Angels and Demons

It's difficult to see the major differences between Angels and Demons and it's predecessor, The Da Vinci code. For starters, the original novels, written by famed author, Dan Brown (though they were released in opposite order as their film counterparts), are very formulaic, as I'm sure future stories featuring the character Robert Langdon will be. Both films share a similar pace and plot line, as well as equally sinister villains behind the master plan. And each film has a twist ending that no one sees coming, unless you read the book before.

It isn't difficult, however, to say that Angels and Demons is better than The Da Vinci code. Because it is.  I'm not sure what about it was better, but I walked out of that theater thoroughly satisfied. Ron Howard and the production crew behind Demons just executed better all across the board. Most of all of that starts with the improved performance of Tom Hanks. I love Tom Hanks and think he is one of the very best actors in all of Hollywood. They should make him the ambassador of Earth because I can't think of one person who doesn't like Tom Hanks. Regardless, he seemed not to be fully in his performance as Robert Langdon in the first go around. This time, he was great. Funny, believable, captured the spirit of Langdon, just all around good.

The surrounding cast was great as well. I can't think of one performance that was subpar. Ewan McGregor was the most notable of said supporting cast. He was excellent, portraying Carmerlengo with grace and respect.

Apart from the acting, the action, effects, camera angles etc. was just better. It is refreshing to see a Hollywood production improve with a sequel as opposed to just creating a watered down version of the first success.

The only thing that I might have done differently is keeping some of the plot line from the book. A lot of the information, not unlike many film adaptations of books, was edited out. Some of it I agreed with; it helped the plot line move quicker for a suspense movie, but some of it I couldn't understand.

SPOILER ALLERT!!! For instance, in the beginning of the movie, someone kills a researcher and uses his eye to gain access to a heavily secured area using a retina scan. Well, in the movie, that was the end of it. In the book, that man who was murdered, was the father of Langdon's love interest, Vittoria Vetra. I thought that was a key piece of the plot line which brought vulnerability two Vetra's character and would have brought a different level of emotion to the film. Maybe there is a good reason for the omission, but I can't figure it out, and that is only one example.

Other than that, however, the film was a success. Exactly what I had hoped it would be, an entertaining summer blockbuster. Oh, and my mother enjoyed it as well. We went and saw it together.

Muller's grade: B-

If you liked this flick, check these ones out: National Treasure, Indiana Jones,  Apollo 13

Up

It must be difficult for a company such as Pixar to release a move every year when we have come to expect greatness from every new motion picture it produces. With such amazing accomplishments as Toy Story, Finding Nemo, The Incredibles, Ratatouille, and, most recently, Wall E, Pixar has revolutionized the way we look at movies, particularly animation. And if it's not obvious, for what it's worth, I love Pixar movies.

Up is no different, but it isn't an instant classic like the previously mentioned juggernauts. Up is heartwarming, funny, family oriented and even a bit melancholy, though certainly not in a bad way. In short, it's good, not great. I liked it, I didn't love it. I wold recommend it, but don't drop what you're doing to go see it right now.

What Up really lacks is that "X" factor. It just isn't that memorable. I walked out satisfied but the further I get away from that moment, the further Up drifts from my Mind.

Having said all this, Pixar has nothing to be ashamed about, and likely never will for that matter. But with the bar being set so high from previous successes, Up, for me, is on the lower end of the spectrum of great Pixar movies. Plus, I saw it in 3-D, which added basically nothing to the movie. It was kind of cool, I guess, but was just a good movie that they decided to make 3-D as apposed to a good 3-D movie. So save yourself a few extra bucks and see it on a standard screen.

The story was good enough and the characters were likable. I actually thought that Pixar went in an interesting direction making the main character in a kids movie and old man. And a widower at that. But the themes of love and companionship really shine through and Up doesn't disappoint. 

Muller's Grade: B

If you liked this flick, check out: Finding Nemo, Kung Fu Panda, Shrek or Coraline which was a great 3-D movie.

STAR TREK

Now, these first couple of posts are going to be a little late. I haven't really had much time to get started on all these reviews so bare with me. The first review of this summer season starts off with the much anticipated, latest installment of the "Star Trek" franchise.

I should start off by saying that, until seeing this movie, I had never seen another "Star Trek"... anything. Not a movie, not a television episode, not anything, never really having any inclination to do so. What can I say? I'm a "Star Wars" guy. So if you are a Treky yourself, please excuse my ignorance on the matter, and don't hate me. 

Having said that, this movie was nothing short of totally AWESOME. The action was great, the acting was good enough and I was not lost on the story, much to my surprise. The people behind this movie really took great care in introducing the characters, who have been pop culture icons for decades, to a whole new audience. I thought I was going to get left behind in all the sci-fi jargon, but this "Star Trek", at least to me, was the first to really be marketed to a much broader fan base. I can't be sure, but I doubt the die hard fans are upset with the finished product, and guys like me, who have no experience in such matters, are going to love it.

It kicks ass! That's basically all there is to it. Fast paced, witty, good and evil. What more could you want?

What really impressed me the most were the performances by Chris Pine and Zachary Quinto, who played Captain James Kirk and Spok respectively. They seemed to create there own versions of such recognizable characters while still holding true to the original performances themselves. I mean from what I know of those characters, which is admittedly not much, these guys really nailed it. Pine as Kirk was a perfect choice. This will be his breakout performance and he deserves the recognition he gets. His cockiness and wit made him a Captain Kirk that need not be compared to Shatner's 

If you go see one summer movie, (be warned that Harry Potter has yet to be released) see Star Trek. If nothing else, director J.J. Abrams knows how to entertain.

Muller's Grade: B+

If you liked this flick, check out: Iron Man, Transformers, Mission Impossible III