Man of Steel

Written by Markus Robinson, Edited by Nicole I. Ashland

Markus Rating: 2 Stars

Rated PG-13 for intense sequences of sci-fi violence, action and destruction, and for some language

I waited an entire year for this?! “Superman Returns” was better!

Directed by the writer/director of “Sucker Punch” (need I say more?) with a script void of anything memorable, written by David S. Goyer (Blade) and produced (with story credits) by the infamous Christopher Nolan, “Man of Steel”, the newest blockbuster sure to make an exorbitant amount of money worldwide, today sadly stands as one of the biggest disappointments in the resurgence of the modern superhero era.

Telling the story of the origins of Superman, his days as a youth and his adult confrontation with General Zod, there are basically three damning flaws which serve to retard “Man of Steel” and its assent into the stratosphere of superhero cinematic notoriety. “Man of Steel” isn’t even on par with the dangerously average “The Amazing Spider-Man”. Hell, while it wasn’t a better movie, even “Green Lantern” was more coherent at times. Anyway, the flaws are as follows:      

1.       “Man of Steel” is unbelievably un-engaging! It is impossible to emotionally connect with any of the characters on screen. And if I don’t care about anybody in this movie, then why am I watching it? If you don’t think this is a problem, go watch “John Carter” again. 

2.       Robert Downey Jr. as Iron Man is not replaceable. Hugh Jackman as Wolverine is not replaceable. Even Chris Hemsworth as Thor is not replaceable. But Henry Cavill as Clark Kent/Kal-El/Superman is such “nothing” here, that this rebooted Superman character is more liken to a sort of Man of Steel by committee. His acting is so vanilla, that at times (many times) he sort of fades into the background of this larger than life production, for long stretches. But it’s not like Cavill was even asked to act or do much of anything here. He lifts a few things, and his eyes glow from time to time and he talks to his mom a bit. But I feel that any young actor with a muscular physique could have done the same thing.  And maybe with a little more charisma of a leading man.  Hence, Man of Steel by committee.

3.        This feels like a 4 hour movie that had been edited down to a 2 ½ hour movie. And sloppily edited at that. Let me put it to you another way: The narrative structure within “Man of Steel” is so choppy in its plotting, that it seemed as if director Zack Snyder had completed a series of these films beforehand, but instead of giving us three separate movies, he felt compelled to give us a highlight reel, with dense plot development, followed by large gaps which seemed as if huge chunks of connective storyline were left out, followed again by dense plot development, and call it a movie. In short, more than once I thought I had fallen asleep during “Man of Steel” and missed crucial scenes, only to find out that I had not. And this is why I don’t lay any of the blame on Christopher Nolan. The man only came up with the story. What Snyder did from that point on is clearly beyond Nolan’s control.   

This leads me to the one great flaw which supersedes, while at the same time umbrellas, said three major flaws: Zack Snyder’s direction. Due to his choice of focusing on his direction rather than his characters, said characters come off as unimportant. Hence, nobody cares if they live or die. Due to his lack of true understanding of the Superman series (no mention of Kryptonite?!) or the Superman character, Cavill comes off as a hero nobody roots for or sympathizes with. And due to Snyder’s choice of a plot structuring which exposes his horrific storytelling abilities, he has made a film that will leave a majority of audiences’ cold; only pretending to like this movie in order to save face with their friends.

For me Zack Snyder is nothing more than a version of Michael Bay. I can only take his stylized direction in small music video sized doses.  So, after wading through about an hour and a half of majorly uneventful sequences, I resigned myself to waiting for the larger action sequences which were sure to come about in the latter half, thinking maybe this would be the aspect which brought me back into the film. But alas, it did not, as the fighting sequences between Superman and General Zod could only be described as long winded. I mean, the visuals during said scenes of conflict were what they were. Not bad, but more so a bombardment of desensitizing CGI explosions.  And this is why I have to lay most of the blame on Zack Snyder, for putting this “thing” together. The bland script that was used didn’t help, but Snyder was clearly the wrong pick for this venture. Furthermore, the Nolan-esque dark and serious undertone Snyder implements is horribly misused, and comes off as awkward through tonally misguided attempts at comedic dialogue and dramatic portions which are far too melodramatic. 

Final Thought: “Man of Steel” only has a few redeeming qualities. The first being, that there are more than a few well crafted flashbacks, which are perfectly implemented by the hated Zack Snyder. They convey the only genuine atmosphere of the entire film and contain the best scene in the movie where Kevin Costner fights a tornado (well, sort of). The second redeeming quality has to be Michael Shannon (Take Shelter) as General Zod, who isn’t great here, but seems to be the only actor not phoning in a performance. Also, Shannon has the perfect face to play this particular villain, as he gives his trademark crazy eye stare at every opportunity. And the third redeeming comfort would have to be Hans Zimmer’s score. But then again, I’m probably one of the few who hasn’t gotten tired of the bludgeoning score this composer brings to the table. All of that said, if you’re like me and had any kind of hopes or expectations for this film, then none of these aspects will be all that redeeming. And as one of the biggest disappointments in my lifetime, I’m being kind here by giving “Man of Steel” even two stars.

Follow me on Twitter @moviesmarkus

Frances Ha

Written by Markus Robinson, Edited by Nicole I. Ashland

Markus Rating: 4 Stars

Rated R for sexual references and language

Brilliantly balancing its own quirky self awareness, with a ton of genuine likability, “Frances Ha” is what a smart female comedy looks like. Take that “Bridesmaids”!

Side Note: So, I can already hear the irritatingly shrill commentary from the “Bridesmaids” faithful now, stating that the comedy in “Frances Ha” and “Bridesmaids” are “totally different” and cannot be compared. But guess what? I just did.  

Directed and co-written by Noah Baumbach, who is essentially the personification of a New York indie filmmaker (for better or worse) and co-written and starring Greta Gerwig, in her best role to date. “Frances Ha” tells the story of a woman in her late twenties named Frances who lives in New York, but doesn’t really have any permanent residency. In fact, she doesn’t really have any real direction in life. She is a dancer that doesn’t really dance all that well. She continuously wears these hideous floral print dresses with black leggings and a sweater wrapped around her waist. In some circles she is referred to as “Frances undate-able”. And to top it all off, her best friend, Sophie (played by Mickey Summer) and she seem to be growing apart, after Sophie decides to move in with her boyfriend. OK, so while this sounds like the makings of a barely watchable coming of age tale concerning a late twenties, annoyingly quirky, white, middle-class hipster, “Frances Ha” ends up being a pleasantly naturalistic and insightfully funny film about a woman just trying to find her place in a world that seems to be passing her by.

Shot in black and white, as if to transport us back to an older (better) style of Indie filmmaking, why this Baumbach endeavor works monumentally better than his last directorial attempt “Greenberg”, has nothing to do with his direction. But clearly has almost everything to do with Greta Gerwig playing a middle class woman dealing with first world problems, with such likeability that audiences won’t be able to help themselves but root for Frances and her quest to fulfill her idealistic dreams, no matter the odds.

Another Side Note: Much attention is going to be paid to the final scene, which serves to give an off-beat, yet simplistic explanation for the title of this film. And in its simplicity, many pretentious film school dialogues are sure to arise. But for the rest of us, the one great flaw in “Frances Ha” will come forth in a final few minutes which will end up leaving your average movie-goer cold.  

Final Thought: This surprising little film almost plays out like an early Woody Allen. And that may be praise enough for many to immediately go out and buy a ticket (or maybe avoid this movie all together). But do realize that throughout the overtly quirky world Baumbach has built, Gerwig’s performance (and undoubtedly her conversational dialogue) is the only thing here which allows this film to stay grounded, and more importantly stay relatable. Not to say Baumbach’s content isn’t entertaining, but “Frances Ha” is definitely Gerwig’s time to shine, as she is the inexplicable reason I am giving a film like this a solid recommendation, even though its protagonist is reminiscent of the most annoying actress in the world: Zooey Deschanel.

Follow me on Twitter @moviesmarkus

This Is the End

Written by Markus Robinson, Edited by Nicole I. Ashland

Markus Rating 5 Stars

Rated R for crude and sexual content throughout, brief graphic nudity, pervasive language, drug use and some violence

Why isn’t Jay Baruchel in more things?! Well, more relevant things. I mean “Goon” was a really good movie, but how many people saw that?

The writing team that brought you “Superbad”, Seth Rogen and the very hit and miss Evan Goldberg, come together once again to write and direct this film. Adapted from a 2007 short by Goldberg, Rogen and Baruchel entitled Jay and Seth Versus the Apocalypse, “This Is the End” has one of the most simplistically brilliant plotlines in film history. Basically, Rogen, Baruchel and every other comedic actor you can think of (all playing themselves) attend a party at James Franco’s house…and then the world ends. This plays out like an elongated Funny or Die skit. The only difference being that “This Is the End” is consistently funny.

There is actually a subplot dealing with Rogan and Baruchel growing apart as friends which works really well (in “Superbad”-esque fashion) only because of the construction of the script and some rather genuine chemistry from its two leads.  And can I take a minute to talk about how well this film looks for being both Rogen and Goldberg’s directorial debuts? I mean, aside from the onslaught of funny one-liners, this end-of-days film looks like a million bucks (in a good way). Even when some of the CGI does slip into a cartoonish realm, like seasoned vets, Rogen and Goldberg maintain the tonal atmosphere befitting each scene; be it a high octane chase sequence or a few well placed dance sequences.

Side Note: When I say everybody is in this movie, I do mean EVERYBODY. But the cameo that clearly steals the show is from Michael Cera in his most outlandishly crass and hilarious role ever; a performance that is almost worth the price of admission alone. Trust me. If you weren’t a Cera fan before, which is supremely understandable with him being the most annoying kind of Canadian and all, then you will be after this. 

“This Is the End” is what every person paying $11 for their movie ticket should expect, but rarely gets from a modern comedy. It’s not only an adult comedy that actually contains non-stop laughs for a change, but “This Is the End” is the funniest movie since “40 Year Old Virgin”. This also is a much needed return to comedic form for Rogan and to a lesser extent Jonah Hill (only because “21 Jump Street” was pretty funny) and clearly is the funniest movie the rest of this cast has been a part of by far.  Hell, even Danny McBride is hilarious here. And we all know how much I hate Danny McBride.

Final Thought: There are so many memorable one-liners in this movie, it is sure to become an instant comedy classic. And why most of these jokes work is because they are so self-deprecating. Yes, THIS IS about 20 minutes too long and it is essentially a movie full of phallic and weed tangents, but when it comes right down to it “This Is the End” is a comedy which contains very few bits that don’t work (mostly coming near the end) and is drowned in laugh out loud moments from minute one, to a finale that blows the one in “Bridesmaids” right out of the water. I hate to constantly pick on “Bridesmaids” (well, hate is such a strong word) but Kristen Wiig and crew should really take note on how a real comedy like “This Is the End” constructs a final sequence. I’m just saying.   

Follow me on Twitter @moviesmarkus

The Purge

Written by Markus Robinson, Edited by Nicole I. Ashland

Markus Rating: 3 Stars

Rated R for strong disturbing violence and some language

Was "The Purge" a warning about the dangers of letting black people into your home, or simply a misguided attempt at a dystopian social commentary? Well, what I believe writer/director James DeMonaco was trying to do with this film, was create a story with the feel of something similar to Shirley Jackson’s “The Lottery”, even though what “The Purge” turns into is nothing more than an average thriller, with a hint of pro-NRA rally cry.    

Synopsis: It’s the year 2022 and we are a nation reborn! Crime in the United States is at 1% and people are supposedly the happiest they’ve ever been due to the emergence of a regime known as The New Founding Fathers, who have taken over as the new government. And their most mind boggling decree surrounds opening the flood gates of crime for one night a year, allowing for a 12 hour period where all crime (mainly murder) is legal. The theory behind said mandate is stated that by allowing people to commit crimes for one night out of the year, this gives individuals the chance to “purge” all of the hate that they’ve built up inside. Though it is alluded to early on, that said Purge is just an excuse to kill the indigent, as these are the usual targets since they don’t have the financial means to protect themselves. OK, so while everything I’ve written so far sounds interesting on some level, that’s not really what DeMonaco chooses to focus on. This narrative concerns an insanely wealthy man named James Sandin (played by Ethan Hawke) and his family who live in a mansion, as they ready their “impenetrable” security system for the annual purge. Even though they choose not to participate in the nights events, they show their support by displaying blue flowers in their front yard. But, when the middle of the night brings a homeless and bloodied man pleading for sanctuary to their front door, followed by a psychotic and very elitist gang, who all look like extras out of “Cruel Intentions”, the Sandin family will spend the rest of the night fighting for their lives.

Even though it was not the film I was hoping for, “The Purge” does work, delivering an intriguing setup and events which will hook its viewership, no matter how slightly.  That said, there are some headshaking flaws concentrated in this 85 minute movie. “The Purge” does step over the line of visual creepiness into visual silliness repeatedly. I am mainly referring to the shots from the trailers of the psychotic gang skipping around the front lawn with butcher knives and swinging on swings.  As for the dialogue, it was way too on the nose at times. And though the ending was not bad enough to spoil any macabre atmosphere DeMonaco brings about, it quickly plunges a portion of “The Purge” into a high octane action film, to which the movie never tonally recovers.  

Something to keep in mind while watching this: The entire plot is from the perspective of a very rich Atherton-esque family living in a gated community; hence the scope is very narrow. That is to say, we don't really get to see anything beyond the gates, or what percentage of society is for or against the annual night of murder. And thus comes the major flaw of this film; i.e. taking a large scope concept and restricting it to a small cul-de-sac. 

Final Thought: All I heard in the days leading up to my watching of “The Purge” was how the movie was all premise and no substance. I’m here to say that that statement is not altogether true. As “ludicrous” or “offensive” as this attempt at an allegorical social thriller may sound to some, I cannot deny that my interest was kept for the full runtime, even through a “Die Hard”-esque climax and predictable ending. For me, the Twilight Zone-ish premise was quite compelling, but definitely would have worked better as either a short film or in a massive world-wide narrative.  And because “The Purge” falls somewhere in between those two, it conceptually suffers more than need be.  All in all, the high hopes I had coming into this film where not totally obliterated, but sadly “The Purge” not working as a horror or a fully functioning thriller, ultimately relegates it to only a slight recommendation.

Follow me on Twitter @moviesmarkus

Now You See Me

Written by Markus Robinson, Edited by Nicole I. Ashland

Markus Rating: 2 Stars

Rated PG-13 for language, some action and sexual content

“Now You See Me” is essentially a movie whose narrative is played out like a magic trick. And I love magic, but here is the thing about a well done trick: If every part of the trick (especially one that lasts two hours) isn’t engaging enough to keep the viewer interested, then most certainly the outcome will be disregarded, no matter how amazeballs it may be.

The Synopsis: After a team of magicians, who call themselves The Four Horsemen (Jesse Eisenberg, Woody Harrelson, and to a lesser extent Isla Fisher and Dave Franco) pull off a bank robbery in a bank located halfway around the world during a live Las Vegas performance, an FBI agent and an Interpol detective played by Mark Ruffalo and Melanie Laurent (who is horribly unnecessary here) respectively, must work together in order to get to the bottom of it all.   

Director Louis Leterrier (The Transporter) does the best he can with the material allotted. All the visuals are on point, so the fact that the script contains a huge lull for the entirety of the second act (and part of the third) isn’t really his fault.  This leads me to the main issue with “Now You See Me”. This is a film which begins with a visual bang. A bang so hypnotizing that it completely masks its own confusingly weak premise. And for about 40 minutes, due to Leterrier’s direction and how Ruffalo, Harrelson and Eisenberg interact with each other, “Now You See Me” does maintain an impressive, high octane, cat and mouse entertainment level. But as the movie progresses, it is the elongated second act which may lose the interest of many audience members and a final rather shocking, but overall nonsensical reveal in the final act, which may lose the rest.

Side Note: Morgan Freeman and Michael Caine both have supporting roles in this movie, and in fact do have one pretty epic interaction. But neither of them do enough here to allot them any more space in this review, so…

Final Thought: It is the rather snappy and well delivered humor throughout, which keeps this film from totally becoming derailed during its questionable latter half.  But the more I had hoped that this was going to be a comedic “The Prestige”, the more it became a misguided, moral-centric Robin Hood. That said, the most damning thing I can say about “Now You See Me” is that it’s a definite instance of: the more you have time to think about what you’ve just seen, the worse this movie becomes.     

Follow me on Twitter @moviesmarkus

The Internship

Written by Markus Robinson, Edited by Nicole I. Ashland

Markus Rating: 3 Stars

Rated PG-13 for sexuality, some crude humor, partying and language

There is no denying that “The Internship” is one big advertisement for Google. There is also no denying that it does star the only actor arguably more annoying than Adam Sandler. But even so, that doesn’t take away from my solemn guarantee that even the most cynical out there will find humor in this PG-13 comedy.

Truthfully, going into this Vince Vaughn led production (as he also takes writing credits) I was more than a little skeptical, since (as an actor) Vaughn is a comedic one trick pony. And this quick talking “trick”, while somewhat funny within the confines of the early 2000’s, if not diluted, is played out in 2013. But, luckily for the millions who will undoubtedly be dragged to watch this movie, the supporting cast steals the show (especially Tobit Raphael who plays Yo-Yo Santos, delivering most of the laugh out loud lines) and takes much of the comedic weight off of Vaughn’s shoulders. Owen Wilson also does his part to thankfully take some of the spotlight off of Vaughn. And even if you hate him as an actor, it is undeniable that Wilson, playing the “straight man” to Vaughn’s “wacky giant” does work in this forum; no matter how much you don’t think it will.    

Yeah, I know the trailers look awful, but trust me, there are some laugh out loud bits sprinkled throughout “The Internship” (especially when Wilson and Vaughn step onto the Google campus) which are surprisingly well written and executed. That said, during the moments when I wasn’t laughing “The Internship” did feel very formulaic, as if director Shawn Levy (Date Night) was ticking off boxes from an imaginary “buddy comedy” checklist. Example: First act, two old guys get in a situation where they must interact with young people. Check! Act two they find that they are out of their league and give up. Check! In the third act they work together, using the talents they’ve possessed all along, to triumph against all odds. Check and check! So, while the supporting cast and the said funny bits throughout do push this comedy along, any time “The Internship” has to display any emotion other than frivolity, the generic story structure bleeds through, as Levy and Vaughn seem to lazily succumb to the overly melodramatic and uninteresting growth of these paper thin protagonists.

Final Thought: “Wedding Crashers”, this is not. The main reason “The Internship” only gets a slight recommendation from me, has to do primarily with its lack of memorable moments. Allow me to explain: the most successful comedies throughout the last decade (starring the same, if not a similar stable of comedic actors) all had one thing in common. Be it “Old School”, “Anchorman: The Legend of Ron Burgundy”, “Step Brothers” or the aforementioned “Wedding Crashers”, they all had memorable lines of dialogue or situations which can be easily regurgitated back by fans of the genre. Yes, “The Internship” contains some funny situations and more than an adequate amount of funny lines. And all that matters in a movie like this is how much one laughs throughout. But at the end of the day, no matter how much you laughed, I would challenge you to find any one line of dialogue or relatable comedic situation that stuck with you after you exited the theater. Hence, “The Internship” will ultimately go down as one of those watchable yet forgettable comedies.

Follow me on Twitter @moviesmarkus  

After Earth

Written by Markus Robinson, Edited by Nicole I. Ashland

Markus Rating: 2 Stars

Rated PG-13 for sci-fi action violence and some disturbing images

I understand that many people were duped by the studios into seeing this movie, since the trailers intentionally had failed to mention the director’s name. Yes, M. Night Shyamalan did direct “After Earth”, but before you click off this page in utter repulsion…well, I guess “After Earth” isn’t that good of a movie, so I guess you would be right to do so. 

From this point forward (in order to keep the rest of you reading) I will not be using said director’s name during this review.

Synopsis: Beginning with a lazy narration which sort of explains how Earth became uninhabitable in the distant future (just think of it as The Happening Part 2, with an alien or two) the story basically begins when a crash landing leaves 13 year old Kitai Raige (Jaden Smith) and his father Cypher (Will Smith) as the only survivors, stranded on said uninhabitable Earth. With their only chance of survival being a rescue beacon which broke off upon descent, and Cypher suffering from two broken legs, Katai must venture out into the hostile environment in order to retrieve the beacon before they both die.         

While “After Earth” contains a compelling enough plot to keep ones interest throughout, it was a compilation of minor underwhelming factors which worked to overshadow and make this a below average movie going experience.

The Script: The dialogue here is pretty bad. Filled with cringe inducing back and forth’s, which only serve to continuously bludgeon the audience over the head with paternal life lessons, writers Gary Whitta and the director who shall not be named, have done “After Earth” (and it’s actors) no real favors. To the point where most (if not all) of the watchable moments during this film (and there are more than a few) occur when nobody is speaking.  

The Direction: As for the direction, he who shall not be named actually does a fairly decent job, for about half the movie. But at the point when “After Earth” exits the forest (you’ll know it when you see it) the cinematography goes from striking, to overrun by cheap looking CGI, rivaling the likes of “Green Lantern”.

The Story: As I alluded to before, I was rather impressed with how the plot here wasn’t as bad as everyone was proclaiming it to be. And aside from the fact that the main “bad guy” in all of this doesn’t seem to make a whole lot of sense, much of this storyline is entertaining enough to be deemed the foundation of a watchable sci-fi venture.  But then comes the insertion of melodrama. Over and over again said melodramatic scenes come about, slowing the film to a screeching halt just when things are starting to pick up. I’ll put it like this: “After Earth” was no “The Pursuit of Happyness”, no matter how much it tried to be.

The Acting: While this aspect is the least of the factors which worked against “After Earth”, much will be made of Jaden Smith’s bouts of goofy overacting. Some may go so far as to make claim that the younger Smith is a bad actor. To this I would argue that if not for those immensely awkward Cajun-like accents that each character was forced to use throughout “After Earth”, Jaden’s underrated acting abilities would have been given a proper chance to carry this story, with diction that wasn’t so distracting. 

Final Thought: The people wanted another “The Sixth Sense”, but got “Devil” instead. The root of the problem with “After Earth” really comes down to the fact that after train-wrecks like “The Village” and “Lady in the Water”, and the negative backlash from anime dweebs everywhere after “The Last Airbender”, he who shall not be named needed to redeem himself with something the caliber of “The Sixth Sense”. So, while “After Earth” is a step in the right direction (I’m still not recommending it) the bias that comes with this director will undoubtedly have many audiences taking an all or nothing attitude. In other words, this director who shall not be named needed to come out with something that was damn near Oscar worthy in order to avoid getting his film ripped to shreds right out of the gate. So, in his defense, the strong negative overreactions to “After Earth” may not be all his fault. Furthermore, this story was credited as a Will Smith idea, so if there is any real blame to be passed around, one could make an argument that “After Earth” is more Will Smith’s fault than he who shall not be named.  

Follow me on Twitter @moviesmarkus

Aftershock

Written by Markus Robinson, Edited by Nicole I. Ashland

Markus Rating: 1 Star

Rated R for strong bloody violence including rape, language, drug content and some nudity

Eli Roth’s “Aftershock” should have been a frightening cinematic experience since I do live in earthquake country. But after forty minutes of needless setup, scene after scene of sequences which mimic those outrageously low budget SyFy Channel movies shown at two in the morning, and the fact that my suspicions of this films watchability were already high considering it was only produced (not directed) by Roth, it soon became clear that “Aftershock” was built on a foundation which literally fell apart at the seams.

Synopsis: A group of “young people” who seek an adventure (lead by non-actor Eli Roth himself) attempt to find it in a country outside of the United States. And then bad stuff happens. Does this plot sound like “Hostel” yet? Well, it is sort of “Hostel”, in Chile, if the sadistic killers had been replaced by a natural disaster.  

The problem with this film comes down to the simple fact that the duration of an earthquake is only a few seconds long. So, after said phenomenon occurs, the movie doesn’t seem to know what to do with itself, as if Roth and friends hadn’t come prepared with any other plot development which could sustain a feature length film. So, aside from a few smirk inducing social network jokes, an extremely short back and forth between Roth and one Selena Gomez and some minor suspenseful situations in the final 30 minutes, “Aftershock” is a generic and somewhat boring horror endeavor.   

Final Thought: The ending is actually the best part of this movie, and I’m not even being sarcastic. The final twist used by writer/director Nicolas Lopez is pretty clever. But what one has to wade through to get to this finale is not at all worth the time. Besides, at the end of the day, “Aftershock” is a film where the faster you realize the kind of low grade production it is, the faster you may want to turn it off (or walk out).

Follow me on Twitter @moviesmarkus

Fast & Furious 6

Written by Markus Robinson, Edited by Nicole I. Ashland

Markus Rating: 4 Stars

Rated PG-13 for intense sequences of violence and action and mayhem throughout, some sexuality and language

Dwayne “The Rock” Johnson is officially the new Arnold Schwarzenegger. But more importantly, the person in charge of keeping The Rock bicep-deep in arm butter should get some Executive Producer credits and be deemed the new hardest working man in Hollywood.

Under the direction of Justin Lin, “Fast & Furious 6” sees the return of almost everyone from “Fast Five”; including Vin Diesel as Dominic Toretto, Paul Walker as Brian O’Conner, Dwayne Johnson as Hobbs, Jordana Brewster, Tyrese Gibson, Ludacris, etc. as they come together for one last job...again. Also joining the crew is Gina Carano as Hobbs’ assistant (and my future wife) who is apparently given free rein to go MMA on everyone she sees fit. And returning (because she’s got nothing better to do) is Michelle Rodriguez, in a storyline less focused on, the better.

Synopsis: Duhhhhhh….Fast cars go fast.

Why the movie works: This is clearly Lin’s best visual stab at the franchise yet, as he not only creates the best things-blow-up climax to come out of any of these films, but also (for the second time in a row) gives his audiences exactly what they came to see. Lin does a brilliant job of making sure there is either a car driving fast, a woman in a bikini, or the Rock giving someone the people’s eyebrow and spouting off something fantastically WWE-ish, on the screen at all times. In fact, he has done so well with guiding this franchise into the realm of highly entertaining B movie fluff, that it is a wonder why he is being replaced by horror director James Wan for the upcoming “Fast & Furious 7”.

Side Note:  I realize Lin did direct both “The Fast and the Furious: Tokyo Drift” and “Fast & Furious” as well, but let’s be honest, those movies are better left forgotten.

Final Thought:  Aside from the fact that “Fast & Furious 6” is a tad too long, that Vin Diesel still calls what he does acting, that there is an odd body distortion phenomenon which happens when Diesel and The Rock stand next to each other and that the storyline doesn’t really matter (especially the more sentimental sections) I’m not ashamed to say that I was thoroughly entertained as I walked out of the theater. And while I realize that this is a lot to look past, if you are the type to spend your hard earned money on a movie entitled “Fast & Furious 6”; a movie which is filled with unbelievable, yet well constructed, high flying, auto-centric stunts and enough comic relief to get the casual fan through, then this installment is clearly worth watching.

Follow me on Twitter @moviesmarkus

The Hangover Part 3

Written by Markus Robinson, Edited by Nicole I. Ashland

Markus Rating: 1 Star

Rated R for pervasive language including sexual references, some violence and drug content, and brief graphic nudity

Kudos to director Todd Phillips (who should really be directing action flicks) for not giving audiences another carbon copy storyline of the original; even though this movie is set in Las Vegas…again. In saying that, Phillips seemed to have had only one goal in mind when making “The Hangover Part 3”. And that was to make something better than the insanely lazy and disgusting retread that was “The Hangover Part 2”. But while this isn’t as offensively gross or vulgar, it is offensively tame and dull and uneventful.

The Synopsis: Like one of those stupid Fast & Furious sequels, the gang’s all back. This includes the likes of Zach Galifianakis as Alan, Ed Helms as Stu, Justin Bartha as the other guy and Bradley Cooper, as the guy who can’t put these movies in his rearview fast enough.  In this final installment, the guys stage an intervention for Alan because…well, maybe because it took them three movies to realize how mentally unstable he actually was. They plan a trip together in order to get Alan some treatment, but, through a series of lazily plotted events, they end up getting mixed up with Mr. Chow (Ken Jeong) again in…You know what? Instead of writing my usual long-winded review, I will mix it up a little and do something a bit unconventional. Just to preface this next statement, I usually take notes while watching a movie. But, since this was touted (from the trailers) to be the epic finale to these inexplicably beloved comedies, I decided to keep a tally of laughs instead. That is to say, instead of notes I counted all of the times “The Hangover 3” did its job and made me laugh. Here are the results of my experiment:

During this comedy, which had a runtime of 100 minutes, I laughed twice and smirked once. Review over.

Follow me on Twitter @moviesmarkus