in that regard.

Nick: WWZ had many great scenes that were escalated by whatever would make that situation more difficult for the character. Wherever Brad Pitt was the zombies went. The UN should have thrown Brad Pitt into an abyss and let the zombies follow! End of crisis.

Dustin: Would you recommend WWZ?

Nick: I would. The movie provides thrills and chills, and many great actors deliver wonderful performances in small roles. Marc Forster does a good job with the action directing, always letting the audience see enough to understand what is happening within the scene. How about you, sir?

Dustin: I think the movie has broad appeal, and I would recommend it to general audiences, not just fans of the zombie genre. I think even snobbish connoisseurs of zombie films will also like what this movie did with the genre.

Nick: As well as connoisseurs of Brad Pitt’s gorgeous, indestructible face.

Man of Steel

Dustin: 4 of 5 stars Nick: 2 of 5 stars Average: 3 of 5 stars (Woozy canary)

Dustin: Superman is the latest action hero to get a Hollywood gritty reboot. Man of Steel stars British actor Henry Cavill defending “truth, justice and the American way.”

What did you think of Man o’ Steel, Nick?

Nick: I felt that this movie suffered the most through its nonlinear method of storytelling. There were constant jumps through time from when Clark was young to the present.

Dustin: I didn't think the nonlinear story detracted from the movie. The flashbacks seemed to be in the right places and dramatically matched the present-day storyline. Dramatically, I thought it was the best Superman movie to date.

Nick: “That’s heresy!” 

Dustin: Have you seen the 1978 Superman recently? Gene Hackman's Lex Luthor is an underwhelming villain whose two henchmen are a bimbo and a bumbling idiot. Superman can fly around the world really fast to turn back time, which subtracts an element of suspense knowing anything bad can be undone. And at the end (SPOILER!) he just flies Lex Luthor and his henchman, Otis, to jail. I’m sure they will be able to walk free once word gets out they weren't legally charged with a crime.

Nick: Yes, it’s very silly, but it was a big deal in its day. First time a man could fly! But I believe that Superman Returns is a better film mostly because Clark Kent as the bumbling reporter is just as important as his Kryptonian side of Kal-El. This Clark Kent is just Kal-El before he is Superman, and it’s not very endearing.

Dustin: The ‘78 film had a lot of iconic movie imagery. There is General Zod and his gang getting expelled from Krypton in a 2D square, the fortress of solitude, Superman’s external undies. Those are images that will stick with you your whole life. This movie suffers compared to that film in that regard.

Nick: You combined the first two films. Zod was in Superman II, son! Which is my favorite.

Dustin: But you see him get expelled from Krypton in the first one.

Nick: Oh, that’s funny. That’s what I wanted to happen in Man of Steel. I wanted the writers to set him up as a future bad guy.

Dustin: I agree 100 percent. I thought this was a little too overblown for the first film in a series or trilogy. As a stand-alone film it was fine, but the sequel will need to be bigger and better, and I don’t think they could get bigger without being silly.

If this was a trilogy, I would have liked to see General Zod expelled from Krypton in the first film, then have a young Superman who wasn't quite sure of his limitations go up against a minor villain. In the second film, a full-fledged Superman could fight Lex Luthor, who forces ethical dilemmas on our hero that he can’t solve by strength alone. Then wrap up the trilogy with General Zod. I have a hard time picturing Clark Kent going to work at the Daily Planet after everything that happened in this film.

Nick: I disagree. I think as a standalone film it suffers, but I think it will become better after the next films in the series are released. DC developed this film as the starter of its Justice League series.

Dustin: What did you think of this movie visually?

Nick: The one brilliant thing about this movie was its action directing. I loved the fight scenes, especially when there wasn't advertising in the background. But even though I loved the fight scenes they didn't hold true to the values of Superman. He used to be all about giving his body so as to not destroy things like buildings in order for less humans to become casualties. In this film he takes down skyscrapers and blows up tankers without a single thought.

Dustin: I agree that wasn't very Christ-like of a hero who was 33 years old and juxtaposed next to images of Christ.

I thought the film looked great, especially the scenes on Krypton. It was developed well as an alien world. Some of the imagery was a little too overblown. Sometimes I couldn't tell where I was supposed to look. I blame that on George Lucas/Star Wars prequels influence. I also didn't like the shaky cam. There’s a dramatic scene between Kevin Costner and young Clark Kent that looks like the cameraman is having a seizure. Hold the camera still and let the acting carry the scene! But then Lois Lane is watching video she shot of Clark Kent sneaking into the Fortress of Solitude on her Nikon camera and the image is perfectly still. If any shot should have been shaky, it should have been that.

Nick: It pleases me that you noticed how much they were comparing Superman to Christ. It started to irk me after awhile. I am shocked though that you didn't mention the lens flares. Everyone seemed to be annoyed by them in Star Trek Into Darkness, where I thought they were used well, but in Man of Steel I guess it’s OK to have lens flares in practically every shot.

Dustin: I guess I didn't notice the lens flares because my eyes were drawn to the product placements. Sears, U-Haul, Nikon, Nokia, LexCorp, Chevrolet, Budweiser, all paid for product placement in this film. About 25 minutes took place in an IHOP. Even through the gloom and explosions, you can still make out the 7-Eleven sign.

Nick: Before I saw this film I read an article about how Man of Steel recouped three-fourths of its budget just through advertising. So even if the film bombed it still would have made its money back just by how much it whored itself out. Christ-like indeed!

THE FOLLOWING SECTION CONTAINS SPOILERS

Nick: The film was very incompetent in many ways, especially in the way the story randomly carried itself. For example, Superman gave himself up to Zod and then Faora-Ul demanded Lois come on the ship as well, but they do absolutely nothing with her. She was brought on the ship purely so the story could carry on. Superman handed her the device that for some reason could be put into another device that just happened to be in the room they threw Lois into unguarded so that Jor-El’s ghost would then corrupt their system. It’s ridiculous.

Dustin: Exactly. How did Superman, who’d never been to Krypton and presumably didn't understand its technology, know that there would be a drive for his “Hope” USB in General Zod’s ship? And what if Jor-El had a PC while General Zod had a Mac? Like you said, they just needed to advance to the next plot point.

Nick: None of the humans were developed well until the last 10 minutes of the film, where there was finely some light-heartedness. Even Jonathan Clark’s (Kevin Costner) eventual death was ineffective. He died by tornado in Kansas (of course) to save their dog trapped in a car so that Clark wouldn't have to show his powers to other onlookers by running mildly faster than most people could and by using his strength to keep on the ground longer than most near a tornado. Really, Jonathan? Really?

Dustin: And everyone in Kansas knows that tornadoes can just come out of nowhere like that. And there are usually tons of people driving on them country highways to become potential onlookers.

END OF SPOILERS

Nick: I was not convinced of Superman’s trust and eventually love of Lois Lane. He first meets her after he catches her spying on him and he tells her, “I can do things other people can’t.” What a line! Then she writes an article about him and tells the whole world. Then she tracks him down to his Dad’s grave. Why does he trust her so much? Because the script tells him too?

Dustin: Because Amy Adams is cute, that’s why.

Nick: Good reasoning! I’m sold.

Dustin: I don’t think the things we mentioned detracted too much from what was an enjoyable summer blockbuster. They just prevented a good film from being a great one. Would you recommend it?

Nick: No. The film needed a co-director to slow the film down at some points. I think if Bryan Singer and Zach Snyder directed the next one together it could be a masterpiece. Singer understands the soul, and Snyder showed the impact.

The Purge EXTRAS + Man of Steel PREVIEW

Nick: I’m excited for This Is the End.

Dustin: I am cautiously optimistic. I laughed in the trailer, but I’m afraid it’ll be too improvised, too self-indulgent, and too loosely plotted.

Nick: I thought you were about to say “too loosely based on a true story”!

Dustin: Like Pain & Gain?

I have high hopes for Man of Steel.

Nick: Can’t wait. I already have my plans to go see it. I pray it’s the first review in which I can say many flattering things.

Dustin: A part of me wants the movie to flop in a big way. I have $2000 in Vegas on Henry Cavill succeeding Daniel Craig as James Bond, and that will never happen if audiences associate him too strongly with Superman. If the movie flops, five to 10 years later he can play 007, and to most people he’ll simply be that guy who played Superman in that one movie no one cared about. And the preppy kid from The Purge can play the villain. But I equally want to see a good Superman movie, so...

Nick: You’re as mean-spirited as The Purge. I kind of want to kill you right now.

Dustin: Luckily murder is still illegal 365 for the next nine years, my friend.

Nick: I’ll bide my time...

The Purge

Dustin: 1.5/5 stars Nick: 1.5/5 stars Average: 1.5/5 stars (Canary on life support)

Dustin: For today’s review I caught up with Nick Keith at his villa in Tuscany.

Love the view, Nick.

Nick: Grazie! Come sta?

Dustin: The Chianti is excellent—2006 was a good year.

Nick: Yes, it was a beautiful time. Italy won the World Cup, everyone was happy, and everything benefited.

Dustin: I hope your villa is secure. I would hate for a mindless mob from the outside to try to break in here and slaughter whoever you’re protecting along with you and your family like in that movie, Hotel Rwanda.

By the way, what did you think of The Purge?

Nick: While a fun B-movie premise, The Purge never attempted anything that would be entertaining on any level.

Dustin: I liked the premise too, and the movie really had me going for the first 25 minutes or so. But yeah, it was disappointing after that.

Nick: I thought the movie would have excelled if it went outside of the house. Why just explore one house, in one neighborhood, rather than an entire country where the Purge is happening?

Dustin: I prefer a narrow focus, but I agree the movie needed to set up the world a little better, which was the same complaint we had last week with After Earf. We’re just told everyone except some pussies in academia think the Purge is good for society, and the characters, except the boy, never really question that, not even when their lives are in danger. The movie needed to set up the George Orwellian society better.

Nick: When I say country, I mean show me some scenes of families in their living rooms, huddled together, enjoying some popcorn, surrounded by weapons, watching the Purge on their TVs. We do get a scene that shows the Purge is televised for everyone at home.

Dustin: I think that is part of my overall complaint about this movie—that it’s simply lazy. Especially in character development.

The action really starts when the stupid boy lets a stranger who is the target of the Purge into their house for no good reason. The family plans to turn him over to the mob to protect themselves. We’re never given a reason to sympathize with the stranger up to this point. Or ever, really. He is prepared to cut down the mother with a machete and he later holds a gun to the sister’s head in order to save himself. At no point would I have reconsidered turning him over. After he’s all tied up, he says, “Turn me over. Save your family.” Of course the family can’t turn him over after he’s said that. It was out of character for the stranger. I think the stranger was either trying to manipulate the family into protecting him, which would be in character, or the screenwriter was lazy and just needed a reason for the mob to invade the house.

Nick: What a rant! Now when you say stupid, I assume you mean naïve. I also feel that you are supposed to feel for the kids and the stranger solely based on the fact that they had nothing to do with the induction of the Purge, while the parents are well-off and probably aligned themselves with the faction pushing for the Purge.

Dustin: The family supports the Purge. The father became wealthy selling security equipment, and he says at one point the Purge is a good thing. He tells the boy about how bad society was before the Purge. I never got the impression the parents challenged that belief in the movie. The action was too fast to slow down and spend time on pointless things like character development.

Nick: The whole family doesn't support the Purge. The dad does, and the mother goes along with it, but she only says the Purge is good for society too calm her children. The kids never act as if they support this system of violence.

Dustin: I felt like this movie tried to add some social commentary, but in a half-hearted way that fell flat. Did you get that impression?

Nick: It was definitely created with the idea of attacking society, but, like you said, nothing really follows through. Lazy writing.

Dustin: I really liked the setup, and I think this could have been an excellent movie in the right hands. What with a brainwashed society cleansing itself of a certain class of people, while a family hid an innocent victim, there was an obvious parallel with the Holocaust that was never explored. The movie could have also brought up ethical questions about whether it’s right to put your family in obvious danger to protect only one person, and whether legalizing violence for one night is right if it leads to a safe society. The movie only barely touched on the latter question. The material needed someone like Stanley Kubrick or the Coen brothers.

THE FOLLOWING SECTION CONTAINS SPOILERS—NOT THAT IT MATTERS

Nick: Ethan Hawke (the dad) tried to kick the stranger out in order to protect his family, and the family supported him until they saw how psychotic he was becoming. Do you not remember Ethan Hawke trying to get the stranger out of his house?

Dustin: I remembered that scene. I thought he was acting logically considering the stranger had just held a gun to his daughter's head. I was actually wondering why the family was showing any sympathy to the stranger right then. I thought that was lazy writing. But the writer needed a reason for the stranger to save the family at the end, which is what I predicted from that moment.

Nick: Well the stranger was only trying to protect himself from people who were freaking out that he was in their house. He also did not go after the family. The parents kept coming after him to try to get him out of the house. I also feel the wife’s U-turn was justified as she was just sticking a letter opener into an open wound on the stranger’s stomach while being yelled at by her husband. Then the husband saw the way his whole family looked at him and changed his mind.

END OF SPOILERS

Nick: I do agree though there is lazy writing. The twist, the bad guys, and the world are so thin.

Dustin: Did you think this needed to play like a horror film? It really wasn't a horror film. No ghosts, no ghouls, no “paranormal activity.” But it had a creepy atmosphere, cut in a way that made the mob look supernatural. There were moments that made you jump for no reason. Like when the girl leaned over in front of the boy’s roving camera thingy and there was a loud Dun! that made you jump. I was like “Whoa! Oh, it was only the girl. Phew. ...wait, what? Fuck this movie.”

Nick: I thought it played itself as a thriller with some horror elements thrown in. You don’t need a ghost to make a horror film, just an antagonist that you don’t quite understand and is unrelenting, such as the Purge in general or the creepy, yuppie kids. I enjoyed the casting of the main yuppie. He looked just like his mask with the creepy smile.

Dustin: I liked him too. Totally a future Bond villain.

Nick: I thought his character wasn't given much to do besides being intimidating for 10 minutes.

I thought this film would have benefited if there were better twists with less jerking of the camera and quick editing. I would've liked the twists to be more B-moviesque. Like, way after the boyfriend tried to kill the dad you would learn that the daughter coaxed him into doing that. Then when the neighbors come you find out that the daughter was having a seedy relationship with one of the husbands. Then the adulterous husband kills his wife and he and the daughter make out in front of her freaked-out family. Then her little brother kills her, as she is taunting the dying wife, and the stranger kills the husband. You like? I think it sounds way more fun.

Dustin: You could write your own Purge fan fiction. It’s definitely more believable than what actually happened, and would give actual motives for the characters’ actions. The movie expects us to believe society is less than 10 years from devolving into a Utopian dystopia, and that our neighbors are petty enough to kill us because we have a slightly bigger house. It's a very ugly and mean-spirited movie in that sense.

The movie was only an hour and 20 minutes. It could have built up the plot in a smarter way and had the home invasion just be the final act of a two-hour movie.

Nick: The Purge suffered from having a B-movie premise while trying to be a heart-wrenching thriller, which it never came close to accomplishing.

After Earth

Dustin: 2.5/5 stars Nick: 2/5 stars Average: 2.25/5 stars (Canary on life support)

Nick: After Earth is a science fiction/drama that crash lands a father and son with a strained relationship onto a deadly, uninhabited world once known as Earth.

Dustin: Welcome to Earf!

In this movie, Jaden Smith wants to be exactly like his father, while Will Smith pulls all the strings.

Nick: There’s a lot to like here. Many shots are wonderfully captured, and the idea of a son needing to conquer fear, in general, in order to save his emotionally constipated father is an exciting concept.

Dustin: I thought the movie was visually fantastic. M. Night Shamalamadingdong is a very talented director technically, even if he is an egotistical, incompetent storyteller. The worlds looked great. You could hardly tell Nova Prime, humanity’s new home, was CGI. There were also some nice set pieces, such as when Kitai (Jaden Smith), leapt off a high waterfall.

Nick: While I agree that the worlds were both fantastically done, I thought the beasts that inhabited the earth and the Ursa (from Nova Prime) were poorly brought to life.

Dustin: I thought the Ursa were well done, but I could have used more. I didn't like the beasts on earth either. The baboons were clearly CGI. The movie takes places 1000 years or so in the future, but the animals on earth seem to have evolved much further than 1000 years would have taken them, which made it hard for me to suspend disbelief.

Nick: Well if you knew Latin, then you would think that the Ursa was CGI because it means “bear.” So that definitely evolved quite a bit.

Dustin: I don’t know Latin. I have enough trouble keeping up with living languages, so...

Nick: There were certainly too many scenes of Kitai against a new threat from earth while I think we both would have preferred that threat being an ever increasing one from the dreaded Ursa who can sense fear.

Dustin: Exactly. The movie would have been more suspenseful if the Ursa had been tracking him the entire time, instead of being more like the boss at the end of a video game level.

Nick: So someone thought it was a good idea to have the actors over enunciate their words and to purse their lips whenever they felt like it.

Dustin: That was the first thing I noticed. It was clearly an artistic decision to establish something of the culture in the future. But it certainly made the performances less naturalistic, which was the main drawback of this movie.

Nick: Yes, while it might make sense that this is how we may talk in the future, it immediately takes me, at least, out of the film.

One thing I did appreciate was how the flashback scenes were utilized, although sometimes they didn't add anything to the story.

Dustin: I thought the flashbacks were overused too. Less would have been more. Or the same, at least.

One thing I couldn't help but notice about the future world is that racism still evidently exists, even if it was never mentioned. From an anthropological perspective, it is very strange for ethnic groups to occupy the same area without completely intermixing. The U.S. is a unique country in that regard as blacks and whites have lived together for 400 years, but have never really mixed. That would be baffling to future archaeologists, but we obviously know there are social issues at work. That obviously hasn't changed in the future as seen in After Earth.

Nick: I didn't notice. You’re saying that blacks and whites were together but separate on Nova Prime?

Dustin: The fact that blacks and whites and Indians, apparently, were still separate ethnic groups implied social prejudices, yes.

THE FOLLOWING SECTION CONTAINS SPOILERS

Dustin: I found the script corny and predictable. One example that sums this up was at the beginning when the guy missing his leg asked to be stood up so he could salute Will Smith. Then at the end, Will Smith, whose own leg is injured, asks to be stood up so he can salute his son. I didn't find that callback particularly clever, and it was just one of the weaknesses of the script.

Nick: I think that both of those moments should have been omitted. The first one was used to show Kitai how heralded his father was, but I’m sure they could have come up with a better way to show this such as an awards ceremony for his father, which would have built up Nova Prime more as a society and would have shown Kitai how important his father is to that society.

END OF SPOILERS

Nick: I thought the world of Nova Prime could have been explored more while cutting a lot of the pointless action scenes while on earth.

Dustin: I completely agree. The movie only spent a few minutes at the beginning explaining the setup, and I spent a lot time just trying to catch up. A few more minutes introducing us to the world would have saved me a lot of frustration. Peter Jackson spent ample time in The Lord of the Rings just setting up Middle Earth, which not only eased us into the setting, but also showed the audience what was at stake. M. Night Shamalamadingdong didn't attempt to do that here. Or the movie could have used an everyman through whom we could experience this world. Someone like a Luke Skywalker or Jack from Jack the Giant Slayer. The characters here acted like weird space aliens, and I couldn't connect with them.

Nick: It feels that way because we spend most of our time watching two characters, one called a “ghoster” for his impressive ability of not feeling fear, and the other wanting to be just like that character. The father and son have also hardly spent any time together, so it feels like they don’t know how to connect with each other. I think we were supposed to understand Nova Prime’s humanity through the scenes that showed the rest of their family.

Dustin: There was a similar father-son dynamic in October Sky. But Chris Cooper’s character showed a much more complete range of human emotions, and the audience was able to connect with him, even if they didn't agree with his manner. So at the end when he finally accepts his son on his son’s terms, it is much more satisfying. I felt nothing at the end of After Earth.

Nick: Did you feel anything during After Earth?

Dustin: No. There’s a scene halfway through that is supposed to be Kitai’s turning point as he realizes he has to go out on his own. He cries and shows emotion, but I just thought, Why would he even care to seek approval from an emotionally distant father who has hardly been present in his life? Again, Jake Gyllenhaal in October Sky was more believable.

Nick: I was actually setting you up to just say “fear,” then the review would be over. But I like the point you bring up. This is another part of the movie that could have benefited by showing more of their home world and how much Kitai’s father means to its survival. I’m sure they wanted to convey that, but they never explored it.

Dustin: In preparation for this review, I watched The Pursuit of Happyness. It was a little corny too, like this movie, but the performances were much better. I know Will Smith is capable of more which is what disappointed me here.

Nick: It’s very kind of you to call PoH a little corny. That movie was eazy cheeze on cheese. It’s an abomination.

Dustin: Would you recommend After Earth?

Nick: No. While an interesting idea with what I’ll politely call an “interesting” director, After Earth doesn't live up to the large scope it creates.

Dustin: Well, maybe they can more fully explore its scope in the proposed sequel for 2015.

#

Dustin: So what should we review next week? We have The Internship and The Purge.

Nick: Well, I’m seeing The Purge with a friend of mine. If you want to do The Internship I can see that with you if you want. I really want to review something I can give a good rating to one of these days.

Dustin: Yeah, The Internship doesn't look too promising. It looks like a tame, by-the-numbers comedy. The Purge has an interesting premise, and I’m hoping they make the most of it.

Nick: The Internship looks exactly like Wedding Crashers. You have two guys in a situation where they don’t belong, with Owen Wilson being charming and getting the girl, while Vince Vaughn is loud and obtrusive. But The Purge also looks like its going to be silly fun.

Dustin: I was gonna say The Internship looks like The Pursuit of Happyness because it’s about some guys doing an internship and hoping it will lead to a job, but whatever.