Top Three Favorite Films of 2014 (So Far), and the Top Three to Anticipate

For the past couple of years, I’ve done articles where I list my five favorite films of the year.  We’re officially halfway through 2014, so I’ve constructed a list of the best films I’ve seen from January to June.  Although I haven’t seen quite enough films to warrant a Top Five list, I’ve definitely seen enough to write a Top Three list.

Within the past six months, there was the surprisingly clever comedy sequel, “22 Jump Street,” and the enjoyable sci-fi adventure, “Edge of Tomorrow.”  There were also some intelligent and endlessly exciting superhero films, such as “X-Men: Days of Future Past” and “Captain America: The Winter Soldier.” 

There were also some low points, such as Clint Eastwood’s dull adaptation of the “Jersey Boys” musical, and the unnecessary and neutered “RoboCop” remake.

So, the following are my top three favorites for the first half of the year:

1) The Lego Movie: It’s been four months since I saw this film (twice in total), and I still can’t believe how hilarious and brilliant this animated adventure turned out.  Directed by Phil Lord and Christopher Miller, the story centers on a construction worker named Emmet (voiced by Chris Pratt) who lives an ordinary life in Bricksburg, and must team up with the Master Builders to save the world from the reign of the evil Lord Business (voiced by Will Ferrell).  With an outstanding and talented voice cast, beautifully detailed animation, and a story loaded with smart humor and a third-act twist that deepens the film’s central theme, “The Lego Movie” is fantastic entertainment for both children and adults.  Although there’s an age recommendation for Lego blocks, this film is for everyone.

2) Chef: In Jon Favreau’s latest project as a director, he plays Carl Casper, a chef who quits his job one night after a dispute with his boss and a heated confrontation with a food critic.  Afterwards, he decides to purchase a food truck and goes into business for himself, all while trying to reconnect with his young son.  Favreau gives his best performance yet, and is backed up with an accomplished supporting cast, with John Leguizamo as a standout, who appears as Carl’s loyal friend and fellow chef.  The screenplay, also by Favreau, has memorable comedic scenarios, but also serious moments that are grounded in the main character’s family dynamics.  If you’re an adventurer of different cuisines and need an escape from the big summer tentpole films, don’t let this one escape you.

3) The Grand Budapest Hotel: Wes Anderson’s latest film tells the story of a teenage boy named Zero Moustafa (Tony Revolori), who becomes a bellhop at the titular hotel.  While working there, he finds a father figure in concierge Gustave (Ralph Fiennes), and soon must help him prove his innocence when he is framed after one of the hotel’s most notable guests (Tilda Swinton) dies of unknown circumstances.  The cast is wonderful all around, especially Fiennes in the lead role as the eccentric and philandering hotel attendant.  As Anderson has done with some of his other films, he places literary characteristics into the story, an aspect of his movies that I admire very much.  Similar to his films that have used this technique before, it works just as well for “TGBH” because, like a novel, it transports you to exciting and wondrous new places, and is filled with many interesting characters.  A stay at this hotel is highly recommended.

Will any of these films appear in my top five of 2014?  You’ll find out at the end of the year!

As for the second half of 2014, there are many films that are worth getting excited over.  The remainder of the summer will bring the post-apocalyptic prequel-sequel, “Dawn of the Planet of the Apes,” and the next Marvel Comics adventure, “Guardians of the Galaxy.”  For the fall movie season, there will be David Fincher’s adaptation of “Gone Girl,” sci-fi drama “Interstellar,” the continuation of the “Hunger Games” saga with “Mockingjay - Part 1,” and “The Hobbit: The Battle of the Five Armies,” which will mark the end of the “Lord of the Rings” prequel trilogy.

Now, here are my top three to look forward to:

1) Foxcatcher (Nov. 14): Directed by Bennett Miller, this biographical film tells the story of champion Olympic wrestler Mark Schultz (Channing Tatum) and how his schizophrenic coach, John du Pont (Steve Carell), killed Schultz’s brother, Dave (Mark Ruffalo), also an Olympic champion.  Miller has only directed three other films up until now, which were “Moneyball,” “Capote” and the documentary, “The Cruise,” all three of which dealt with notable American figures.  He has shown a talent for going really in depth with his subjects, so I highly doubt that his new film will be any less detailed.  Miller won Best Director at the Cannes Film Festival back in May, and “Foxcatcher” already seems to be becoming a significant Oscar contender.  It might very well turn out to be one of the big indie hits of the fall season.  The film also stars Vanessa Redgrave, Sienna Miller and Anthony Michael Hall.

2) Gone Girl (Oct. 3): Based on the 2012 bestselling novel by Gillian Flynn, David Fincher directs this film of a marriage gone horribly wrong.  On their fifth wedding anniversary, Nick Dunne (Ben Affleck) finds that his wife, Amy (Rosamund Pike), has gone missing, and he’s soon listed as the prime suspect.  With Fincher having helmed strong thrillers such as “The Girl with the Dragon Tattoo,” “Zodiac” and “Seven,” I’m sure he will bring his signature dark atmosphere to this twisty narrative.  The film also stars Neil Patrick Harris, Tyler Perry, Kim Dickens and Patrick Fugit.

3) Interstellar (Nov. 7): Director Christopher Nolan follows up the success of his “Dark Knight” trilogy and “Inception” with this new sci-fi drama.  Many of the plot details are still being kept a secret, but what has been revealed is that the film will tell the story of a group of explorers who use a newfound wormhole to break the limitations of human space travel.  Nolan is certainly not a stranger to making bold blockbusters, and “Interstellar” looks as though it has a lot of ideas to share.  The film stars Matthew McConaughey, Anne Hathaway, Jessica Chastain and Michael Caine.

Jon Favreau Gives You a Movie That Will Satisfy Your Taste Buds

Over the summer before my senior year of high school, I had the opportunity to work in a local restaurant as a busboy.  If you have ever had the chance to work in such an environment, you probably have an idea of how hectic it gets in the kitchen, like the fast-paced nature of New York’s Penn Station confined to one room.  It’s a busy area, and unless you’re a chef, you go in for what you need and then must get out right away.  During the time you’re in the kitchen, however, you can get a glimpse of what it takes to make an acceptable meal.

In Jon Favreau’s comedy-drama, “Chef,” he tells the story of man who loves to cook for a living and yearns for the freedom to prepare whatever dishes he wants.  With a heartfelt lead performance from the director, a committed supporting cast and a narrative about the importance of never limiting your talents, Favreau brings us one of the best little surprises of the summer movie season.

Chef Carl Casper (Favreau) works at a Los Angeles restaurant where, one night, he and his kitchen crew must do their best to impress a food critic and blogger, Ramsey Michel (Oliver Platt).  Although Carl wishes to change the menu up with different dishes, his boss (Dustin Hoffman) is against it, and makes the staff stick with the traditional menu.  After the restaurant is given a scathing review, Carl reprimand’s Ramsey on Twitter, invites him back to the restaurant and yells at him in front of the customers and staff before quitting.

Carl’s ex-wife, Inez (Sofía Vergara), invites him to accompany her and their son, Percy (EmJay Anthony) as she visits her father in Miami, and he accepts.  While they’re there, Carl attempts to reconnect with his son, and offers to purchase a food truck from Inez’s first ex-husband, Marvin (Robert Downey, Jr.).  After Carl’s fellow chef, Martin (John Leguizamo), joins them in Miami, and their creative abilities are soon able to flourish as they fix up the truck and open it for business.

Jon Favreau gives the best performance of his career, so far, as the film’s father figure.  Throughout the film, he easily displays his character’s need to branch out and be adventurous with his profession.  As mentioned before, there’s a scene early in the movie when he’s told by his boss that he has to stick to the regular menu and not make any changes.  When Carl has to notify the rest of the staff, you can see the subtle hints of frustration in his facial expressions and tone of voice that emphasize how much he wants to venture into his new culinary creations.

Although several of Favreau’s previous roles called for him to be strictly comical, this role requires him to find a balance between comedic and dramatic acting.  He tackles both of these styles equally well, but it was especially fresh to see him perform his more serious scenes, particularly when he angrily confronts the food critic and when he tries to reconnect with his son.

The screenplay by Favreau is one that tells a story of exploring your passion and keeping it alive by attempting new challenges to make it better.  We are given several scenes that show how much care and attention Carl puts into cooking his many different meals, as well as scenes where we see the work that has to be done to repair the food truck to get it ready for business.  These portions of the film really make you appreciate the hard work that Carl puts into making his edible visions possible.

In order to provide us with an idea of the detail and artistry that goes into what Carl makes, there are many shots of food during the film that instill a sense of the main character’s inventiveness when cooking.  These shots aren’t just there to make your mouth water, but also to show how much Carl’s talent grows throughout the story.

As far as how the characters are written, one thing that I favor about the screenplay is how Favreau and Vergara’s roles aren’t presented in such a way that paint them as bitter divorcees, but rather as two friends who try to make the best of their current situation.  The two are helpful to each other, seeing as Vergara’s character is the one who proposes the idea of the food truck to Carl, and Carl helps her take care of their son while she gets some work done while they’re in Miami.

Although the story can get a little cliched in spots with the whole divorced-parent-trying-to-reconnect-with-his-child angle, the film is still a lot of fun and rewarding to watch because of how genuine the characters are.  Along with Favreau’s direction, he’s able to stage realistic interactions between the characters, with the scenes focusing on the main character’s family being standouts.

Not only will you leave the theater with the pleasure of having seen a great movie, but you might  even notice your stomach growling.

Final grade: A-

The Songs Are As Memorable As Ever, But Are Stuck In a Rather Unmemorable Film

Back in 2005, Broadway introduced audiences to “Jersey Boys,” a musical that told of how The Four Seasons became a singing sensation.  With the way it explored how the main characters were changed by their success told a classic, but true story of the fame that comes with hard work, and the troubles that come with conflicts within an artistic group.

Legendary director Clint Eastwood now brings an adaptation of the musical to his still-growing filmography.  Seeing as his last couple of movies had trouble matching the greatness of his previous films, I was worried about how he would approach this piece of music history.  Although the performances are up to par for an Eastwood movie, the film has difficulty translating the energy from the show that made it immensely appealing.

In 1950s Belleville, New Jersey, Frankie Castelluccio (John Lloyd Young) works at a barbershop and has dreams of becoming a famous singer.  After a few run-ins with the law, Frankie and his friend, Tommy DeVito (Vincent Piazza), decide to become more serious about their musical talents.  When the two of them and fellow band-member Nick Massi (Michael Lomenda) need a fourth person in their group, they recruit aspiring songwriter Bob Gaudio (Erich Bergen) to join them.  

After receiving a few gigs, the band begins a steady climb to stardom.  They enjoy their fame at first, but tension begins to rise within the group when problems both inside and outside of the quartet threaten to jeopardize everything it has achieved.

One of the things that the movie does get right is the casting of John Lloyd Young, who originated the role of Frankie Valli for the Broadway musical and won a Tony Award for doing so.  A champ of falsetto and performance presence, it’s a treat to watch him sing if you didn’t get to see him act the role on the stage, especially when he gets to “Can’t Take My Eyes Off You.”  Even in his more dialogue-heavy scenes, you can see he’s comfortable with the transition from stage to screen.  

Vincent Piazza exhibits a tough New Jersey personality as Tommy DeVito, an individual who seems to have never left the wrong side of the tracks.  With the thick Jersey accent and attitude that exudes unbreakable confidence, Piazza offers a forceful personality.  

Erich Bergen and Michael Lomenda round out the famous quartet, and are as proficient as Piazza and Young in their acting and singing.  Whatever liveliness is missing from other aspects of the movie, at least the four leads do what they can to keep some spirit throughout the film.

Marshall Brickman and Rick Elice, who wrote the book for the musical, have penned the screenplay.  Although the show was lively and incorporated many of the band’s hits in interesting and entertaining ways to tell the story, the movie just doesn’t capture the same vibrancy, and the structure of the narrative is more like what you would see in a normal famous-musician biopic, such as “Walk the Line” and “Ray,” rather than an adaptation of a Broadway musical.   

Director Clint Eastwood, as much as I respect him, is not a decent match for this kind of film.  Sadly, this movie continues a steady decline in quality that has been seen in a few of his more recent films, starting with “Hereafter,” which was good, but not of the high caliber that was present in many of Eastwood’s films that came before.  

Even though the lyrics are beautifully sung, the scenes in which the band performs their songs could have had a lot more Broadway-style kick to them, and the scenes that are very dialogue-driven tend to slow the movie down considerably.  With this downtempo pace, it’s almost difficult to believe that this film is supposed to be based on a Broadway show.  There shouldn’t be problems like this in a movie about music legends.

The only real sequence that reminds you that this is supposed to be an adaptation of a musical is the end credits where The Four Seasons and the rest of the cast sing and dance to “December, 1963 (Oh, What a Night).  Not only was it disappointing for me to see one of my favorite songs from the quartet get wasted in a sequence that feels out of place with the structure of the rest of the movie, but the scene is also a glimpse into what this movie could have been if it had landed in the hands of a director who has had success with directing movie musicals, such as Bill Condon, who did “Dreamgirls," or Rob Marshall, who did “Chicago.”  That song also could have been put to much better use if it had gone with the scene that it was supposed to, just like in the show.

Given the splendid experience of watching the history of The Four Seasons play out on Broadway, it’s unfortunate that most of the show’s spirit was lost in its move to film.  The material was all there for the screenwriters and director to properly use, but they weren’t able to retain the musical’s better qualities.  Oh, what a shame.

Final grade: C

These Two Aren’t Exactly Campus Security

A little over two years ago, Phil Lord and Christopher Miller took television drama “21 Jump Street” and adapted it into a comedy film.  It seemed like an unusual thing to do, but the bold experiment resulted in the film becoming a box-office hit and one of the best comedies of 2012.  With the sharp humor and natural energy that flew between the well-matched stars, Jonah Hill and Channing Tatum, the film was a lot funnier than expected.

While we’ve had many bad sequels to hit comedies that failed to live up to their originals, “22 Jump Street” succeeds in continuing the story of young cops Schmidt (Hill) and Jenko (Tatum).  Although it doesn’t quite top the original, directors Phil Lord and Christopher Miller have delivered something rare: a good comedy sequel.

After some successful case-solving in the Jump Street program, Schmidt and Jenko are patrolling the streets and cracking down on crime.  Following a failed attempt at arresting a group of drug dealers, they’re brought back to Jump Street and assigned a new task by their boss, Captain Dickson (Ice Cube).  He informs the two about the death of a student at a local college due to a new drug called WHYPHY (pronounced the same as “WiFi”), and the duo must enroll as students and find out the identities of the dealers and supplier.  While there, Schmidt and Jenko’s involvements with different on-campus groups will cause them to question if they are holding each other back, and whether or not they should pursue their individual interests.

Jonah Hill and Channing Tatum return with every bit of the bromance connection they expressed in the first film, maybe even more.  Hill continues to savor his character’s memorable and hopeless awkwardness, particularly in a scene during a poetry slam, in which he has to come up with a poem on the spot.  As far as Tatum goes, he nails his character’s simplemindedness, and just like in the first film, it’s not the lazy, stereotypical dunce-jock stupidity.  Instead, this personality trait is downplayed to smart, little jokes here and there that give us an understanding of his comical, cranial emptiness. 

They’re so immersed in the verbal interactions and visual gags they share, that you almost wish they would do many more “Jump Street” films (you can get a taste of what that would be like during the very creative end credits), but at the same time, it would be awful to spoil what’s already an outstandingly funny cinematic pairing.  

There’s a recurring theme in the movie about things being in balance with one another, and that’s what Hill and Tatum are.  They support one another in their scenes and respond well to each other, making their time on screen together endlessly entertaining and a constant example of how efficient they are in making their characters’ friendship believable.

Ice Cube makes a hysterical return as the short-tempered captain of the Jump Street program.  He truly makes the most out of every scene he’s in, and is one of the funniest parts of the movie.

The screenplay by Michael Bacall, Oren Uziel and Rodney Rothman finds its strength in not trying to create a sequel that tries to outdo the original in the joke department.  Although the story provides us with a decent amount of jokes, it also engages to be more of an exploration of Schmidt and Jenko’s friendship and how it develops in their new college environment, where Schmidt is determined to work on their case, while Jenko is distracted by reveling in the joy of the acceptance of his peers and success on the school’s football team.

The screenplay also changes around how the two characters assimilate in college because, in the first film, it’s Schmidt who’s seen as the more popular of the two.  This time around, it’s Jenko who’s getting all of the attention from students, so it was interesting to watch how this switch in popularity would impact their friendship.

I was worried at first that the film was going to head in the same direction as “The Hangover – Part II,” in that it has a different location, but a similar story.  While that may be the case, the jokes and dialogue are clever enough that you can forgive the familiarity, seeing as part of what makes the movie work is how self-aware it is about being identical to the original. 

Phil Lord and Christopher Miller are two highly talented comedic filmmakers, and it’s evident that these directors, Hill and Tatum work very well together.  Lord and Miller had a hit with “The Lego Movie” back in February, which, in my opinion, is one of the best films of the year, so far.  Now, they’ve delivered a surprisingly acceptable sequel in film comedy, a genre that doesn’t have a whole lot of worthy second installments.  Given how intelligent and comical the story material is, they’re able to get committed performances out of their cast that help make this sequel a lot better than it could have been.  They know how to treat audiences and bring well-written humor to the screen, rather than settle for what’s easy. 

As seen in “The Lego Movie” and “21 Jump Street,” this directing duo can also craft enjoyably frenetic action sequences, and that ability carries over to this film, particularly during the climactic spring-break chase scene.

With “22 Jump Street,” we are given a sequel that actually has some thought put into it, instead of one that’s released solely to make a quick buck off the success of its original.  As far as comedic sequels go, this one certainly makes the dean’s list.

Final grade: B+

Reliving the Same Day, But Striving For Different Results

Tom Cruise has built a regal reputation in the realm of blockbusters.  He’s a part of the ongoing “Mission: Impossible” series, a couple of Steven Spielberg’s adventures with “War of the Worlds” and “Minority Report,” and some successful comedies, such as “Tropic Thunder” and “Jerry Maguire.”  

He’s as active as ever, which is exemplified in director Doug Liman’s sci-fi thriller, “Edge of Tomorrow.”  With a smart script, neat visuals and a reliably game Cruise, this is one of the most fun films of the summer.

For five years, the world has been at war with a race of aliens known as Mimics.  As they continue to wreak havoc on Europe, an organization known as the United Defense Forces arms soldiers with mechanized exoskeletons called Jackets, which prove to be powerful weapons against the invaders.  When Major William Cage (Cruise), a UDF spokesman and officer in the US military, is brought to London to meet with General Brigham (Brendan Gleeson), he’s ordered to be dropped into battle to capture footage of the soldiers’ invasion during Operation Downfall, despite not being an actual soldier.  When he tries to blackmail Brigham to excuse him from this task, he’s arrested, stripped of his rank and sent to a military base that’s preparing to launch an attack on the coast of France.

When Cage dies minutes into the invasion, he suddenly and inexplicably wakes up on the day he arrived at the base.  Teaming up with Sergeant Rita Vrataski (Emily Blunt), Cage must figure out why he keeps waking up on this day whenever he dies, and realizes that the mystery behind this could lead to the answer for how to defeat the Mimics.

After staring in many big movies over the past couple of decades, Tom Cruise’s films still provide considerable entertainment value because of his comfortableness in front of the camera and willingness to throw himself into all kinds of onscreen adventures.  He continues to be a talented action star who clearly has as much energy as he showed in his earlier films, and it looks like he has plenty for more.    

Emily Blunt has acted in several dramatic and comedic vehicles, but in this film, she displays another side of her acting talents as a venerable action-movie heroine with a resilient fighting spirit.  She’s more than able to hold her own when sharing the screen with an enduring movie-star like Cruise, and should consider getting involved with more action films.

The screenplay by Christopher McQuarrie, Jez Butterworth and John-Henry Butterworth, which is based on Hiroshi Sakurazaka’s young-adult novel, “All You Need Is Kill,” while also taking some inspiration from the film “Groundhog Day,” has a story that adds to the always-intriguing premise of how time is presented in film.  This movie could have easily reduced itself to another “Battle: Los Angeles,” with the film just being one empty, video-game action sequence after another that don’t add up to much of a story, but that isn’t the case with this film.  Although the story can get repetitive at times as Cruise’s character continues to relive the same day, the action keeps getting more and more interesting throughout the film once Will and Rita finally get passed the battle on the coast and move more inland.  The screenwriters also add a few humorous bits that, despite the serious situations that the characters face, never feel out of place because of how much fun the movie is.

Part of the reason why the film goes above what it could have been is because of the bond between Cruise and Blunt.  Just like what Liman did with Brad Pitt and Angelina Jolie in “Mr. and Mrs. Smith” and Matt Damon and Franka Potente in “The Bourne Identity,” he makes sure that his male and female leads offer a believable connection for when the story needs them to take part in some deeper moments of interaction in between the action sequences.  This is particularly shown once Will and Rita begin to build a stronger relationship once they get passed the coastal carnage.

The summer movie season tends to be a time for sequels, prequels and reboots to popular movie franchises.  So, given the enjoyable time to be had with “Edge of Tomorrow,” it’s refreshing to see a film that doesn’t fall into any of those categories.  This is something that should be happening in cinema again and again.

Final grade: B+

Even When Mutants Fight Their Hardest, Can the Future Still Be Saved?

When you think of it, it’s quite a cinematic achievement of how long the X-Men films have been going.  The first was released back in 2000, and there have been seven movies in the past fourteen years.  Although some of the films were much better than others, the long life that the famous mutants have experienced on the big screen speaks of the volumes of stories that can be put to film.

Having not directed an X-Men film since 2003, Bryan Singer finally returns with “X-Men: Days of Future Past.”  After Brett Ratner’s severely disappointing “X-Men: The Last Stand,” we were given a prequel five years later with Matthew Vaughns’s “X-Men: First Class,” which was a significant improvement that placed the franchise back on course.  Now, with an experienced cast and a story that builds upon the mythology in riveting new ways, “Days of Future Past” is the best X-Men movie, so far.

In the future, highly evolved robots known as “Sentinels” are killing mutants and oppressing humans who have the gene to produce mutant offspring.  A small group of mutants is able to escape the Sentinels due to Kitty Pryde’s (Ellen Page) ability to send a person’s consciousness back in time to deliver warnings.  When her group meets up with Professor Xavier (Patrick Stewart), Magneto (Ian McKellen), Wolverine (Hugh Jackman) and Storm (Halle Berry), they devise a plan to help alter this bleak future.  

They decide to send Wolverine’s consciousness back in time to 1973, with the hopes of preventing Mystique (Jennifer Lawrence) from assassinating Sentinel creator Bolivar Trask (Peter Dinklage), an event that will eventually bring about the horrible future that’s happening now.  In order to stop her, Wolverine will have to bring a young Charles Xavier (James McAvoy) and a young Magneto (Michael Fassbender) together and recruit their help.  To make the plan work, these two rivals will have to put their differences aside to protect the world from a disastrous fate.

Seeing as the film brings in the casts from the original films and the prequel, this installment has the strongest ensemble out of all the X-Men movies, and probably out of all superhero films as well.  One of the most significant factors of the film is that, for a summer blockbuster, it has a surprising amount of scenes that are reliant on the tense interactions between the characters, and doesn’t just go for the mutant action.  Some of the film’s best scenes come from those involving Jackman, McAvoy and Fassbender because of how in tune they are with their characters.  The three of them provide a dramatic depth from which big tentpole movies should not feel the need to shy away.

Knowing that Peter Dinklage was going to play the villain, I was very much looking forward to seeing his contribution to the expanding world of the X-Men films.  He is indeed a fine actor, and does what he can with the material, but I felt as though his scenes could have been elevated if the story had allowed him to be more than simply a scientist trying to throw mutants into extinction.

A superb addition to the heroes is Quicksilver (Evan Peters), who has a considerably fun introduction as a fast-talking and fast-moving mutant who helps Wolverine, Charles and Beast (Nicholas Hoult) break Magneto out of his prison cell below the Pentagon.  Quicksilver is only in the film for a couple of scenes, and he’s one of many highlights, so I’m eager to see how the filmmakers expand his role for the sequel.

The screenplay by Simon Kinberg doesn’t waste any time in getting its story started.  Right after the first 10 minutes, Wolverine is already sent back to the past, and the narrative just continuously builds from there.  A strong point of the film is how it doesn’t constantly transition between the past and future, but mostly stays in the former, which allows the audience to stay invested in what’s happening in the ‘70s storyline and the important events that unfold.

One of the most entertaining portions of the film is Magneto’s prison break, a segment that's on par with the opening scene of “X2: X-Men United.”  It’s a creatively shot sequence, with help from cinematographer Newton Thomas Sigel, and is one of the best that Singer has brought to the franchise.  It also helps that it includes Jim Croce’s song, “Time In a Bottle,” which is humorously added to the scene.

Similar to a couple of the better X-Men films that came before this, “Days of Future Past” is able to strike a balance between wonderfully staged action sequences and scenes reliant on the drama between characters.  When most of an X-Men movie focuses on actors of high ranking, such as Jackman, McAvoy and Fassbender, you don’t want them to just throw around their powers for two hours.  You want them to open up so we know the kind of people they are and who they will eventually become, and this film gives us that in abundance.

*The next paragraph contains a minor spoiler.*

Kinberg also makes a bold move with the film’s ending, where he crafts it so that it erases everything that happened in “The Last Stand.”  That being an X-Men movie I’d like to forget about, the initiative that Kinberg takes fully pays off.  When you think about it, his screenwriting actions parallel the world-saving actions of the mutants in the film: Kinberg wants to change the franchise’s past in order to make it great again, and the mutants want to change the past so they can have a promising future.

Bryan Singer, after having directed the first two X-Men films, has brought us a character-devoted and fast-paced sequel, and I would fully support him taking charge for as many of the sequels as he can.  He clearly possesses an understanding of the source material, and has become one of the best directors currently working in the superhero genre.  With his attention to character relationships and having an eye for action sequences that deliver thrills aplenty, it’s going to be difficult to wait two years to see what he does with the upcoming “X-Men: Apocalypse.”  Now that “X-Men: Days of Future Past” has propelled the mutants’ cinematic adventures much further and fixed the problems caused by “The Last Stand,” the next film will likely continue Singer’s tradition of excellence in the X-Men series. 

As Prof. X says to his younger self at one point in the movie, “Just because someone stumbles and loses their path, doesn’t mean they can’t be saved,” which is a quote that can be applied to this series in that, although it has had a couple of bad installments in the mix, Singer has brought back his trustworthy vision of the comics.  It’s a vision that I have missed, and one that I will look forward to seeing again in the sequel.

Final grade: A-