+
AMDG

23           Mikael M. Laurel                                                                                                       Submitted 09/23/15

10M       FCC Movie of the Week

“Everest”

Directed by Baltasar Kormakur (2 Guns)

Starring:

Jason Clarke (Zero Dark Thirty) as Rob Hall

Jake Gyllenhaal (Southpaw) as Scott Fischer

Josh Brolin (Labor Day) as Beck Weathers

Keira Knightley (Begin Again) as Jan Hall

Robin Wright (The Chronicle) as Peach Weathers

Summary:

The film is based on a true story. In 1996, a group of mountain climbers prepare for an expedition to the summit of Mount Everest, expecting an adventure where they would overcome great odds and face their fears. However, an unexpected storm hits, and the expedition turns from an overwhelming challenge into a fight for survival.

Review:

                When I entered the cinema to watch the movie the other day, the left and right rows and columns of seats were nearly empty. It’s no surprise; the movie wasn’t promoted as much as blockbusters such as Terminator Genisys or Jurassic World. However, I believe Everest could go down as one of the most underrated movies of the year.

                In my opinion, the film’s cinematography was its best part. It magnified the Everest and showed its vastness one moment, then scaled down and showed the mount’s minute details the next. Lighting was very good as well, as it set the tone for particular scenes, like when the storm hit; that scene’s lack thereof gave it a slight feeling of suspense and danger, which was most likely its intended tone.

                The composed musical score wasn’t a masterpiece, but like with the lighting, it set the tone for many scenes, particularly at the end, where there was a feeling of extreme melancholy.

                The make-up was superb. Many actors were glammed up so well to the point that they looked almost exactly like their real counterparts (pictures were shown at the end). Clarke and Gyllenhaal were almost unrecognizable. Beck Weathers apparently got hit with frostbite, and Brolin’s makeup really made it looked like he had that particular disease.

                However, I do believe that many characters had one-dimensional personalities. One particular example is Scott Fischer, who was energetic, daring, and happy go lucky throughout, and I’m quite sure that the real Scott Fischer would not have been happy go lucky all the time, especially in situations of near death. It would have helped if a little more serious scenes with Fischer were added to test Gyllenhaal’s acting chops a little, and to intensify the movie more.

                Speaking of which, there were many cases in Everest where the actors weren’t quite as intense as they should have been. Even in climactic situations, many of the actors, I felt, were too calm. They showed emotion, but didn’t exaggerate it as much as they should have.

                Taking note of the pros and in spite of the cons, I think Everest was a very good film. It was definitely flawed, but its positives outnumbered its negatives, as shown. It could have been much better though, with the stellar casting and visuals that it had. However, the film was still well executed, and it got its point across clearly. It was still able to tell a shocking and tragic tale about survival on top of Mount Everest.

Jose Miguel B. Fernandez                                                                              Film Critique                     

10-D

Inside Out

            To start my review, I will first give a short summary of Inside Out. The main character in this movie is Riley; at the start of the movie, we see how she got her emotions/feelings (joy was gotten from birth, sadness followed soon after, disgust when she was forced to eat broccoli, anger when she retaliated against her dad for forcing her to eat broccoli and fear when she nearly tripped over a lamp wire). To continue, she lives in Minnesota but then due to her father’s work, her family is forced to move to San Francisco. Riley doesn’t take this lightly as there are many setbacks to being in SF (for example: being away from friends, new school, moving truck not arriving, not having her hockey team, etc). The movie then focuses on Riley’s emotions as sadness and joy are accidentally taken away from the main control room ( spoilers ahead). When joy and sadness are roaming Riley’s long-term memory, the remaining emotions (anger, fear, disgust) are then forced to take control of Riley, disabling her to feel joy and sadness. After a few days, anger gives Riley the idea to run away by stealing her mom’s credit card and using it at a bus station; luckily, joy and sadness return and get Riley to go back to her parents. She then joins her university hockey team and the movie ends.

            To start the actual review, I would say the movie was pretty good. The animation was well done; the story is clichéd but that’s acceptable because it’s a kid’s movie. The humor was fairly good too but what I really noticed that for a movie made for 5-12-ish children, the theme of running away and depression wasn’t really appropriate. Nonetheless, it’s a good movie. 7/10

Joaquin Quizon

12-E

Terminator Genisys

Story: The story was quite good, quite fresh and really is a great take on the whole time

travel plot of the series. Although there are a few plot holes here and there, it is overall a

great story that is entertaining and keeps you interested. 8/10

Cast: The cast was great; Emilia Clarke was phenomenal as Sarah Connor, even pulling off a

great American accent. Jai Courtney also plays Kyle Reese well and Jason Clarke puts in an

amazing performance as John Connor. However, the biggest praise goes to the big man

himself, Arnold Schwarzenegger, who reprises his role as the terminator and shows that

even in his advanced age, he can still put on a wonderful performance. 10/10

Sound and sight: They brought back the old theme song which really got me watching the

movie and the way it was filmed was great, a typical action movie which I enjoy a lot .

The explosions were great and so were the shooting scenes and overall, it was a great sight

to behold. However, the cgi was a bit off in some parts.

Overall: Great cast with great directing and story make for a great movie that features a

classic. If the director keeps this up, I can see another trilogy coming up for Terminator.

Martin Paterno

10-B

A few weeks ago I watched Ant-Man. I found this movie really fun to watch, because of its hilarious script, great action scenes, and its never-ending comic relief. For those of you who don’t know, the original Ant-Man in the comic book universe, Hank Pym, creates a suit that lets him shrink down to the size of an ant. In Marvel’s movie adaptation, however, Hank is an old and retired Ant-Man who gives his suit to Scott Lang. I really liked the cinematography of this film because it would be following an ant- sized man beating up the bad guys, so the audience would see a speck and henchmen flying around.

Overall, I’d give this film a 7.5/10. Why? Well I do think Ant-Man is a good film but compared to legends like Titanic or The Godfather, Ant-man doesn’t really have that extra “oomph” like the two movies mentioned above. However, in the end, Ant-Man is still something nice to watch; it does have its moments and is an action-packed film.

Presenting... the Film Critics Circle's Best Picture for schoolyear 2014-2015...

SHARKNADO 2: THE SECOND ONE

A BITING REVIEW

By Lorenzo Vallente

Film Critics Circle '14-'15

Directed by: Anthony C. Ferrante

Starring:    Ian Ziering

                    Tara Reid

                    Vivica A. Fox

                    Mark McGrath

PLOT SUMMARY:

            The protagonists of the first movie are on their way to New York for a signing of their book, How To Survive A Sharknado and Other Unnatural Disasters, when another Sharknado begins. This time, the movie is set in New York. What havoc will the sharks cause in the Big Apple? Watch this fantastic movie and find out.

REVIEW PROPER:

       We all know this movie is terrible. I am not here to disprove that indisputable statement. I am simply here to defend the creativity, imagination, and brilliance of the filmmakers helming this disaster of a film. "Oh Lorenzo, what ever do you mean?" any sensible reader would ask. Well, dear educated readers, bear with me as I make my case.

      As stated before, this is a terrible movie. We know it and even the filmmakers know it, and there lies my first point. The movie is incredibly self-aware and it works much much better because of it. Don't expect the brilliant awareness of 22 Jump Street in this movie. However, why would you? It's SHARKNADO. Moving on, the movie knows it's stupid and the filmmakers go through the arduous process to keep it so. It piles on lots of bad jokes, unintentionally (or are they) hilarious scenes of drama and action that get more and more ridiculous by the minute. Again, this movie knows all this and winks at the audience every step of the way. By intentionally setting out to make a 'so bad it's good' film, it entertains us immensely in the process. And that's what we go to the movies for, to be entertained.

        Well, we have to talk technical so…

        The plot is absurd and has always been so. The acting is terrible, and the 'stars' make every effort to look as goofy and self-aware as possible, which (I suppose) is commendable. The directing is functional and sometimes has surprisingly good camera shots. The scene where the characters of Ziering and Fox are running to the roof has solid camerawork. The slow-mo sequences also delight. The scene where Ziering splits the shark in half in slow-mo is incredibly satisfying. The special effects are terrible. They look as if they were ripped out of a Gamecube game, but it's SyFy so you can't expect much more. The lighting is fine, as none of the scenes are too dark or too bright. It must seem ridiculous to critique this as a legitimate movie, but it must be done.

       It is also necessary to point out that opposed to other films of the Z-movie type (ex. Octoshark Megalodon Crocodile vs Anaconda), the two Sharknados are by far the least painful and most fun ones of them all. I think this movie is more aware than the first Sharknado and succeeds to be a little more entertaining as well. This movie piles on the cameos so keep your eyes peeled for famous faces hidden in tiny roles.

     Overall, as a film, it is utter garbage. However, as a piece of ridiculous, guilty entertainment, it is a masterpiece. Someone asked me if I found it disconcerting that people are now making intentionally horrible movies as opposed to trying to make amazing and thought-provoking ones. I answered that I did not. As long as an audience remains entertained and forgets about their worries for 2 hours, a movie has done its job. And I believe this movie passes that test with flying colors. Thank you, Sharknado, for making me believe in entertaining schlock.

          Sharknado 3 will be released in July so keep an eye out for it.

RATING: 10/10

                  

This review, by the way, was written by Rafael Bautista.

Night at the Museum: Secret of the Tomb

Larry Daley (Ben Stiller), the night guard in the past 2 films, is overseeing an event for the Museum of Natural History in New York and uses some of the exhibits as part of his event but, things go wrong when the exhibits act out against the audience. It is later discovered that they acted out because of what happened to the Tablet of Ahkmenrah. The tablet started to corrode which made the exhibits act out. Ahkmenrah says that he should see his father since he knew the secrets of the tablet and that he did not know why that happened to the tablet. Larry soon discovers that Ahkmenrah’s parents were in the British Museum so he, his son, and some of the exhibits travel to London to discover what happened to the tablet and on how to fix it.

As the final film of the trilogy, “Night at the Museum: Secret of the Tomb”, is able to satisfyingly end the franchise as well as deliver a more or less enjoyable family comedy movie. First of all, this is Robin Williams’ final on-screen role (his last movie in 2015 will only feature his voice) and I think he was able to deliver as Teddy Roosevelt. He serves as the guide for Larry and does it well. His last scene is quite emotional because of what he tells Larry and how it relates to his life. Rebel Wilson is a lovely surprise as the museum guard, Tilly, because her scenes were very funny and she stole the show whenever she was on screen. I liked her so much that I wished she had more scenes in the movie. I also enjoyed Crystal the monkey as Dexter since she had some enjoyable scenes in the film.

Also, there is a cameo made by 2 certain celebrities near the end of the film that I thoroughly was pleased with because of the pedigree they have as actors and they are not usually seen in comedy movies. The CGI used in the film is fine and the exhibits brought to life are good to look at. The subplot between Larry and his son, Nick, is correctly handled since there is satisfying closure given between them in the end, though it did feel a bit like filler to the story since it was not that important to the story.  The ending of the film is one of the best parts because it is able to give the main characters of the film closure in their stories and somewhat emotionally give closure to the entire franchise as a whole.

This film though has its downsides and the biggest one is its plot. It falls under a very generic story plot that has been done too many times. For some people, the plot twist of the movie would not be a surprise because of how generic it actually is. The comedy is so-so since it was not bad, thoug, it was not that good either with most of the jokes directed towards kids but, there is one joke that I was surprised was in the movie because it was more for adults.

I believe that the native American Sacajawea was not paid too much attention in the film since she has a few speaking lines in the entire film even though she is seen throughout most it. Dan Stevens as Sir Lancelot feels very stereotypical in the way his character is supposed to be in the story. The rest of the cast give an okay performance, though it is not something to be bragged about. 

Despite the fact that they did not only change museums but also countries, the film does not take full advantage of it as it sometimes feels as if they are still in the same museum in New York. They do show though new exhibits never seen before. They do also go out into the London streets even if it was not that long.

In the end, Night at the Museum: Secret of the Tomb serves as a fulfilling conclusion to the 8- year old franchise with some standout performances and a good and somewhat emotional ending.