I, Frankenstein

Every January, Hollywood decides to dump multiple piles of expensive trash upon the audience in the hopes of making a bit of scratch. One of those piles for 2014 is I, Frankenstein.

The Creature, dubbed Adam, (Aaron Eckhart) because why not, is hurriedly rushed through his prologue where his creator, Frankenstein, dies. Once we get the two or three minutes of back story out of the way, Adam makes a shaky alliance with a group of gargoyles that protect humans from demons on Earth. The rest of the movie is a dimly-lit film where badly CGI'd demons battle badly CGI'd gargoyles and grumpy ol' Adam is stuck in the middle where he feels that this is not his fight.

Honestly, they should just call this movie by its real title: Underworld 5. The lighting, acting, release schedule and hammy bad guy portrayal by Bill Nighy all seem like they were filming I, Frankenstein under the release of the next film in the Underworld franchise. You take the demons and gargoyles and replace them with werewolves and vampires and the toned-up Aaron Eckhart and replace him with the toned-up Kate Beckinsale and you just made Underworld 5 without anyone even realizing it.

Aaron Eckhart, eager to show off how much time he spent in the gym, sleepwalks through the film without being bothered to even try to have some fun, in what is a silly premise. Not doing him any favors is writer/director Stuart Beattie who gives us a film that is way too serious for its own good. I understand if you are trying to make a classic version of the Frankenstein story, but the idea is so silly, that some humor would have done wonders for this film. Instead we get Adam, who is no fun, plodding along in a story devoid of fun while being shot in a style that drains any last hope of fun. Instead, we get a bland and utterly boring film that, where no one seems to have any fun, relegating the viewer to not have any fun either.

And honestly, where's the fun in that?

2.4/10

A Good Day To Die Hard

Oh, John McClane. Where have you gone? 25 years after the original classic, nothing recognizable remains from the once classic action film series.

Budget restraints and a sense of greed permeate the latest entry into the Die Hard franchise as John McClane leaves American soil and must stop Russian terrorists. What is this, 1986? Stock Russian bad guy Viktor plans on silencing: whistle blower Yuri before a trial can happen that implicates Viktor as an evil, uber bad guy. CIA Agent Jack McClane, (Jai Courtney) through circumstances ends up with Yuri and tries to protect him. Once an attempt on Yuri's life has been put into motion, Jack and Yuri go on the run long enough for Yuri to provide evidence to Jack and the CIA Department.

Where does John McClane (Bruce Willis) fit into this? Not well, actually. John goes on "vacation" to Russia to help Jack out. For the main portion of the film, John really has no idea what is going on and plays second fiddle in the plot to Jack and Yuri. Most of the time, John fumbles around, surviving death-defying stunt after death-defying stunt with very little recourse of pain in this film. I understand that John has been here before, but any sense of logic, even the smallest sense, would have been welcome into this film.

Logic. That's a word that really should have been provided to writer, Skip Woods and director, John Moore. The action in the film is overblown, the stunts ridiculous and the acting very forced. One-liners come fast and furious from John, though none really have any staying power. Even Live Free or Die Hard had "I was out of bullets."

Nothing about this film is memorable except for the bad guys. Their plan: which includes harvesting weapons-grade uranium from Chernobyl (again, what is this, 1986?). Along with that, this is the first film in the Dir Hard franchise where the bad guys really don't even get their evil plan going. According to the script, they begin the motions of their nefarious plan, but then John and Jack interfere and the climax begins here. These are the most inept and least dangerous bad guys in the Die Hard franchise by far. And this includes Timothy Olyphant.

I really didn't like this film, which suffers from sub-par directing and a horrendous script. This franchise died in 1995 and unfortunately, the international market will make sure the franchise keeps ticking. Plus, who'd have thought that John McClane could read Russian? And I get it, Bruce, you're on vacation.

This film should have Died Hard.

2.7/10

Jack Reacher

Tom Cruise re-teams with Christopher McQuarrie to bring the literary character Jack Reacher to the big screen.

I have never read any book involving the character of Jack Reacher, including 'One Shot', which this film used as the basis. So, not being able to compare and contrast the book versus the film, I will solely be reviewing the film on its own merits.

After a sniper guns down five people in Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania, the sniper is easily tracked down. Using crime scene evidence, this appears to be an open and shut case. During his interrogation, the sniper, James Barr (Joseph Sikora) writes down "Get Jack Reacher".

We learn that Jack Reacher (Tom Cruise) is a ghost. There is little information on him, and most of it comes in the form of his military history. Jack Reacher shows up and almost immediately teams up with Barr's defense attorney Helen Rodin (Rosamund Pike). Helen is just trying to ensure that Barr gets a fair trial while her father, District Attorney Alex Rodin (Richard Jenkins) feels that this case is a slam dunk.

As such with a film like this, the case isn't a slam dunk and Jack Reacher begins to find evidence that may free Barr. Jack uses his intelligence and wit to overcome obstacles that are continually thrown his way in an effort to avert him from saving Barr. In typical Tom Cruise fashion, action, fists and one-liners are thrown out in a fury with most landing for good shots.

Writer and director Christopher McQuarrie makes an old-school feeling solid action/mystery film. McQuarrie's script is a little too generous with wrapping things up in a neat little package, though. As an action film, though, you could do much, MUCH worse. There are no humongous set pieces or large amounts of gaudy CGI continuously hitting you over the head. This is a solid, stripped-down, yet somewhat forgettable action film. Christopher McQuarrie provides a few action set pieces that do not feel over the top (with the exception of a fist fight in the rain) and doesn't try to 'wow' you with whatever new CGI creation that was devised this week. Instead, the action is solid, just like the performances.

Jack Reacher does not really stand out amongst other characters that Tom Cruise has played before. He is secretive, but a solid good guy who wants things to be done right... even if he is the only one who can do it that way. Jack Reacher follows a solid code of conduct, and with the exception of a car chase, adheres to what he believes in. Granted, as he never seems to fear what he is getting in to, there really is no threat that anything bad is going to happen to him.

Jack Reacher is nothing grandiose, but also nothing gratuitous either. Just a good old fashioned action/thriller. And sometimes that is all you need.

7.3/10