Priest Review

'm a fan of many film genres and so, too, it would appear, is Priest's director, Scott Stewart. For Priest encompasses elements from sci-fi, western, vampire, horror, fantasy, revenge and post-apocalyptic movies, at times in a gloriously fun fashion and in its weaker parts, playing like a ‘best of' rehash from a truckload of movies from previous decades, including Blade Runner, Star Wars, The Matrix, Mad Max 2 and Blade 2.

Priest isn't afraid to aim high in its aspirations and deserves praise for doing so, with the backstory plastered over a bloody and enjoyable animated credits sequence, leading into the live action, high walled, dystopian city that now safely houses humanity after the vampire scourge threatened to take over.

The cityscapes and streets affectionately homage Ridley Scott's vision, while adding the big brother broadcast element seen in Equilibrium, with Christopher Plummer's sinister face (instead of Sean Pertwee's) adorning the sides of buildings, which are also branded by stylised cross insignias.

Indeed, Scott Stewart's film shares many similarities with Kurt Wimmer's: a fascistic state ruled by fear, guardians of the state capable of being a threat, a rebellious brooding British lead with a gruff American accent, even gun-fu (though the fight scenes never quite match Christian Bale's helmet smashing antics).

Sadly, though, as with the much underappreciated Daybreakers, no sooner have you admired and adjusted to the sights and sounds of this new future society, then the film quickly shifts to the much more budget-friendly, familiar climes of the desert wasteland, where the movie spends the majority of its all too brief eighty-eight minute runtime.

The always excellent Paul Bettany leads proceedings as the titular Priest, channelling parts of his rosary clutching psychosis from The Da Vinci Code, full of brood and conflict, on a mission to save his niece from the villainous clutches of former brother in arms, Karl Urban.

Urban clearly relishes every second of his drawling, vampire cowboy role (he's a huge fan of westerns) and is an actor I've been following since his breakthrough role as Eomer in The Two Towers. So more's the pity that his screen time seems to be far too short, as he's noticeable by his absence.

Bettany, under Stewart's guidance for the second time after Legion, proves to be a strangely apt action hero, throwing himself (literally in the film's better moments) into the fight scenes with an aggressive vigour. By his side is the fantastically named Cam Gigandet, who plays the young, trigger happy sheriff with the requisite amount of brash narrow mindedness. Though I have difficulty seeing him as a hero, after his less friendly roles in the likes of Never Back Down and The O.C.Here's hoping his Twilight followers watch Priest and appreciate vampires' true, cinematic nastiness.

Maggie Q also appears as a fellow priest, but suffers from having arguably the most clichéd character to flesh out. She's loved Bettany's Priest for years, but their faith and his devotion to a love he left behind has meant she's suffered in silence. But worse, she only has one brief action scene to shine in.

Even genre favourite Brad Dourif gets a few minutes of screen time, as a snake oil salesman, but is gone in the blink of an eye, with a potential part in the film's bigger plans never exploited.

In fact, the actors' roles summarise Priest's best and worst traits. It's solid, at times beautiful, but cliché-ridden and cut short. The film constantly seems to take two steps forward and one step back. When the two leads' first vampire fight hits, it incorporates some great violence, made more threatening by the humanoid familiars, then piles on the reasonable CGI beasties, and the mix works well. When the second encounter happens, it's just one big CGI beastie, which is in no way scary and the film falls flat.

There's an abundance of recent films that have openly invited comparisons tocomputer games, but it's one I normally tend to shrug off. (I even liked Battle: Los Angeles, despite similar criticism.) Yet, Priest really did have that fault, made more noticeable after a good start to the action.

I never understand why bigger monsters seem to be seen as a bigger threat. If you're dealing with vampires, the biggest danger isn't being swallowed by a big monster. It's the fear of infection or being torn and devoured piece by piece. By way of comparison, just look at Paul W S Anderson's Resident Evil. Instead of guns versus zombies, there was a pointless Cube rip-off. I wonder how much of a coincidence it is, with both films released by Screen Gems, that the early promise of originality mixed with potential horror violence, give way to PG-13/12A tailoring, and therefore, cash-friendly stability.

If the above issues are a matter of taste and opinion, then there's one major flaw in Priest that is absolutely irrefutable: the dialogue. I can deal with clichéd and broadly drawn characters. They're par for the course in this kind of movie, as are the odd spoken clangers. (I'll confess here to even warming to Bill Pullman's speech from Independence Day. Oh, yes.) But, my god, every other line in Priest is a near indigestible rock.

Things get so bad that you can start to predict every one-liner, to near spoof-level heights. There's a drinking game to be had with every clichéd utterance and movie reference (there are characters called Hicks and Uncle Owen, a black-hooded Bettany races across the desert on a speeding bike like a biblical Darth Maul), which will end with even the most hardened drinker in an unconscious mess.

Against the contrivances, there's still much to enjoy, with the production design (including all manner of futuristic guns, gadgets and bikes) and Christopher Young's superbly rousing score being standouts, while Stewart's direction and composition really does excel at times. I thoroughly enjoyed his debut feature, Legion, for dealing out a solid B-movie fix, setting about its familiar business with a wry sense of humour, a humour that the all too dour-faced Priest would have been utterly lifted by.

I should also mention the 3D, for the sake of completion, which seemed passable, but unnecessary, especially when the heavy 3D glasses made my nose hurt and distracted me from what was happening on screen, as I shifted them about.

Still, if Priest spawns into the franchise it would love to be, then I'd be more than happy to sit through more, and I'll no doubt watch Priest again on Blu-ray at home, with some almost requisite beer.

With an increased budget and runtime, more intimate horror-based action and a complete dialogue overhaul, Scott Stewart could really deliver on all fronts. But for now, it's much fairer to compare Priest to the similar work by his peers (including Wimmer's Ultraviolet), than any involving electric sheep.

Bridesmaids Review

In most weddings, the bride garners the undivided attention of the audience.

For this particular occasion, however, Kristen Wiig steals the bouquet and runs with it. Both a co-writer and star of the film, Wiig takes viewers on a hilarious journey to the altar in “Bridesmaids.”

After Annie’s (Wiig) best friend, Lillian (SNL alum Maya Rudolph), asks her to be her maid of honor, chaos ensues. Out to steal the best friend role is the manipulative trophy wife Helen (Rose Byrne), who tries throwing a myriad of bridal luncheons and bachelorette parties. The movie follows Annie as she attempts to fulfill her duties in the midst of her life spiraling down around her.

From the opening scene onwards, Wiig steals the audience’s attention. Her performance is complemented by an array of interesting cast characters from bridesmaids to sex partners (Jon Hamm) to roommates.

The comfort between the actresses is easily seen in the banter between Rudolph and Wiig in the opening scenes – it is one of the better chemistries seen in recent comedies.

Rounding off the bridal party are three hilarious contributors: the sweet Becca, the mother of three foul-mouthed boys in Rita, and the tomboy in Megan (Melissa McCarthy). McCarthy’s character could have easily been the brunt of stereotypical lesbian jokes, but the writers avoid this pitfall well, giving each character their own dialogue to shine.

Like Producer Judd Apatow’s other comedies, “Knocked Up” and “The 40 Year Old Virgin,” this comedy has depth and draws the audience in to root for Annie in a sea of impossibility. While the film is highly lauded for its female cast, it is anything but a chick flick. This R-rated comedy can be enjoyed by women and men alike thanks to great dialogue, hilarious sight gags, and Wiig’s ability to make any moment funny or heartfelt.

“Bridesmaids” puts a spin on wedding-related antics like few others – the role of bridesmaid will hardly be looked at the same way again.

Jumping the Broom Review

Salim Akil's feature directorial debut, "Jumping the Broom," is a predictable, yet funny and endearing, comedy about the clash of two families from different socioeconomic backgrounds coming together for a wedding. As expected, their emotions are high and drama ensues. 

After a string of relationships going nowhere, Sabrina (Paula Patton) makes a deal with God that she will save herself if He sends her the right guy. Bam! She crashes into Jason (Laz Alonso)—literally. She runs into him with her car, and they are swept into a whirlwind romance. Before she even meets his mother, Pam (Loretta Devine), the couple is getting married. The families finally get to meet on the weekend of the wedding at Sabrina's family's home on Martha's Vineyard, and neither family is happy about it.

The humor in the film is frequently based on familiar characters and situations, but the screenplay by Elizabeth Hunter and Arlene Gibbs gives nearly each of the characters in the large cast a story arc of his or her own, which allows character development and prevents them from dissolving in to one-dimensional stereotypes. Sabrina's family is the wealthy high-class type, while Jason's family represents the lower class. 

At the heart of the drama is the secret Sabrina's mother, Claudine (Angela Bassett), is keeping from her, which threatens to destroy the wedding. At first glance, Claudine is a snobby ice queen. But, as the story progresses, Bassett infuses her with a vulnerability and tenderness that makes her sympathetic. Pam—Jason's religious mother who is ironically in anger management classes—could easily have been a one-note character, bogged down with the one-liners; but, from the start, Devine brings the character to life, imbuing her with emotion and love to keep her well-rounded. Both actors establish their characters as flawed but clearly motivated by love for their children.

Patton and Alonso turn in respectable performances, but despite that the story centers on their characters, the draw is the cast surrounding them. The stellar supporting actors elevate the material, creating authentic characters that make the tale believable despite all the drama going on. 

Brian Stokes Mitchell's stoic father of Sabrina soon transforms into a loving, hard-working man who is able to persuade his wife to accept Jason. Mike Epps takes the sleazy character of Jason's uncle and gives him heart, making him the voice of reason when Pam threatens to destroy everything. Julie Bowen turns in a hilarious performance as the wedding coordinator, leaving a solid impression in a short amount of screen time. And Tasha Smith's portrayal of Pam's best friend is fun and authentic.

The multiple storylines combined with the comical characters keep the film moving. Despite the lack of clear connections between the two main plotlines—the families coming together and the family secret—the cast is fun to watch and manages to bring laughter and tears.

Genre: Comedy
Written by: Elizabeth Hunter and Arlene Gibbs
Directed by: Salim Akil
Starring: Angela Bassett, Paula Patton, Laz Alonso, Loretta Devine, Meagan Good, Tasha Smith, Julie Bowen, Romeo Miller, DeRay Davis, Valarie Pettiford, Mike Epps.

Something Borrowed Review

Something Borrowed is based on a 2005 work of chick literature by Emily Giffin. It was directed with extraordinary impersonality by Luke Greenfield (Rob Schneider’s The Animal), and produced by Hilary Swank in collaboration, apparently, with the restaurant Shake Shack—one of the lifestyle brands prominently featured in this tale of love and betrayal among New York City’s young and affluent.

Rachel White (Ginnifer Goodwin) is a successful single gal, though her face in repose is a frown, with creases starting to show at the corners. As the film begins, she walks into her own dirty 30th birthday party, thrown by her lifelong best friend, Darcy (Kate Hudson). Among the guests are Darcy’s groom-to-be, Dex (Colin Egglesfield), and Ethan (John Krasinski), the comic-relief platonic pal.

Normally, Rachel’s the schoolmarm and Darcy’s blond and having more fun, but something is askew tonight. Maybe it’s Rachel’s shock at starting a fourth decade, maybe it’s Dex’s pre-wedding jitters, maybe it’s the way Darcy leaves Rachel with the fond slur “I just hate your shoes so much” as she stumbles home early—but Rachel and Dex go for a nightcap together, and wake up in the same bed.

In addition to giving them a guilty secret to conceal, this act shakes loose an avalanche of flashbacks. Before Darcy got Dex, he was Rachel’s study-buddy at NYU Law, and it seems their flirty friendship stopped just shy of a hook-up six years prior, when Rachel stepped aside for Darcy, as we’re told she always has. Ethan’s given the job of explicating that friendship dynamic to Rachel—and the viewer. Goodwin’s an appealing wallflower, and Hudson shows flashes of blithe, funny egotism, but they lack moments together that illustrate Darcy’s feminine gamesmanship in action. From the opening birthday-party scene, in which Darcy narrates a slideshow introducing the cast of characters, it’s clear that Something Borrowed finds it easier to tell us about relationships than to show us them under way.

For the rest of the summer, spent between Manhattan and the Southampton rental, Rachel and Dex carry on and off, hesitating to drop the bomb on Darcy. Dex’s other big roadblock in breaking off the wedding are his stereotyped WASP parents, a neurasthenic mother and disapproving father who says things like, “It’s not the kind of people we are”; wants to buy the newlyweds a Westchester manor; and presumably quashed Dex’s dreams of being a teacher—because he is having a career crisis on top of everything else. (A Happy Ending showing Dex’s first day at some Bronx P.S. would be welcome.)

In other romantic complications, Ethan is followed to Southampton by a hopeful, puppyish old fling, played by Ashley Williams—a chewtoy for Krasinski, whose comedy always seems to require someone to cut. Still, Ethan’s a more appealing bachelor than Dex. Egglesfield has fine genes, but he’s a limited actor playing a character that requires a vulnerability in order for us to forgive his frequent caddishness and constipated decisionmaking. Egglesfield can’t transcend his guy-who-just-cut-you-off-in-his-convertible air; misting up over his family troubles, he registers as schemingly sensitive, looking to take advantage of any sympathy that comes his way.

The Something Borrowedis, of course, the premise, embellished from a 1997 Julia Robertsvehicle, My Best Friend’s Wedding. Befitting a demographically precise movie about second-chance nostalgia, Borrowed raids young professionals’ Clinton-era pop-culture memories. Dex’s wildman pal, played by Steve Howey, resembles Mark McGrath, the middlebrow go-to “bad boy” in 1998. At one point, Rachel goes to check out a “ ’90s cover band” for the wedding, and we’re treated to meaningful renditions of Third Eye Blindstandards; later, Goodwin and Hudson perform a Salt-N-Pepa dance number, rehearsed to perfection in distant youth. (This is the one moment they actually seem like symbiotic BFFs.)

The poster, featuring colorful little boxes with headshots of the stars, is nearly the same lazy design used to promote the superb, humane comedy How Do You Know last year—a disturbing example of insensate Hollywood selling its best and worst in the same package. If not the worst, this is at least the most dissembling. It’s no coincidence that Something Borrowed features lawyer protagonists; while making a pretense of being a comedy of modern sexual ethics, the movie never asks a hard question without an answer prepared in advance.

Thor Review

Despite Marvel and Paramount's best marketing efforts to convince otherwise, Kenneth Branagh'sThor is a perfectly satisfactory piece of popcorn entertainment. It is cheerfully silly and openly operatic, but played out with absolute conviction. It is no great landmark in the realm of comic book films, but it is easily the best of the Marvel-financed films thus far released. It has larger-than-life action with human-scale emotions, and Branagh directs with an unexpected confidence that seeps through the finished product. It is no great piece of art nor defining statement of our times, but its good-natured pomp makes its obvious flaws almost endearing.

A token amount of plot: Young Thor (Chris Hemsworth) is about to be crowned king of Asgard when the pesky Frost Giants attempt an act of robbery/murder with world-threatening implications. King Odin (Anthony Hopkins) wants to deal with the matter in a diplomatic fashion, but the headstrong and angry Thor insists on violent retribution, with action that threatens full-scale war. Enraged that he nearly put a petulant would-be child on the crown, Odin banishes Thor to the distant planet known as Earth, with the implicit instructions that he not be allowed to return until he earns his birthright by learning of his humility. Stuck on Earth with no powers, he immediately has a run-in with three traveling scientists (Natalie Portman, Kat Dennings and Stellan Skarsgard) and attracts the attention of Shield (once again personified by Clark Gregg). As Thor acquits himself to a human life and finds himself falling for Dr. Jane Foster (Portman), Odin's other son, Loki puts himself on the throne and sets some most unpleasant plans into motion. Can Thor win back his throne and defeat his brother's machinations? Considering that The Avengers is coming out next year, I'm guessing the answer is some variation on 'yes'.

First off, unlike the heavily-tinkered-with Iron Man 2, Thor remains a mostly stand-alone adventure. There are a few references to Tony Stark and Bruce Banner, and Greg Clark once again hints at a larger universe, but the film is first-and-foremost a character journey for Thor himself. Even with a second act that has perhaps a bit too much Shield material (which could have been better spent developing the undercooked romance between Thor and Jane), this feels more like its own film with its own beginning, middle, and end. Even a brief cameo in the second act feels somewhat organic, even though it was in fact added at the last moment. As a result, while the film has few plot twists, I was indeed surprised by a couple climactic story turns.

As an action picture, the film unfortunately peaks right at the beginning. The first-act battle, Thor and his friends versus the Ice Giants, is a whopper of a curtain raiser. It starts out as one of those overly-edited, shot-too-tight battle scenes but slowly expands its scope and fluidity. It also shows these mighty warriors at the peak of their abilities right off the bat, which a refreshing change of pace from the standard origin story cliche. But the rest of the action, while not unimpressive, fails to equal the scale and scope of that initial conflict. Even the finale, which puts Thor and Loki against each other on the visually dazzling rainbow bridge, is brief and perfunctory. Compared to the action we've already seen in films such as Sucker Punch, Thirteen Assassins, and Fast Five,Thor doesn't quite get as epic as it perhaps should have.

Fortunately, the picture works as a character piece. Pretty much every actor treats this, appropriately enough, like Shakespeare. Hemsworth takes this gift of a role and runs with it, delivering a star-making turn that makes us sympathize with Thor's initial recklessness and yet still believe his lightning-fast transition into a better person (the 'rock bottom' moment is potent enough to make us buy Thor's instant humility). Anthony Hopkins once again shows that he is at his best in pulp fiction entertainments, delivering a passionate piece of performance art. Portman is looser than usual here, as she openly swoons over the studly and charming would-be warrior god while remaining steadfastly committed to her research. I didn't buy their relationship as anything more than a brief flirtation, but most 'great love' stories in genre films fail that test.

Skarsgard is basically around to provide exposition (although I imagine he'll be a character who hops around the Marvel universe ala Greg Clark) and Kat Dennings is purely charming comic relief (on a prurient note: long-haired Dennings + nerd glasses = 'winning'). Tom Hiddleston steals the picture, as his thoughtful and compelling villain makes the film work as an emotional fable. While Loki is indeed sinister, his motivations are reasonable and his feelings are genuine. Like Willem Dafoe in the first Spider-Man film, he brings everyones' game up a notch and his big dramatic scenes with Hopkins and Hemsworth are the highlights of the picture. Alas, most of the rest of the cast is used for background scenery. Rene Russo returns from retirement (as Thor and Loki's mother) for only a single scene and a few lines here and there. Idris Elba has fun as the guardian of the rainbow bridge teleportation device, but his screentime is painfully brief.

The technical aspects of the film are a mixed bag. Branagh's infamous Dutch-angles are so ever-present that I half-expected William Dozier to break in and announce that The Penguin had just robbed a bank. The special effects are not exactly what you would call photo-real, but their obviousness frankly adds to the film's goofy charm (the shots of Thor and company flying through the inter-dimensional portals are just plain neat). The 3D is invisible, which is arguably a good thing as it also doesn't seem to darken the image all that much. 3D qualms aside, it is a film worth seeing in IMAX if one is so inclined. There are genuine leaps in logic (Loki is very smart except when he is very stupid) and some real head-scratchers. Norse mythology is acknowledged in the picture, yet no one suspects that trickster-god guy of being, I dunno, tricky? It's the same logic that has the Autobots SHOCKED when they get betrayed by the DECEPTicons.

But these obvious issues (especially the needless Shield material) didn't bother me as much as one would expect. Maybe it's because I have no hard fandom of Thor, so I was only expecting a piece of colorful and larger-than-life entertainment starring actors I happen to enjoy. Maybe it's becauseThor is a far humbler picture than the arrogant and entitled Iron Man films or the patronizingly dumbed-down Incredible Hulk (aww, did Ang Lee make you think too much?). And Thor is quite a bit of family-friendly fun (the PG-13 rating is a joke, this is PG material all the way), and its gee-whiz innocence allows you to overlook its narrative issues.

It doesn't quite score as an action film and not every element works. But the raw emotionalism of Tom Hiddleston and Chris Hemsworth raise the picture above its obvious flaws. The scale and opulence of the Asgard material balances well with the quirkier Earthbound middle act. Kenneth Branagh's Thor is not a patch on the best films of the comic book genre (X2: X-Men United, The Dark Knight, Superman, Spider-Man), but it is a genuinely enjoyable adventure. For this casual observer of the world of Asgard, that's enough for now.

Grade: B

Hoodwinked Too! Hood VS. Evil Review

Consider this: In 2011, making a straightforward, unwinking animated fairy-tale might be a borderline-radical move. After Shrek, its sequels, and Shrek-inspired movies like Happily N’Ever After and theirsequels, ironic takes on the worlds of the Grimms and Mother Goose look like the new normal. Is it possible that a whole generation will know fairy godmothers, big bad wolves, and their ilk only as characters who deliver wisecracks and riff on pop culture?

Hoodwinked Too!: Hood Vs. Evil, a sequel to the 2006 filmHoodwinked, does little to reverse the trend or suggest there’s much life left in it. Stepping into a voice role originated by Anne Hathaway, Hayden Panettiere plays Red Riding Hood, an agent of the Happy Ever After Agency, a Mission: Impossible-like task force charged with assuring that fairy stories end well. Having disappeared to be initiated into the same secret society as her secret-agent grandmother (Glenn Close), Panettiere finds her relationship with her crime-fighting partner—a big bad wolf voiced by Patrick Warburton—has become strained. When the two are charged with rescuing Close, who’s been kidnapped alongside Hansel and Gretel (Bill Hader and Amy Poehler), it becomes tenser still as they attempt a rescue while navigating a sea of faux-epic fight scenes, one-liners, and references to other movies.

Hoodwinked Too! is at its most tolerable when it stops to catch its breath. Running gags like Warburton’s insistence on the power of fake beards to fool bad guys in virtually any situation, or the much-abused, endlessly cheery, banjo-playing goat work a lot better than the endless action sequences, which only highlight the meager resources of Blue Yonder, the animation house behind the Hoodwinked films Happy Ever After Agency. (Especially when rendered in unimpressive 3-D.) It raises the question of who the movie is for in the first place: Kids have seen much better animation in other films, and it’s hard to imagine too many grown-ups ready to smile and nod at yet more smirking takes on famous moments from Scarface and The Silence Of The Lambs. There’s no happy ending to that half-assed combination.

Fast Five Review

n the very first sequence of Fast Five, former federal officer Brian O’Conner (Paul Walker) slams on the brakes of his muscle car, and a bus slams into it at an angle. If you are a fan of physics — or just happen to live on this planet — you can guess what should happen. If you guessed that the muscle car would be obliterated, welcome to the human race. If you guessed that the car would cause the much, much heavier bus to flip over spectacularly, then welcome to the world of Fast Five.

It is with this intro that you are given the rules to the universe of the film you are about to watch. At every bend, there is a casual disregard to the laws of nature; almost a “take that, physics” approach to life. And that is fine. The Fast and Furiousseries is an escapist fantasy. We watch the $100,000 cars driven by beautiful women and tough men, then we jump in our beat up Civics and station wagons and drive home, probably a little faster than we should. You don’t want to put too much thought into the logic of it, and honestly, reality would only get in the way of enjoying this series.

But a bigger issue for the franchise than just its propensity for flipping off science: How do you keep a series fresh after five outings? There are only so many ways to race, and explosions can only get so big (although don’t tell that to Michael Bay). The answer is that you take what works about the series and shift it subtly into a new direction that is original, but doesn’t feel alien to the franchise. That is what director Justin Lin has done by making Fast Fiveinto something of a traditional “heist” movie. And it not only helps to breathe life into the franchise, it helps to deliver the best movie of the series to date.

Have car, will travel

The fifth Fast and Furious installment picks up exactly where the last movie ended, with Dominic Toretto (Vin Diesel) on his way to prison while O’Conner and Dom’s sister Mia (Jordana Brewster) lead an assault to free him. After the rescue, O’Conner and Mia, both very much in love, head to Rio to rendezvous with Dom, and end up staying with Vince (Matt Schulze), the stereotypical “angry guy” from the first film. He has a job for them, and when Dom shows up, they all head off to steal cars. Off a train.

Things go bad quickly, and after a physics-be-damned style escape, the group is being hunted by the resident kingpin of Rio, Herman Reyes (Joaquin de Almeida), because of something they accidently took with them. Mia soon admits that she is preggers, which inspires Dom and O’Conner to eschew running from the forces closing in on them, and instead pull off one massive job that will set them all up for life and cripple Reyes’ operation. But to pull it off, they need a team.

The team is a collection of the Fast and Furious all-stars throughout the years. From the second film 2 Fast 2 Furious, Roman Pearce (Tyrese Gibson) and Tej Parker (Chris “Ludacris” Bridges) return. From the third film The Fast And the Furious: Tokyo Drift, Han Lue (Sung Kang) appears. From the previous film, Fast & Furious, Tego Leo (Tego Calderon), Rico Santos (Don Omar) and Gisele Harabo (Gal Gadot) fill out the crew.

Unbeknownst to the super friends, an elite DSS agent, Luke Hobbs (Dwayne Johnson) is on their trail, and with the help of local Rio officer Elena Neves (Elsa Pataky) and a group of highly trained agents, he sees it as his duty to bring them all to justice.

The many moving pieces

In terms of continuity, here is the strangest part of the film. Fast Five is the fifth movie in the series, but like its predecessor Fast & Furious, it takes place before the events of The Fast And The Furious: Tokyo Drift which is last film in terms of continuity. The only reason to do this is to include Sung Kang’s character of Han, who died in the third film. Now, Han is a good character, and Kang is undeniably a charismatic actor, but it feels a bit like buyers’ remorse than anything else — the producers obviously regret having killed him. It doesn’t make any difference to the story to have Tokyo Drift set in the future, but it might confuse some.

For this series, the change to the heist theme feels natural and right. Fast Five is in many ways closer in tone to movies like The Italian Job, or even Ocean’s 11 than it is to the previous films in the series. In fact, there is very little racing at all in the movie, and only one extended driving sequence at the end. It was a fairly bold move at that. There is one scene where a car race is about to happen, but it skips the actual racing to further the plot. While it is somewhat counterintuitive to say about a franchise based around fast cars, impossibly beautiful women and the like, the series has actually matured. At least a bit. While there is still a ton of ridiculous action, it is not thrown in just to look good, it all serves a purpose.

Each of the characters has a part to play, and while it is always hard to stand out in an ensemble cast, the actors all compliment each other and mesh surprisingly well. In fact, it is something of an accomplishment in itself to have so many big name stars work together, and that is a testament to Lin.

You can almost feel the growth of Justin Lin into a solid action director over the course of the last three Fast and Furious movies. Lin has always had an eye for action, even when he was just starting out and filming on next to no budget with films like Better Luck Tomorrow. As he has learned and grown as a filmmaker, the way he frames scenes has drastically improved, as has his eye for color and aesthetics — something that was at times an issue in the previous film. It’ll be interesting to see where Lin goes from here. Hollywood is currently in love with him, and he is attached to direct the next Terminator starring Arnold Schwarzenegger, so his name may be one that you hear for years to come.

The rest of the crew turns in solid preformances as well, and you can almost feel that they had a good time making this movie. Despite the intense action, this is a movie you are meant to have fun with, and having actors enjoying themselves is important in selling it. Perhaps the most difficult role to play in the film was also perhaps the best cast—that of DSS Agent Hobbs, played by Dwayne Johnson. On paper, the role is fairly bland. You have a dogged federal agent that isn’t particularly funny or likeable, trying to stop the antiheroes that you have become invested in after four previous movies. Johnson is, and always has been undeniably charismatic, and few can convey as much without saying a word as he can. It was an inspired casting choice, and further proof that Johnson deserves the success he has earned. A less actor in this role could have killed this movie dead and made an interesting plot line cringe-worthy. In fact, with so many moving parts in this film, any one of a handful of badly cast actors could have derailed the entire film, but it all works well.

Diesel again plays Vin Diesel, while Walker has nearly perfected the art of acting while looking perpetually stoned. Whether you love or hate them, your opinion probably won’t change much based on this film. But of the two, Diesel is unquestionably the focus, and so he should be. While Fast Five isn’t going to make AFI’s top 100 movies of all-time list, it is an entertaining film thanks partly to the performances that most will enjoy, as long as you don’t think too much about the details.

Conclusion

Fast Five isn’t high art, nor is it trying to be. There is so much testosterone in this movie that even women in the audience may leave with a mustache. It fulfills the traditional summer movie pre-requisites and has a ton of explosions, gun battles and fistfights, just like you would expect. In that sense, it is a very, very traditional film. If you are looking for that one unique snowflake in the snow storm of summer movies, this aint it.

It is, however, the best film in a series bred for its visual extravaganzas. Films like this can go three ways. They can veers towards the ridiculous, as they did with 2 Fast 2 Furious, they can repeat the same formula over and over as they did with the third and fourth films, or they can do something a bit ballsier and take the franchise in a different direction altogether. It doesn’t have to be a wholly original direction, just original for the series. In this case it worked, and likely saved the franchise. A sixth movie has already been greenlit, and while it might at first glance seem over saturation to film six movies based on an action franchise like this, the fifth movie has proved that there is enough life left in the series to justify it. It helps that Fast Five was already released internationally, and in eight days has made back over $30 million of its $125 million budget, so odds are it is going to do alright at the box office.

By the way, make sure to stay through the first block of credits to see a scene with a few surprises that set up the sequel.

While Fast Five isn’t the type of movie that will appeal to the art house crowd in even the smallest way, it is what it intends to be — a summer popcorn movie that is beating the other big name summer films to the theaters by a few weeks (or a week, counting Thor). If you enjoyed the previous films, then you will leave pleasantly surprised at how they have managed to resuscitate the franchise. The action is unbelievable — literally unbelievable — and physics take a punch in the nose, but the film does so with a wink and a nod to the audience, so you accept it. If you can’t, then you are in trouble.

For a fifth film in a franchise, Fast Five offers a slightly mindless, but fully enjoyable heist movie starring a cast of up-and-comers, borderline A-list stars, and directed by a guy who will likely be a household name in the future. Although it isn’t quite summer yet, Fast Five has begun the summer movie season on a good note.

(Fast Five is rated PG-13, with a running time of 130 minutes)