Dope - Review

“Dope” – Review

‘Dope” is a drama comedy produced by Academy Award winning actor Forrest Whitaker and Sean ‘Puff Daddy “Combs, with original music by Pharrell Williams. The film was a huge hit and a critically acclaimed favorite at the 2015 Sundance Film Festival with the audiences there telling the modern story about a high school senior named “Malcolm” played by new comer Shameik Moore.

From the onset we see Malcolm with the support of his mother and two close friends has taken great care of managing his life away from drugs, teenage pregnancy and crime all the while navigating the daily perils of basic life in a tough neighborhood and school life in Los Angeles.

Malcolm is a geek and generally confident and proud about his geeky perception, which is visually reinforced by his antiquated look in the form of a high flat top haircut. He makes the most of his days by always doing the right things and has a genuine earnestness to himself. And while he has an odd quirky affinity for old 1980’s early 1990’s rap hip hop music, Malcolm is a decent kid, juggling college applications, academic interviews and the upcoming SAT test with the working hard goal of getting into Harvard.   

One day while trying to get home on his bike with his two close friends he has a chance encounter on a street corner with a personable drug dealer who asks him to do him a favor. He asks Malcolm to go to a young lady’s home down the street named “Nakia” (Zoe Kravitz) to invite her to his underground birthday party which Malcolm reluctantly does. Later that same night when Malcolm, his two friends and eventually Nakia all arrive at the party, all is well until masked gunmen come crashing to the party with guns blazing on the tip that the drug dealer birthday boy has 6 kilos of drugs at the party club. What happens next leads Malcolm and friends on an adventure that could allow him to go from being a dismissive geek to someone very cool, someone who goes to jail or someone who could be dead.

PROS: In the beginning of the film a scrawl comes across the screen to give three standard definitions of what the word “Dope” means in the dictionary and with that moment the film metaphorically lays the frame work of how it will develop its story as a comedy with dramatic moments throughout. The director wants these characters to be seen not as stereotypes but as real human beings prone to making both serious decisions as well as silly and comical ones. But whatever course of actions they take they do so with the appearance of being real life decisions that are true, sincere with authentic vulnerabilities and consequences at stake and with the right mix of humor blended in for our cinematic viewing ride.

It also makes a great effort with its screenplay to be both funny and smart simultaneously all the while rooted to the generational unique ways teenagers communicate with each other but never so cryptic as not to be understood by any generation watching this film. 

The cast of young actors in this film have real credibility from the opening scene as they execute their characters uniquely developed personalities with crisp sharpness and wit, along with some verbal exchanges between them that were simply hilarious.

CONS: The director has made a very good film that works for most of its 1:55  running time, but there were a few scenes that didn’t work for me. The first involved a woman who had a weird personality that manifested itself with an always being naked obsession. It also didn't help she was not a very good actresses as well. The other scene involved the initial meeting between Malcolm and his Harvard mentor. Their dialog in the meeting seemed to be by design was meant to be a bit cryptic and mysterious. But from my view point I thought it was a bit too mysterious and too clever to its own detriment. In essence I knew what was happening here, but listening to their exchange with each other I wasn’t absolutely sure what the two were actually trying to convey to one another. 

Finally, if you hate the “N” word, then stay at home. It’s in the film a lot, but uses it within the context of natural conversation. There was also a moment where the word came up as a focal point of debate executed with a mix of seriousness and humor about its usage as a matter of social acceptance or not. Bottom line, this is not a criticism of the film by me, rather I am letting every know it is in the movie often and was used by the director (my estimation) to make the film feel it was honest and “keeping it real.”  

CONCLUSIONS: "Dope" is currently and probably permanently in limited release. Still it is a must see film for 2015 as it will remind you structurally as a mix of Tom Cruise’s “Risky Business”, Ice Cube’s “Friday” and Matthew Broderick’s “Ferris Bueller’s Day Off”. It makes clever fun of itself, fun of the environment of which these characters reside in and fun at the circumstances that sometimes befall on them that often were not of their own making. It also works hard to talk about modern big city African American life while adroitly being anti-stereotype about the culture as a whole. In addition it deals honestly with the anxieties and complexities of the inner city and its day to day intended - unintended offerings, especially for young teens that don’t always get their stories told in thought provoking books, edgy newspaper stories or the six o’clock news. And while it has some story line hiccups along the way, “Dope” is a vibrant, freewheeling, funny and forceful film that is both entertaining and very believable.

3 – 3/4 Stars

     

   

Jurassic World – Review

Jurassic World – Review

Colin Trevorrow directs the epic action-adventure sequel called “Jurassic World” which is largely based on the characters created by author Michael Crichton and was previously Directed by Steven Spielberg as “Jurassic Park”. That original 1993 film which was nominated for Best Picture was made for the small sum by today standards for $63 million and grossed $1,029 billion worldwide. Spielberg returns in this installment as Executive Producer; which mean he advised and wrote the checks for this $150 million dollar project.

The story picks up 22 years since the infamous T Rex went nuts causing the surviving characters to evacuate Jurassic Park. As you recall those who made it off the island in the helicopter all had somber – reflective looks on their faces that maybe collectively they learned a valuable lesson that no matter how well intentioned the idea (profitability) of bringing these extinct animals back to life, to quote the character Dr. Ian Malcom (Jeff Goldblum) …… “Your scientist were so preoccupied with whether or not they could they never stop to think if they should”.

Well, apparently 22 years is enough time not to get greedy and stupid again as we see from the opening few minutes they did not heed Ian’s advice as “Jurassic World” is bigger, more technological advanced and has all the trapping of a new modern Disney World amusement park, only in this park the entertainment can and will eat you. But hey, what can go wrong this time with all of the new high tech devices, state of the art visual monitoring security, human para - military personnel security at the ready and safety protocols abound to account for every single contingency. Again, what could go wrong? Well something has to otherwise you don’t have a movie to go see.

The crux of this plot is arrogance and greed has take hold of common sense again as lead scientists have been developing new genetically cross matched dinosaurs with made up convoluted names not worth repeating. However, when you see their latest creation (and they make a point to revealing its existence early on in the film) the only thing that comes to mind is a T-Rex hybrid mixed strung out on caffeine, adrenaline and steroids. This new puppy want to eat and kill everything. And with that small revelation you can figure out the rest.  There are thousands of tourists on the island and this new monster managers to get loose. So, let the running, chasing, screaming and half eaten people scenes begin.

PROS: “Jurassic World” has one good thing going for. Its very fun to watch as the pace of this film is executed very well, so much so you don’t have time to ask probative subconscious questions through out as I tend to do. You are a part of this ride with lots of endless action scenes with some clearly designed to replicate itself from the 1993 original sequences as well Alien and Raiders of the Lost Ark.

Also, Chris Pratt is the new hot guy in Hollywood and he has immediate on screen charm and charisma. For the most part he is the central reason the movies holds together as well as it does given the believability of the plot per se.  

CONS: Clichés abound. When you see a rumbling over weight security guard eating a cookie you know he will be eaten. When you have a pudgy corporate executive in the film who see’s nothing but greater opportunity to expand he will eventually do something stupid. As much as Chris Pratt was the glue to the film I could not but smirk a bit at him being some kind of “Raptor Whisperer”. And finally when you see a member of the parks senior management be the pilot lead on a helicopter assault with trained military personnel, well you get it again something bad will happen. Oh did I mentioned that they establish early in the film that he doesn’t fly a helicopter that well. Duh?

Finally, Bryce Dallas Howard plays a character named Claire Dearing who is the day to day manager of this multi-million dollar facility. I have her seen in other films and she always gives a solid performance. However, the writing of her character’s personality seem less grounded to the idea of her actually being capable of managing this kind of facility with all of it complexities and more like some self-involved semi smug “House Wife of Beverly Hills”. Though it didn’t happen it would not have surprised me in the middle of her being chased by a dinosaur she would stop to use her phone to make reservations next week at some five star restaurant.  

Conclusion: “Jurassic World” is more like the Fast and Furious franchise with just a tiny bit more of its story in tune with some element of reality. Just as long as you have countless reimagined dinosaurs to chase and eat and you don’t try to analyze things too much beyond that.

All in all, “Jurassic World” is very fun to watch, especially the last 40 minutes involving 4 Raptors. The film is visually stimulating and never has a real single boring moment throughout and after all with thousands of people on the island at one time there are far more innovative ways to kill them and they do to entertain you.

3 – 1/2 Stars

Spy - Review

Spy – Review

Actress Melissa McCarthy takes another spin in the comedy genre with a twist on the spy - James Bondish stories of fancy cars, international spies, nuclear bombs, diamonds, casinos, knife fights, slick jets, guns, martinis, handsome men in tuxedos and pretty women in evening gowns in the pleasantly entertaining film simply called “Spy”

.

McCarthy plays a CIA agent named Susan Cooper who has an unassuming desk job as a “live” analyst. “Live” meaning that she sits in a bunker in Langley, but through advances of drone like optic technologies she can navigate the steps of the field agents through rooms and hallways; essentially keeping them from harms away by being the eyes above of what is bad coming around the corner.

When one of the CIA's top agents is lost in the field and the other top agent’s identity is compromised, Susan is the CIA’s only alternative to investigate the perpetrator of the lost agent as well as follow up on the case he was working on of infiltrating the world of a deadly arms dealer.

PROS: Written and directed by Paul Feig, who previously directed McCarthy in “The Bridesmaids” and “The Heat”, Feig throws a lot of visuals, plot points and an endless amount of strange characters on the screen. But the results are they all work, especially the hysterical egomaniacal exaltations of CIA spy played by Jason Stratham as well as the debonair stylish presentation of CIA spy played by Jude Law. And even though they never tried to hide their British accents it’s not an issue to the story all. There also is a range of other cast members giving funny performance including Rose Byrne, Bobby Cannavale, Allison Janney, Curtis “50 Cent” Jackson, and Miranda Hart.

But the real star of this film is McCarthy as she is in virtually every frame of this 1:55 running time film. And like the great comedic actress Lucille Ball, McCarthy performance and timing was spot on funny and charming. She also when required made her character genuinely serious and reflective as well as unafraid to make the jokes about her with effective humor. She also showed some real fearlessness to mixing it up in various fight scenes with good effectiveness.

CONS: None really. You need to know going in this is a comedic spy story and the sense of urgency and threat is low key.

CONCLUSIONS: With a great opening musical score to start the film off I was thoroughly entertained and laughed at the upbeat and contemporary humor put up on the screen in “Spy”. The tone of the film is endearing, appropriately sexist as hell, with lots of solidly executed mild action and overall a comedy with a nice breezy feel to it all around.

McCarthy in my estimation is Hollywood’s equivalent to an ATM machine, you put her in it and money comes out – she is always funny and I believe capable of doing anything. Mark my word when someone figures out the right dramatic role for her one day, she will be walking up the stage one day to accept her Oscar; she is always that good.

3 – 3/4 Stars

Tomorrowland – Review

Tomorrowland – Review

Director Brad Bird who won Oscars for Best Animation for “The Incredibles” and “Ratatouille” and who also direct the action packed “Mission: Impossible - Ghost Protocol”, takes on another feature film starring Oscar Winner George Clooney in a mystery adventure story called “Tomorrowland”.

The story has a bit of a time travel plot – component to it. It is also where we find early on Clooney’s character as a 10 year old-ish boy genius named Frank who is obsessed with his jet pack invention. While trying to showcase his jet pack idea at the 1964 World Fair in New York he has an encounter with a mysterious young girl of his own age named Athena, who gives Frank a T shaped pin that catapults him into a realm where it’s the future and people are making wonderful things for the betterment of mankind and the earth as well. 

Meanwhile back on earth years later after Frank had disappeared a super bright and idealistic teenage girl named Casey who sees the world slowly being destroyed has come in possession of the same T shaped pin that Frank received years ago. To her astonishment she discovers that when she touches it she is catapulted (back and forth) to the same dimensional time and place as has happened to Frank when he was a young boy.

So, the story begins as we find a confused Casey going out to solve the mystery of what exactly the magic pin is, where did it come from and why did someone give it to her.

PROS: Tomorrowland has a very good intentioned heart, with real charm and warmth to its basic core which could have you watching it simply for the overall message that the earth is slowly and systematically being destroyed by human’s hands and human procrastination. On the countervailing hand it also has a noble ambition to it cinematic soul, as it wants to convey the eternal optimism that exist within all humans to providing the lasting solutions to the world’s problems and social ills, etc., etc.

CONS: While its plot is well-intentioned and a lot of its message it true, it also is a very preachy film about how current humans are not being good stewards of the earth as we sit by and doing nothing about what is happening around us. And while I have no doubt this film tries to reach the next generation to coming up with imaginative and creative solutions for our blue planet, in the end the film’s effort falls flat on getting the masses really motivated to actually doing something about it.

Conclusion: “Tomorrowland” has three problems. One, it is poorly written and poorly directed, in that it felt like watching someone open a puzzle box that said 100 pieces, only to see when its contents are spilled on to the coffee table it’s actually more like one million pieces. The meandering dialog and direction made this movie going experience overly complicated and frustrating to watch and listen to.

Two, George Clooney and Hugh Laurie are veteran actors who know their craft well and made as much of this limited disjointed plot as interesting as they could. But the drag on the film for me were the kids who annoyed me to no end; especially the lead character Casey who was supposed to be the endearing, smart and  good hearted one to the story. She came across as whinny and a total nuisance to the film, even to the point where there is a scene (which is supposed to be funny) where she beats a robot to death with a bat more than a full minute. It goes without saying I don’t condone any violence on children or women, but I do know why certain species eat their young, especially if they are as annoying as Casey.

Finally three, someone forgot to tell Director Brad Bird he was making a feature film and not an animation film again. For all practical purposes this movie felt like it would have been more suited in the animation format in that it looked like and felt like an animation film, especially with its almost animated look and visions of the future. I am not talking about the concepts or ideas of the future, I mean literally the physical look of the movie looked like special effects animation.

Note to Brad Bird, in the future watch films like “Gravity”, “Mad Max” or any of the recent soon to be release new “Star Wars” film trailers if you ever venture into this kind of technical futuristic script again, they will serve you well for generating ideas. Or maybe he can just find his way to doing more animation films soon.

In the end, I am not sure who the intended audience was for this film. Was it mostly for kids? Mostly for adults? Or both. For either audience I found unfortunately the film to be a mess that missed its mark by being emotionally underwhelming with a wobbly story line that was structurally incoherent.  

“Tomorrowland” made me feel more annoyed and grumpy about an important subject matter rather than optimistic.

2 Stars

Mad Max – Fury Road – Review

Mad Max – Fury Road – Review

It’s been 36 years since “Mad Max” the original low budgeted $400K film that eventually grossed $100M worldwide came to American theaters. It was a landmark film from the imaginative mind of Australian medical doctor turned film Director George Miller who subsequently directed it’s equally successful 1981 sequel in titled “Mad Max 2 - Road Warrior” and the 1985 sequel in titled “Mad Max Beyond The Thunderdome”. Now its 2015 and Director Miller gives theater audiences his latest adaptation in the “Mad Max” story through the same character in highway patrolman “Max Rockatansky” in “Mad Max – Fury Road”.

If you are old enough to be a huge fan of the two originals, as I was, then you will recall the earlier Max films starred unknown Peekskill, New York American born turned transplanted West Pymble, Sydney Australian citizen actor Mel Gibson. It was American movie going audience’s first look at Gibson back then and subsequently his first big break into film stardom.

In this new story we see Gibson’s role of “Max” now played by British actor Tom Hardy, along with Charlize Theron as “Furiosa” and pivotal co-star Nicholas Hoult (About A Boy 2002) as ‘Nux”.  And as with the earlier films the story takes place in the not so distant future of 2060 AD where we see our earth is in ruins from some unexplained apocalyptic catastrophic worldwide calamitous event that has caused the downfall of all civilization.

“Max”, who was a former highway patrolman and whose family was killed during the societal collapse, is just trying to survive when things get even worse for him that thrust him into a chance meeting with a bald woman named “Furiosa” who is desperately attempting to cross an immense desert away from a tyrannical Fascist leader named “King Immortan Joe” and his completely bloodthirsty military force called “The War Boys”, who are also collectively the rulers over a totalitarian desert kingdom they call “The Wasteland”. But why? Well that is the plot of the movie.

For “Max” and “Furiosa” their only hope to ever reaching some safety is with the help of each other and with “Max” expansive knowledge of the desert.

PROS: Since 1979 Director Miller has had plenty time to consider a thorough re-imagining of technical ideas to infuse into this story that were impossible to do with his previous “Max” films. Today at his disposal he has the capacity to use the latest in digital cameras, lightening and special affects software to incorporate those ideas to greater realistic affect.

Also, MM-FR is thematically the same original story; that being a story about a dystopian fictional imagined society of a dehumanizing landscapes and dehumanizing people who exist only to survive in this dire terrain, you ask the bottom line question. Does MM-FR deliver the goods?

Well, I will say let the demented fanatic despairing painful mayhem begin, as this is one of the best summer nonstop action films I have seen in a while and will probably be the best action film you will see this summer period.  

With old story and new technology in hand Director Miller comes out swinging his camera as would an orchestra conductor’s baton with the same hyper elevated action and energy, though I would liken this film’s pacing to the perspective of someone being off their Ritalin for a year while strung out on 18 cups of espresso a day. Everything and everyone is more than just a little jacked up here.

MM-FR makes anything you have seen in the “Fast and Furious” franchise look like small children riding tiny plastic hobby horses on an amusement ride in a rural town on the fair grounds that is next to an abandon burnt out mall. Each and every minute watching MM-FR felt like someone had their foot on top of mine pushing down on my car’s accelerator while driving a 100 miles an hour inside a city with no traffic lights at rush hour.

Acting wise Tom Hardy and Charlize Theron own this movie like two commanders of the same ship. Hardy is the lead character and delivers as solid of a charismatic performance as I have come to expect of him, but surprisingly the real star of this film is Charlize Theron.

Theron is electrifyingly flawless in her execution as “Furiosa”. She’s a warrior and yet while she may look manly with her tall stature and shaved head, there is no mistaking “Furiosa” as some androgynous man or as “the weird looking woman chick” in this film. Theron makes the concerted effort to never letting her character be defined by being just the woman nor be restricted by it in any way as she comes across as one of the toughest and most resilient action heroes since Sigourney Weaver’s “Ripley” jumped into that yellow industrial lift loader in Aliens. Girl friend is straight up stoic ass kicker. And when I say she was great, I mean this could be Best Supporting Actress Oscar nomination performance she delivers here.

Also MM – FR is a perfectly executed stand-alone work; meaning you don’t need to revisit the other 3 Max films just to catch up or understand this film at all.

CONS: I got nothing.

CONCLUSION: While there is tons of violence none of it is out of context to simply shocking you purely for the purpose of having a disgusting or graphic impact moment. Each frame of this film made me feel like I was dropped out of thin air into something horrible, foreboding and just plain bad with genuine life and death consequences at stake. And while the film never lets up with a real pause or utilizes any cinematic massaging of the story with preposterously ridiculous computer gymnastics or fake gimmicks, this film looked really difficult to make. It also worked very hard and very well of deliberately getting inside your head that may have you asking “is this real?”

Exquisitely shot, while MM-FR is available in 3-D, I saw it in the normal digital format. It is so imaginative and so well made I really don’t think you need to spend the extras $10 just to have something get temporarily visually embellished inside you mind.

Now for all of you “I will wait to see it” cheap NETFLIX-ers, listen up, don’t bother, you absolutely have to see this film in the theater. Never has isolation and desert with mutant looking humans running amuck’ creating endless chaos and violence against less than mutant looking humans ever look so good.

Finally, OK here I go. Are you ready for this?  “Mad Max – Fury Road” is a masterpiece about what unhinged tribal chaos looks like. More to a contemporary point and analogously speaking, this film is a high octane action packed “western” kind of ride from hell.  And while it is not actually a western, it is one in form, style and attitude just like those old time western films made during the 1950s – 1960’s where you see the line distinctly drawn between the hard charging masked “bad guys”, galloping and shooting at the “good guys” and their stage coach filled with bags of gold. The only “unhinged” difference here is that in MM-FR the people riding on and in that same stage coach with the supposed bags of gold (“the good guys”), well they got guns too and they are just as bad and nasty as the people chasing them.

You have not seen a film like this ever before, as it is constantly drenched in an odd contrast of desert dust, fire, breathless chases, unworldly outfits, scary masks, fireballs, filth, jagged scars, men wearing make-up, women wearing no makeup, strange tattoos, raggedy clothes, androgynous characters, ripped up muscles, rigged out cars, weird looking gasoline trucks, eccentric looking motorbikes, mud and rocks, people swinging on sticks, fire breathing guitars, sexy women and of course blood. And yet with all of this potential mess of assorted visuals for you to contemplate or confuse you, Director Miller never allows a single moment of these background variables to distract you from the plot and enjoyment of his film.

If you see this you will never look at rush hour the same again and from what I can see with a running time of just short of 2 hours MM-FR is a must see film for 2015. It is fabulous to look at, kinetically pleasurable and very intelligently conceived as a lawless demolition grimy freak show ride around, below, above and into hell.

4 Stars Plus

Best Movies About Mothers

Best Movies About Mothers

Alice Doesn’t Live Here Anymore (1974) Angela’s Ashes (1999) Bambi (1942) Changeling (2008) Cinderella (1950) Delores Claiborne (1995) Edward Scissorhands (1990) Erin Brockovich (2000) Forrest Gump (1995) Freaky Friday (2003) Frozen River (2008) Gloria (1980) Imitation of Life (1959) Incendies (2010) Juno (2007) Mamma Mia (2008) Mask (1985)

Mother (2009) Mother and Child (2009) Mrs. Doubtfire (1993) Ordinary People (1980) Places in the Heart (1984) Pride and Prejudice (2005) Sense and Sensibility (1995) Sophie's Choice (1982) Sounder (1972) Steel Magnolias (1989) Terms of Endearment (1983) The Blind Side (2009) The Grapes of Wrath (1940) The Joy Luck Club (1993) The Kids Are All Right (2010) The Sound of Music (1965) Volver (2006)

Avengers: Age of Ultron

Avengers: Age of Ultron

Its spring time, it’s early in the month of May, fresh popcorn smell is in the air and the perpetually annoying sounds of hundreds of flip flops walking past me are all about. Well, it must be that time again where any movie just two summers ago that made even the slightest profit above the price of a McDonald’s Happy Meal comes out again to our cinematic doorsteps.

Its goal? Well to attempt to titillate, stimulate and hopefully recapture its original magic with the movie going audiences again in the form of Hollywood’s perpetual cash cow effort called the “interminable block buster sequel”. Such is the case with Marvels comic book Avengers cast in the title of “Avengers:  Age of Ultron”

.

Once again we see Iron Man, The Hulk, Captain America, Black Widow, Thor and Hawkeye team up to save the world. What? Did you think they would do anything else like go after inside traders on Wall Street? Obviously I digress as the new story takes us on the journey of saving the world (again) only this time through the cause of one of the Avengers own mistake.

Without too much detail here, when we see Tony Stark trying to jumpstart an artificial intelligence that was dormant into some kind of peacekeeping program, things go terrible awry with global chaotic hell being cut loose. So, again it’s up to our mightiest super heroes to be put to the test again to save the planet from the newly created villainous threat named Ultron. Let the inconsequential, mindless, destructive 2 hours and 11 minutes mayhem begin.

Pros: If you were definitely planning to go the movies this weekend and you and your date have narrowed it down to the choices of “Get Hard”, “Paul Blart: Mall Cop”, “Child 44”, or the “Avengers”, then it’s a no brainer, the Avengers it is. It will hold your entertainment attention.

Also, as actors go I have always been a fan of James Spader. He’s one of the few actors that exude intelligence when he is acting and reciting his lines. He’s in this new Avengers film, but you want see him as he is the voice of the metal Ultron. If you don’t know who James Spader he has some limited success in films such “Stargate”, “2 Days in the Valley” and “Lincoln”. He has garnered more critical success on TV in such successful shows as “The Practice”, “Boston Legal” and currently “The Blacklist”.

Cons: Aaaaaaah where do I begin. Look, this movie is not bad, instead what it is its just bland with no one to really root for or have a visceral connection to. Loki in the previous film as the principle villain was a great counterweight to the well-intended Avengers heroes. He was someone who was equal parts debonair and charming and also devious and diabolical as hell. He was also quite deceptively good in making you the viewer subliminally think that there was the small possibility he might just end his evil ways only to surprise you (metaphorically speaking) by stabbing the audience in its viewing back.

Conclusion: During the creative plot development part of this film by the Disney Executives who produced this film, they appeared to give us an Avengers sequel here as if they could just roll out any old story that they could make up; just fill it with a lot of non-stop action and the audience will eat this up. Well, that may be true, but you can kill off a great franchise rather quickly when you don’t work to keep it fresh and miscast it (aka “The Bourne Legacy” and Jeremy Renner) or you can have a franchise that works well with the hard work of keeping it fresh and innovative thinking (aka the whole 007 James Bond series and Sean Connery, Pierce Brosnan to Daniel Craig).

I can't tell you not to see “Avengers: Age of Ultron”; you should see it if you like the cast and the characters from the original and their respective individual franchises. However, if you wanted to see it in the comfort of your home with a pizza delivery on the way, then that would be in my estimation the better call to watching this rather pedestrian effort.

3 Stars