Showing posts with label 2016. Show all posts
Showing posts with label 2016. Show all posts

Sunday, January 1, 2017

Farewell 2016: A Personal and Cinematic Year in Review

Kicked off the year with Donnie and Mike

The year 2016 is currently synonymous with hatred and negativity. People on social media have made their sentiments about the year very clear through numerous humorous memes and tweets. It's easily the go-to thing to make fun of, and the band wagon of all jokes as of late. Most people dislike the year for one or both of two reasons: a lot famous celebrities and entertainers died this year and Donald Trump won the Presidency. While there were a few celebrity deaths that were quite saddening and the hatred brewed from the election in general, not the results, was disheartening, these things were far from venomous enough to taint an entire year for me. Because in all honesty, 2016 was one of the best years of my life, from both a personal stand point, and from a movie watching experience. Let's break it down.

2016 was the year where I got more so into cinematic journalism than ever before. Although I had always written for my own blog and school paper, I wouldn't necessarily call those the big leagues. After getting my feet wet in late 2015 by interviewing Scott Adkins, I eventually did what I never thought I'd get to do, meet and interview major actors in person, specifically Donnie Yen and Mike Tyson for Ip Man 3. Talk about awesome. It's one thing to meet an actor you like, but it's different when they don't even live in your own country and aren't exactly easy to find or meet up with. Meeting Donnie and Mike is currently the high light of my journalistic career, bar none.

I also got to review more advanced screeners for films such as Ip Man 3 (my first in person screening), Kickboxer: Vengeance (which main actor Alain Moussi shouted me out to about on his Facebook), and Kill Zone 2 (which I got to E-Mail interview Tony Jaa about). I even dabbled in product reviews, such as the Arrow Video releases of two Sho Kosugi films and david j. moore's The Good, The Tough, and the Deadly book. I also received a bunch of free Blu-Rays and DVD's throughout the year, which was quite nice. Come on, who doesn't love free stuff? I must have saved about $100 on movies I would have bought otherwise.

Hanging with the Van Damme boys, Sheldon and Ernie.

Through my review of The Good, the Tough, and the Deadly, I discovered that there was a book signing at Dark Delicacies in Burbank, CA, where I got to meet some filmmakers and authors I had been following for some time. The biggest take away was meeting one of my favorite authors, Vern of Outlaw Vern, whom is most notable for writing the bible on Steven Seagal. It was great to finally be able to put a face and a voice to his writing after so many years. Don't worry Vern, I swear to never reveal your true identity to the world. Me and my friend Chris also got to meet directors Sheldon Lettich (Double Impact, Legionnaire, The Hard Corps) and Ernie Barbarsh (Assassination Games, 6 Bullets, Pound of Flesh), two guys who have made several movies with our favorite action star, Jean-Claude Van Damme. They were very sweet and a blast to meet.

2016 was also the first year where I catalogued every single movie that I watched throughout the year. I had always wanted to do this, but had never actually committed before. Through the use of Letterboxd, I finally did it, and can confirm that I watched 238 movies in 2016, both new and old. If you want to see the specifics, you can check them out here. I may have watched far too many Steven Seagal films, more so than any other actor I believe.

As far as movie-going went, 2016 was a real mixed bag. The new films that were bad, specifically the I.P. focused blockbusters, were especially bad, while the smaller independent features, were beyond fantastic. If there was ever a year to point too that demonstrates the vast difference in the output of our current cinematic world, it would be this one. Below you will find multiple lists that I thought were worth making in order to explain my year of movie watching. There are two that concern 2016, with one being about the very best and the other the worst. There are also two lists regarding older films that I watched. One details the best discoveries of mine, films that I had never seen before, as well as a list devoted to re-discoveries of mine where I fell in love with films again that I had not seen in a long time. And since I'm a huge action fan, I'm writing up a separate post specifically for my favorite and most disappointing action films of the year. I hope you enjoy them!

I couldn't have asked for a better quote.
Ten Best Films of 2016:
10) Hacksaw Ridge 
9) Hell or High Water 
8) The Nice Guys
7) Moonlight
6) The Lobster
5) The Wailing
4) Green Room
3) La La Land
2) Swiss Army Man
1) SPL II: A Time for Consequences

Ten Worst Films of 2016:
10) Rogue One: A Star Wars Story
9) Independence Day: Resurgence
8) Central Intelligence
7) High Rise
6) Hail, Caesar!
5) Suicide Squad
4) X-Men: Apocalypse
3) Blair Witch
2) Batman v Superman: Dawn of Justice
In the presence of titans.
1) Keanu

Ten Best Older Film Discoveries of 2016:
10) Redemption (Steven Knight, Jason Statham film)
9) Snake Eyes
8) Con Air
7) The Hunt (Maads Mikkelsen film)
6) Purple Rain
5) Battle Royale
4) The Host (Bong Joon Ho, Korean one)
3) About Time
2) To Live and Die In L.A. 
1) Inside Llewyn Davis

Ten Best Older Film Re-Discoveries of 2016:
10) War of the Worlds (Spielberg one)
9) Tropic Thunder
8) The Even Stevens Movie
7) Bruce Almighty
6) Reservoir Dogs 
5) Halloween III: Season of the Witch
4) A Goofy Movie
3) Spider-Man 3
2) Love, Actually
1) An American Werewolf in London

When I look at all I did in 2016, I grew up and flourished more than than ever before, as I got my name out there, met some people, got my first Credit Card, became a manager of a movie theatre, and even got engaged. If you ask me, those are all some pretty great accomplishments, and proof that 2016 wasn't a bad year for me. Therefore, here's to 2017! Hopefully the year where I score my dream full time career job and get married. To end this post, enjoy some more photos of my journeys and adventures in 2016!

Me and my fiance.
Me pretending to take a pic with Rob Liefeld.
LACMA
More movies than time to watch them all.
My first Seagal in theatres. It sucked.
The TMNT boys.
I always snag a pic with the Apollo 13 boys at Universal.
One of the lower moments of 2016.

Thursday, November 3, 2016

Link This: Enclosure (2016) - Film Festival Review

Hey everyone! I recently reviewed an advanced screener of Patrick Rea's Enclosure, a new independent horror film showing at the St. Louis International Film Festival. While it was slow to the start, I found myself surprised with how much I enjoyed it. If you go in with low expectations, it's surprisingly good, especially for horror buffs or those with an appreciation for monster make up. It also stars Fiona Douriff, Brad Douriff's daughter, so it has a nice connection there. Check out my review here.




Monday, October 24, 2016

Jack Reacher: Never Go Back (2016) - Theatrical Review


Director: Edward Zwick
Cast: Tom Cruise, Cobie Smulders, Robert Knepper, Danika Yarosh
Country: United States
Rating: PG-13
Run Time: 118 min

Note: This review was originally written for a different website that shall go unnamed. However, the editor of the website refused to post my review because they disagreed with my opinion, stating that they would not post a review of mine unless they agreed with me. In honor of the freedom of speech and truthful journalism, I chose to post it here on my own blog. 

Movie star Tom Cruise has typically only partaken within one long standing franchise of his, the fantastic Mission: Impossible series. However, it’s nice to see him spread his legs and take a stab at another one by expanding 2012’s Jack Reacher into his latest franchise. It’s been a long standing opinion of mine, as well as many other action fans, that Christopher McQuarrie's Jack Reacher is a hugely underrated and masterfully crafted action thriller that deserved more attention and box office than it scored. It was far from a failure, but not nearly as successful as it could and should have been. 

Fast forward four years, and now we have the franchise’s first sequel, Jack Reacher: Never Go Back, directed by Edward Zwick, who previously collaborated with Cruise on 2003’s The Last Samurai. While the original film will continue to be lauded and praised by action fans alike, Never Go Back is unlikely to gain anyone’s admiration, as it is nothing more than a mediocre, but mildly watchable, studio actioner that fails to conjure up the same sense of craftsmanship imbued within the first film.

Jack Reacher: Never Turn Your Back

Never Go Back finds Jack Reacher (Tom Cruise) helping military police solve crimes as he works his way across the country. When Reacher decides to visit Susan Turner (Cobie Smulders), the military officer he has been helping solve cases, he stumbles upon a conspiracy in which she is framed for a crime that she did not commit. Matters are further complicated when Reacher discovers that he may also have a daughter that he never knew about.

Never Go Back is significantly weaker than its predecessor, almost to the point where it more closely resembles the DTV equivalent of a Jack Reacher film, although it does feature the budget and name value of a cinematic release. Whereas the first film was a throwback to the stylistic sensibilities of the gritty and patient action films of the 1970s, the sequel is more representative of post 2000s actioners with its dull exposition, needless plotting, and incomprehensible action sequences that reinforce its bland stature. All of this can be blamed upon the script and direction by Zwick, who fails to reach the heights that McQuarrie reached within the first film. It’s a shame that Zwick failed so hard, as he has built a respectable career upon dramatic and epic pieces of entertainment like Glory, The Last Samurai, and Blood Diamond. While Never Go Back is one of his smaller scaled films to date, it’s a hugely disappointing effort when held up to both its previous installment and all of Zwick’s other features.

Besides being an overly plotted film in which every single character only talks about the plight at hand, Never Go Back is barely a reintroduction or honorable representation of its titular character. After a small opening scene, that plays out far weaker than Zwick must have intended it to be, we are immediately thrust into the plot of the film with little time to get to know Reacher again. He is simply used as a vessel to carry us along a plot that we don’t care about while also providing us with some brutal beat downs and savage shootouts that don’t thrill us nearly as well as they could. While I have not read every single one of Lee Child’s ‘Jack Reacher’ novels, even I can tell that Never Go Back is a poor representation of the character. This film could have been about any action character, as there is very little to it that is distinctly ‘Jack Reacher’ about it. When you compare the charismatic, witty, and bad ass hero established in the first film, to this cold, morose, but still bad ass character from the second film, you’ll see a strong difference that reflects Zwick’s mishandling of the character and Cruise’s laziness as a performer and producer.

Mardi Gras Reacher

Speaking of Cruise, this might just be one of his weakest performances to date. He’s clearly going with the motions here, appearing bored and emotionally stagnant throughout, hardly demonstrating the charisma and energy of the movie star that he can be. Cruise joins the ranks of Liam Neeson as a superior movie star who has settled for less with straight forward action affair. While it’s great to see talented actors like Cruise tackle more straight forward action affair like this, as he has been doing for many years now, his disinterest in the genre, or specifically this project, is apparent. In all honesty, he has my permission to leave action behind and return to the more dramatic and comedic affair that made him a star.

On the action side of things, Never Go Back is a letdown, although not a complete failure. Whereas Jack Reacher featured crisp and inspired car chases, shootouts, and fist fights that benefited from their smooth cinematography and punchy sound design, the sequel is leaps and bounds weaker. It’s clear that Zwick doesn’t understand how to shoot a fight scene, let alone craft a fight scene within a plot that we care about, the way that McQuarrie does. The fights within Never Go Back are shot, edited, and scored to appear exciting, but simply aren’t so. They’re decent, thanks to some memorable moments such as a bloody take down within an airplane restroom and a kill upon a roof top. But overall, they suffer from weak coverage that reveals the production’s inability to produce visibly comprehensible action. I am glad to say that the shootouts fare better, although there are even less of those than the physical brawls. All in all, the action is far from insulting or cringe worthy, but Cruise and this franchise know and deserve better, and this is hardly their best.

On a final note, Never Go Back doesn’t feature a stellar supporting cast like the first, as it only has Cruise going for it, and even he is a let-down. The first film featured an absolutely fantastic supporting cast of major Hollywood players that made it more than just a Cruise super-show. Besides Cruise, who was at his best in the first, it also featured Rosamund Pike, Richard Jenkins, Jai Courtney, Robert Duvall, David Oyelowo, and Werner Herzog of all people. That cast alone raised it above the ranks of its similar B-movie ilk to A-movie heaven. 

However, Never Go Back’s DTV/B-movie stature is reinforced by its weak supporting cast who barely leave an impression. Smulders, who most will recognize from her turn as Agent Maria Hill in The Avengers movies, is stern and dull the entire run time. Other notable players include Robert Knepper, previously seen in this year’s Hard Target 2, as a corrupt general, although he is unfortunately denied much screen time. Patrick Heusinger acts as the film’s despicable right hand man, simply named “The Hunter,” but can’t hold a candle to Courtney’s time in the first, as he aims for a more over the top and insane performance that clashes with the rest of the film’s tone. However, it is Danika Yarosh, who plays Samantha, Reacher’s potential daughter, who gives the weakest performance of the bunch. If anything, Never Go Back is a reminder of the old days when Cruise was the main draw for most of his films.

Stuff like this doesn't matter if there isn't a feasible story to latch it onto.

In conclusion, Never Go Back, which should never be seen again, is a lackluster sequel that fails to reach the heights of the first, or even come out a commendable action effort. The first film, as well as many other of Cruise’s ventures, are far more memorable, and feature plenty of unforgettable and iconic scenes. Unfortunately, Never Go Back is as forgetful as they come. It’s nothing more than a bland studio actioner with decent action, a woeful plot, and Cruise doing his tough guy thing. If anything, the film will forever be damned to repeats on TNT, where it might as well have premiered due to its artistic pedigree. Fans of the first film, the long running book series, and competently made old fashioned action thrillers will probably come out severely disappointed. 

What was originally one of my more anticipated action films of the year is unfortunately nothing more than an average studio actioner that might be bad enough to prevent a third entry from ever happening. That being said, and if box office numbers prove to be good, a third entry from a better filmmaker and a more dedicated Cruise would be enough to make up for the mishap of this lackluster second entry in the series. Here’s to next time, Cruise. I look forward to when you fully return to the screen charismatic and determined.

Rating: 4.5/10 - Decent action is not enough to save this dull and morose sequel to one of the decade's finest action thrillers.

Reviews In This Series:
Jack Reacher: Never Go Back (Edward Zwick, 2016)

Friday, September 30, 2016

Mechanic: Resurrection (2016) - Theatrical Review



Director: Dennis Gansel
Cast: Jason Statham, Tommy Lee Jones, Jessica Alba, Michelle Yeoh
Country: United States
Rating: R
Run Time: 98 min

Mechanic: Resurrection is a rare breed, an unnecessary sequel to an unnecessary remake, let alone one released five years after its predecessor. I've always loved Michael Winner's original 1972 The Mechanic, both one of the director's finest works and one of action star Charles Bronson's most poignant and subtle performances. It's one of the all time great lone assassin films, with excellent action sequences, a gripping character driven story, and one of the all time great twist endings. Simon West's 2011 remake, also titled The Mechanic, is a fairly bland update of the original, only offering up new action sequences and new actors within the same story occupied by the same characters. While West did a good job upping the action ante, he essentially drained all of the nuance out of Winner's original and opted for more numb skulled entertainment where the villains were obvious and their deaths deserved. It's a solid action film, and deserved of a rental, but essentially made for no other purpose than to fill the space at the bottom of the bargain bin or to occupy air time on the television channel FX.

The last thing that anyone could have expected from a remake of The Mechanic was a sequel, especially when one takes into account the infamous nature of the original film's classic ending. However, those who have seen the remake will remember that it altered the ending of the original for a safer ending that doesn't challenge the audience in any way. What's even more surprising to me is that a sequel was made at all, given that the remake wasn't even that successful, grossing about $60 million off of a $40 million budget. Without any more Transporter films to his name, and with no third Crank film in sight any time soon, I guess Statham needs some sort of franchise to front, so why not turn that generic Mechanic remake of his into his latest franchise? Oh well, Hollywood loves their franchises, and I love my action stars, so of course I'll turn out to a needless and shameless sequel that dares to flaunt the subtitle "Resurrection." Therefore, I showed up and represented my genre as one of ten people in a screening of the film on a Tuesday night at 7:30 P.M. You could really feel the energy in the air.

The most compelling relationship ever put to screen.

Mechanic: Resurrection is a perfectly adequate action thriller that stands as both one of Statham's weaker studio releases and one of the most enjoyable guilty pleasures of the year. Produced by Millenium Films, who used to specialize only in low budget DTV actioners but now produces mid budget actioners with impressive casts and DTV-ish plots, the sequel is arguably their best release this year. Unfortunately, that's not saying much when your competition is the mean spirited London Has Fallen and the dull but admirable Criminal. Overall, Mechanic: Resurrection finds the proper tonal middle ground for a Millenium Film's release between dour and ridiculous, coming out a semi-competent but watchable actioner. It's far from commendable, and in all honesty quite a narrative mess, but Mechanic: Resurrection does nothing more than offer up loads of shootouts and fist fights featuring one of action cinema's greatest stars, Jason Statham.

After escaping death at the end of The Mechanic, Arthur Bishop (Jason Statham), master assassin, now resides in Rio De Janeiro in order to keep a low profile. When an old friend from his past asks him to assassinate three men, he declines. Bishop is immediately attacked, and unfortunately has to leave his new life behind in order to go into hiding once again. When he heads out to a tropical island in Thailand, he meets Gina Thorne (Jessica Alba), an abused woman whom he instantly falls in love with (of course). However, Bishop's old friend, Riah Crain, locates his whereabouts, and kidnaps Thorne in order to force Bishop to complete the assassinations he asked for. The catch: all three must look like an accident. Therefore, Bishop straps on his hitman gear and travels the globe in order to take out three rival arms' dealers all the while trying to save his new girlfriend. It's all in the life of a mechanic.

Whereas the first Mechanic was a fairly gritty, serious, and violent action film, the second one is far more over the top, ridiculous, and colorful. Mechanic: Resurrection is also serious and violent, but in a more tongue in cheek kind of way. Whereas the first film mostly took place amidst dark cities, grungy bars, and tall skyscrapers, the sequel is an entirely different creature, as it is very brightly colored, and takes place almost exclusively amongst boats on water and sandy islands in the tropics. I should stress how tropical and aquatic this movie truly is, as it features not only boats, palm trees, oceans, and wet suits, but even pools, sharks, and submarines. I'm telling you, it's possibly the most overtly tropical and aquatic assassin movie ever made.

So right off the bat, the sequel is an entirely different creature, even though it shares the basic connective tissue of a master assassin who has homes and passports set up all over the globe. It's odd that Simon West directed the first one, which was more serious, as his ridiculous sensibilities from his work on Con Air would have been better fit for an unabashedly non-sensical sequel like this. Either way, the sequel is a noticeably lighter and funner affair, but still Rated R and with a very high body count.

Mechanic: Through the Looking Glass

Although the sequel is thoroughly entertaining, the first act is dreadfully boring, as it attempts to establish a believable relationship between Statham and Alba's characters before ripping them apart. I quickly became bored by the two's painfully un-romantic proceedings, although I did appreciate the presence of Hong Kong superstar Michelle Yeoh (Police Story 3) during this segment of the movie.

Once the film gets into its advertised plot, it becomes a blast to watch. The entire movie is just an excuse to showcase three separate assassinations that also need to appear as if they were accidents. The first assassination, which is set in a prison, could have been its own movie for goodness sakes. Not only does Bishop need to get into the prison, but he than needs to work his way into the accepting arms of his target, murder him, make it look like an accident, and than escape the prison while dodging sharks. And yet, this single assassination, which sounds like an episode to a television show or a movie of its own, is a tiny twenty minute segment of the film. I love it. The second assassination, which involves the advertised high rise pool, is probably the most ridiculous and enjoyable kill of the movie. If you've seen the trailers or even the poster, you know what happens. And the last, well, I dare not spoil what happens, but it involves an arms dealer played by Tommy Lee Jones, who was somehow convinced to participate in this movie for a mere five minutes.

In all honesty, Mechanic: Resurrection resembles the Hitman video game series more so than that franchise's own filmic adaptations, 2007's Hitman and 2015's Hitman: Agent 47. The film offers up several instances in which the mechanic extensively plans out his assassinations in order to make them look like accidents, the mechanic dons disguises and pretends to be someone else in order to gain access to certain areas, and sometimes busts out guns and goes to town on his armed foes. While the Hitman movies are overly concerned with garbage plots that barely incorporate the imagery and creative elements of their own source material, Mechanic: Resurrection actually offers up everything one would want from a Hitman movie, just with Jason Statham. He's also bald too.

That's not Jones' wardrobe. He probably just strolled out of his trailer.

Statham is great as always in the film, almost being too good for the material. His dedication to B-movie craft will always earn him my love and adoration. Veteran actors Yeoh and Jones are honestly dignified cameos within the story, but add major A-credibility to a silly B-movie of this nature. And poor Jessica Alba, who has never been a great actress, is completely useless here, as both an actress and as a damsel in distress character. As to why she is a marketable name actress, I will never know. The cast is commendable, but it's clear that Statham had to do all of the heavy lifting and carry the entire film on his shoulders, which he successfully does.

Director Dennis Gansel rightfully understands the tone of his project, but woefully fails to know where to place the camera at any moment, especially during action sequences. Gansel's shooting style could best be described as claustrophobic, as he shoves his camera right up into the faces of his actors during dialog scenes and action sequences. It's a shame that the camera work is so terribly poor during the plentiful shootouts and fist fights, because the choreography and stunt work is otherwise great.

There's a fantastic stunt during the final shootout where Statham leaps into a steel enforced boat hanging by wires, shoots one of the wires, and than holds onto the boat and shoots at his enemies while it swings around. It's great stuff. Unfortunately, the editing of the film is also very poor, opting to cut based on the real time of the events instead of what could be more visually cohesive. An instance where Statham slams a henchman's head into a table flies by so fast that you won't be able to recall how it visually occurred as your mind is too busy focusing on the next physical beat down. Fight scenes shouldn't be a chore to visually understand, they should be comprehensible and fun to watch. Let this be a lesson to Gansel in case he tackles another action movie, as he understands how to craft a ridiculous and tongue in cheek action fest quite well.

Last but not least, Mechanic: Resurrection demonstrates the technical woes of many Millenium Films, in that its green screens and computer generated effects are down right laughable. While I love mid budget films like this, the limitations of the budget for a film of this scope are very apparent, especially during a scene where Statham rides an inflatable boat across ocean in extreme close up with digital water splashes all around him. Whenever actors walk into a big room, or jump off a cliff, or fall off of a building, it's always an obvious digital effect, and it made me chuckle quite a few times. If Millenium would just craft smaller scaled films that don't try to desperately be blockbusters, than the technical limitations wouldn't be as apparent. But alas, they want mid budget blockbusters, and crappy green screens and laugh out loud effects are going to keep plaguing the larger scaled moments of their films until they learn differently. 

More of this please, and less cliff diving.

Mechanic: Resurrection is so different from its predecessor that one could easily skip the dour woes of the remake and skip ahead to this joyously and unabashedly silly sequel. Not only is the tone different, but one honestly doesn't need to know much about the events of the previous film in order to understand this one. Arthur Bishop is an assassin, plain and simple. That's all you need to know. While the sequel may give genre fans beat downs, shootouts, and over the top kills galore, those in search of a dramatically compelling or skillfully told revenge story will be out of luck. Regardless, Statham fans, like myself, will turn out no matter what. If anything, I could say that I am thankful that this was released by a semi-major studio on the big screen in theaters, as films of this nature are typically doomed to the direct to video market now. It's far from commendable, and accidentally hilarious in parts, but Mechanic: Resurrection is undeniably entertaining and rarely dull for a mid-budget genre picture of its nature. And for that, it gets a recommendation from me.

Rating: 6/10 - Statham's fearless presence, Gansel's control of tone, and fun but technically shoddy action sequences make this unnecessary sequel one of the year's most entertaining action films.

Thursday, June 30, 2016

Independence Day: Resurgence (2016) - Theatrical Review


Director: Roland Emmerich
Cast: Jeff Goldblum, Bill Pulman, Liam Hemsworth, Maika Monroe, Vivica A. Fox
Country: United States
Rating: PG-13
Run Time: 120 min

1996's Independence Day (ID4) is, in my opinion, an undeniably flawed, but hugely entertaining blockbuster. Whereas previous ground breaking blockbusters like Jaws and Star Wars offered escapist entertainment with complex characters and haute tension, ID4 simplified everything down to a point that can be described as safe escapist entertainment with oodles of comedic relief and special effects galore. Although ID4 features some fairly solid filmmaking courtesy of director Roland Emmerich, he still cannot match the likes of Steven Spielberg or George Lucas, as he seems to only use his characters as conduits for stories about worldwide destruction. Ever since Emmerich began his fetish for destruction with ID4, he has always challenged himself as to how much destruction he can depict within his films. From Godzilla, to The Day After Tomorrow, to 2012, to White House Down, Emmerich has always been obsessed with disaster epics.

But Independence Day: Resurgence (ID4:R) represents a new low for Emmerich, a filmmaker who used to be somewhat reliable as far as blockbuster devastation came. Not only is the sequel more ridiculous and absurd than the previous, but it fails to deliver the believable character relationships and affective pacing that makes the original still so affective to this day. There's no denying it, the original ID4 is an iconic film, based mainly upon its destructive imagery, but also upon its ability to make stars out of its actors. Whether you want to admit it or not, ID4 was the biggest film of 1996, and one that is still celebrated every Fourth of July. But let me tell you, no one is going to be celebrating ID4:R ever, let alone remembering it even came out by next month. ID4:R might as well be the biggest budgeted SyFy Channel television movie ever made, as it features the horrendous plotting and inept character work of their low budget turds. Coupled along with some absurd science fiction imagery and laughable green screens that will make anyone snicker in their seat, ID4:R is one of the laziest sequels ever to be produced by a major Hollywood studio.

I wish we lived in a world where we could shrug off damage like this like it's nothing.

If you've seen the posters or the trailers, I don't even need to tell you what happens next. But alas, I will. Since the previous alien invasion of 1996 (they even refer to it as the War of '96 in a desperate effort to expand the ID4 mythos), Earth has settled its differences to unify together and prepare for a possible response attack from the aliens. Twenty years later, Earth has harnessed the aliens' technology to create weapons and vehicles in preparation for their eventual return. They even created a base on the moon in order to spot them as soon as they arrive. When the aliens do arrive, which is more of an expected story beat and hardly a surprise to any one at all (it's almost as if they've read the script), they arrive in only one ship this time with a far simpler and like minded purpose, drill to the center of the Earth in order to absorb the Earth's molten energy and leave it for dead. But these aliens messed with the wrong planet! Because we've got Will Sm...Jessie Usher! And we won't go down without a fight!

Independence Day: Resurgence is this year's Terminator: Genisys, a long delayed sequel to a generation defining franchise that pales in comparison to its predecessor and proves that certain intellectual properties (IP) are no longer as "cool" as they used to be. But while the Terminator series has slowly but surely pumped out a sequel every eight or so years, thereby keeping it somewhat relevant and within the public conscious, ID4:R arrives a whopping twenty years after the original film. While there has always been talk of a sequel, the amount of time that has passed since the first film had always convinced people that a sequel would never get made and that ID4 would always be a fun one-off in which the world triumphs over generic alien invaders. But lo and behold, Hollywood's desperation for marketable brand name and recognizable IP can make anything happen. When one looks at 20th Century Fox's lack of successful franchises and Emmerich's previous flop White House Down, ID4:R sure seemed like a safe sequel to green light in order to ensure both the studio and filmmakers' liveliness. Unfortunately, Fox and Emmerich will have to learn the hard way that previously successful IP's are no longer the box office juggernauts that they used to be. Not only does an Independence Day sequel released within 2016 scream "desperate," but also "lame."

Jeff Goldblum and Baby Thor stare in awe at the aliens.

The poster's tagline, "We had twenty years to prepare. So did they," might as well state, "We had twenty years to prepare for this sequel. This is all we could come up with," because ID4:R is essentially ID4 all over again but with less imagination and humanity. It's almost shocking that the film has a whopping five (!) credited screenwriters, and that two of those screenwriters are actually characters within the film! Who the heck are these guys and why is Emmerich giving them the time of day like this? Anyways, ID4:R also shares the same flaws as this year's absymal, Batman v Superman: Dawn of Justice, in that the film takes no time to introduce its characters or bother with exposition. It simply throws you right into the mix and expects you to accept everything as it is. While ID4 is regarded as a science fiction film, the only science fiction aspects are the invading aliens. Everything else is fairly real world and grounded in how our planet would react to such an attack. However, ID4:R's future world is quite shocking, as the entire planet is now entirely sci-fi based, thereby removing all similarities to real life or even the original film. To simply throw the viewer into such a world, barely give them an update, and hope they accept it without asking any questions, is not only world shaking, but dare I say, even comical.

After watching both ID4 and ID4:R within close proximity to each other, I realized just how well made the original ID4 is. For starters, ID4:R has a major pacing issue, as every plot point, character moment, and action beat is utterly rushed to the point where it almost feels shocking how quickly the scenes transition with one another. What's that? You were just starting to enjoy the level of destruction the alien ship was causing on Earth? Too bad, we're moving on. What's that? You want to lament the death of that character? Too bad, we're moving on. When I first saw that the sequel was only two hours long, a whopping twenty five minutes shorter than the original, I let out a sigh of relief for its somewhat brief run time. But alas, it turns out that all of that missing screen time was necessary in order to provide the film with its much needed build up. 

Speaking of build up, ID4:R has none of it. Much the same way that the film throws the viewer into its world with nary any exposition, the aliens show up and are physically presented on the screen as if it were no big deal. It's a shame, because the original film had such excellent build up and treated the aliens as if they were these awe-inspiring and menacing creatures instead of just the lifeless computer generated presence that they are in the sequel. This brings up another problem, in that the aliens are computer generated (CG) throughout the entire film. Besides one practical shot of an alien's foot (Oh Emmerich, you spoil us), the aliens are always CG and always bland. They're simply, well, there.

Another problem with the sequel is that there are simply too many characters and sub-plots to do justice within a two hour run time. ID4 already flirted with this issue, having a plethora of characters without much to do and an entire sub-plot involving Randy Quaid's character that only pays off at the film's end. However, ID4:R kicks this flaw into overdrive, with not only all of the returning cast members, but also far too many inconsequential and flat characters, especially the two who are also screenwriters. It would take a long long time for me to write about every single one of these characters, as there are a lot, but I'll single out a few who are deserved of praise. The only actors who come out of the picture unschated are Jeff Goldblum and Brent Spiner, who are both returning players. While every other actor, including the filmmakers themselves, play the film extremely straight and take the subject matter way too seriously, Goldblum and Spiner seem to understand the ridiculousness of it all and play the picture with a bubbly and joyous energy that is absent in everyone else. Star Trek: Next Generation fans will be pleased to see Spiner score more screen time here than even in the original.

Come on! How can you not laugh at this!

Many people have pointed out that without Will Smith, who is sorely missed, the sequel lacks a "cool" and relatable human character to ground and carry the adventure with. While this is entirely true, it seems that Liam Hemsworth's character is apparently Emmerich's replacement for this likable human lead. I enjoy his tie to the former President's daughter, which thereby ties him to Bill Pullman and the original picture, but Hemsworth is as flat and generic as they come. Even the President's daughter, played by Maika Monroe, who was excellent in two of contemporary indie horror's greatest films, The Guest and It Follows, comes off especially flat. Seriously, there isn't a single interesting human character in this film, let alone a likable or believable relationship to go along with said characters. It's a shame that Jeff Goldblum and Judd Hirsch's characters, who are father and son, are kept separated until the very end, because their relationship produces a few honest to goodness laughs towards the end that breathes some much needed life into an otherwise bland sequel.

By the way, character deaths are borderline comical. Two major characters, who shall remained unnamed, are killed off so quickly and suddenly, that I honestly couldn't believe how blatant their deaths were. However, Emmerich makes sure to give Spiner's lab assistant friend significant mourning time right after his death. You know, because he was such a lovable character in the first place. Overall, don't come to ID4:R expecting good character work, because it's non-existent.

The original ID4 won an Academy Award for Best Special Effects, and deservedly so. The reason ID4 won an award and is so fondly remembered is because it combined every special effects technique possible to great effect. The film's alien ships, aliens, and explosive devastation was depicted not only through CG effects, which were just taking over Hollywood in the 90s, but also animatronics, miniatures, and practical costumes. ID4 was the final dying breath of classic special effects work. Which now brings me to ID4:R, a film entirely devoid of the creativity and ingenuity found in the original. Not only are all of the aliens and ships CG, but terrible green screens permeate many shots. The digital and nonsensical destruction is so over the top and artificial, that there is no possible way that me or any viewer could possibly take the damage seriously. One shot (pictured above) in which Dubai's the Burj flies through the air and lands in London is near tear inducing. It's one of the funniest things that I have seen all year.

"Earth is not for the taking!"

Overall, there are no surprises here. Besides a second alien species that shamelessly sets up a sequel (which I somewhat want because it will be absurd) and a finale in which a giant alien queen chases Goldblum and friends around in a bus (no joke), everything is as expected. The only time the film becomes fresh and watchable is when it steers away from the boring "been there done that" territory of the original for a ridiculous finale in which a giant alien queen runs around with a laser gun. Although I tore ID4:R to shreds, it is without a doubt one of the most enjoyably schlocky blockbusters to come along in a long time. Nowadays, with how horrendous blockbusters tend to be, simply being not boring is an achievement in and of itself. But in all seriousness, this is not a good sequel, nor a good movie. I recommend getting drunk or getting a group of friends together to laugh at it, but otherwise, look elsewhere for legitimate sci-fi entertainment, because you won't find it here.

Rating: 3/10 - Although devoid of creativity, utterly rushed, and over stuffed with more characters than an ensemble romantic comedy, ID4:R is laughable science fiction schlock from beginning to end.

Franchise:
Independence Day (Roland Emmerich, 1996)
Independence Day: Resurgence (Roland Emmerich, 2016)