The Hangover Part II - Review

Hmmm... I'm beginning to see a pattern developing with the summer movie releases. First, the season started off with a bang with the awesome action blockbuster Thor. Next was the very funny Bridesmaids, the movie with a solid chance of becoming the breakout comedy of the summer. Following that was Pirates of the Caribbean: On Stranger Tides, the incredibly disappointing and unnecessary cash-in sequel to a hit action movie. Now, with The Hangover Part II, we have the incredibly disappointing and unnecessary cash-in sequel to a hit comedy. Does this mean that the next two major releases will be awesome??? I sure hope so, because next week is X-Men First Class, and that franchise is dying for greatness again (Please Don't Suck!) But that won't be until next week... for now, let's just look at the current culprit to steal your money, The Hangover Part II.

The Hangover Part II sees the return of the crew known as The Wolf Pack. There's the straight-laced Stu (Ed Helms), the hip and cool Phil (Bradley Cooper), and the incredibly immature Alan (Zach Galifianakis.) It's two years after the infamous Vegas incident from the first movie, and they've all moved on since then. Stu is days away from getting married to the woman of his dreams, with the wedding being held in Thailand. Two days before the wedding, the group comes together in Thailand... and it all begins again. Seemingly out of nowhere, the group finds themselves in Bangkok, waking up in a run down hotel room with no memory of the night before. To make matters worse, Teddy, the brother of the bride, (who was hanging out with guys) goes missing, forcing the gang to retrace their steps and find him.

Before I start, I have to say this. Making a sequel is no easy task, especially a sequel to a comedy. Here's a little challenge for you: Name at least five sequels to a comedy that were either as good or better than their predecessors. Can you think of five? It's tough isn't it? Making a decent sequel to an action movie or a horror film, while challenging, usually stand a better chance than their comedic brethren. Comedies seldom work twice. After all, a joke isn't nearly as funny if you know the punchline. I only mention all of this because, in spite of the daunting challenge of sequel making, there was little to no effort put into The Hangover II. I've heard of recycling jokes, but this goes beyond that. I admit that I didn't totally get the messiah-like praise the first one got, but nonetheless it was a damn funny movie that definitely deserved better than a crumby half-rate sequel.

The plot is exactly the same same, the characters are (mostly) the same, the development is the same, and most of the jokes... they're the same too. What made the first Hangover work so well was the sense of unpredictability and randomness it boasted. It had all these amazing setups and left the viewer genuinely interested in how it would all unfold. Usually whenever something was revealed, it was goofy and hilarious... great comic premise! However, that premise does not work when you are able to predict those said jokes. Seriously, almost every gag or reveal was merely a slightly modified take on a gag from the first movie. This is some of the most lazy and ineffective comic screenwriting I've ever seen. It's like the writers took the script from the first and replaced Vegas with Bangkok, found a baby with found a monkey, missing a tooth with missing a finger, and... you get the idea.

The humor in the first was crude but generally goofy and fun... about as harmless as a mature comedy can get. The Hangover Part II actually caught me off guard by it's darker tone and more hateful sense of humor. When you have a fish-out-of-water story set in a foreign country, the first concern would be that it comes off as racially insensitive or prejudiced. There are a couple of scenes that might raise an eyebrow or two, including a scene concerning a group of monks in a Buddhist temple, but for the most part it's actually not too bad on the racial front. There is, however, a scene that dwells on a transsexual stripper that includes a rather unfunny joke that is taken further than it really should have been. I admit that I got a handful of chuckles from the flick, but nothing that I'll be remembering a few days from now.

I feel bad for the cast being in this sequel. Galifianakis, Cooper, and Helms are clearly a talented crew whose efforts are totally wasted. Make no mistake, the actors do a serviceable job, and try to make the most out of lame content. Oh sure, sometimes they go a little over the top, but most of those occurrences could have been fixed with some better editing. Any laugh I did get out of this piece of crap was only because of the cast. It's not their fault that the movie sucks, this is purely the fault of a weak script.

In short, The Hangover Part II pretty much sucks. The few minor laughs I did get out of the flick don't justify the 12 dollars you'll be spending on the movie ticket. If you absolutely must see it, wait to rent it on DVD.

My Score: 2 out of 5!

Pirates of the Caribbean: On Stranger Tides - Review

Alright its official! We have our first dud of the summer movie season! It's really too bad, because the summer was off to a great start with the awesome Thor and the funny Bridesmaids. Now we enter sequel territory, approaching the familiar turf (or seas maybe?) of the once promising Pirates of the Caribbean series. I enjoyed the first movie. While it wasn't substantially better than your typical summer blockbuster, it had a bit of an edge thanks to some exciting action scenes, fun characters, and a memorable performance from the great Johnny Depp. The two sequels that followed, while visually striking, were far inferior. They weren't awful, but due in part to poor screenwriting and an over-reliance on visual effects, neither could rise above the level of mediocrity. One thing I can say about 2 and 3, however, is that they were still much better than the series' most recent incarnation. Just how bad is On Stranger Tides??? Lets set the sails for a disappointing adventure.

If you remember the ending to the last Pirates movie, At World's End, the eccentric Jack Sparrow (Johnny Depp) acquired a map that would lead him to the fabled Fountain of Youth. Sparrow is determined to find the fountain, but unfortunately he's not alone. Jack runs into a former fling of his named Angelica (Penelope Cruz), the first-mate and daughter to the infamous Pirate Blackbeard, both of whom seek the Fountain. Also racing for the Fountain is the former Black Pearl captain Barbarossa, now a one-legged ship captain for the King's Royal Navy. With time as a factor, and bloodthirsty pirates racing for eternal life, much hangs in the balance...

Pirates of the Caribbean: On Stranger Tides is one of those movies that has so many problems, that I really don't know where to start. I suppose the story is as good as place as any. In short... it's awful. The story itself is decent enough, a group of pirates go on an adventure in search of the Fountain of Youth. Okay, you can make a good action movie out of that. It doesn't work, however, when you remove most of the enjoyable characters from the previous movies in favor of flat and uninteresting new characters, rewrite most of the personalities' of the few returning figures, add a ridiculous Paganism vs Christianity subplot, and write a script with a laundry list of plot-holes, poor pacing, and inconsistencies. On Stranger Tides is shorter than At World's End, but the plot is so poorly constructed that it moves at a snails pace. What a miserable execution of what should have been a fairly straightforward story.

On Stranger Tides features a few returning characters (Sparrow, Gibbs, and Barbossa) but most of the characters are brand new. The villain is the notorious pirate Blackbeard, played by Ian Mcshane. Penelope Cruz stars as Blackbeard's daughter and Jack's former fling Angelica. There's also a priest named Phillip (Sam Clafin) and a mermaid named Syrena (Astrid Berges-Frisbey). Depp once again plays Jack Sparrow, and while he doesn't give a bad performance per se, he's clearly just phoning in his performance. The same can be said for Geoffrey Rush as Barbossa, whose character has been rewritten so thoroughly that he bears only a slight resemblance to the character in the previous flicks. Cruz holds herself fairly well as Angelica, and while she showcases more charisma than her male counterparts, her character is so flat that she doesn't even come close to saving the movie.

The rest of the cast is just plain awful. Ian McShane is easily the weakest villain in the whole series. On top of his character being dull and uninteresting, he clearly had no interest in giving a decent performance, and just falls flat. Sam Clafin's character (the priest Phillip) had absolutely no relevance to the plot except to be a half-assed love interest to the mermaid. While Syrena the mermaid at least contributed to the plot, the actors who portrayed these two characters were awkward, stale, and had absolutely no chemistry together. What a terrible waste, this cast could have been so much better.

If there's one thing a summer blockbuster like Pirates of the Caribbean should be able to deliver on, it would be the action. I figured, if nothing else, I would have gotten a few memorable stunts or sword fights out the flick, but nope. Even though the last two Pirates movies weren't that good, they at least had a few decent action sequences. I haven't seen the sequels in years, but I still vividly remember the epic all Pirate brawl in At World's End, or that lengthy sword fight on the rolling wheel in Dead Man's Chest. It's been only a few days since I've seen On Stranger Tides, and already my recollection of the movie is beginning to slip my mind. The worst part is that there were numerous set-ups for potentially great and epic battles, but few of them are realized. Blackbeard wields a magic sword that allows him to perform all kinds of crazy acts. Also, his ship even has flamethrowers on the front. Does he ever use them in battle??? No, he doesn't! He uses them in like one or two scenes, and never in any meaningful or interesting way.

At this point, it didn't even surprise me that visual appeal was lackluster too. This wasn't the worst cgi I've ever seen, but it doesn't even hold a candle to the effects from the previous three movies. Remember how cool the effects on Davy Jones were in the last two. Okay, I admit that the over-reliance on CGI did more harm than good to the last two movies, but at least they were well-done. Here, none of the effects are even close to convincing. The mermaids in particular looked pretty awful. While the cinematography had a few decent shots, for the most part it wasn't particularly engaging. There really wasn't much of a sense of composition, and the action wasn't framed in any memorable way. Crappy cg aside, the movie didn't look that bad, but there was nothing about it that I'm going to remember a week from now.

A Pirates movie with the fresh perspective of a new director seemed like a decent idea, but clearly Rob Marshall wasn't up to this one. The worst thing about On Stranger Tides... it's BORING! Okay, some of the sword fights were passable I suppose and there were a handful of decent stunts, but nothing redeemed what didn't work in this movie. The only thing that was kind of "so-bad-it's good" were the mermaids that show up halfway through. It turns out, these mermaids spout fangs and like to eat intruding sailors. It's stupid yes, but these sort of "vampire mermaids" were the only memorable thing to come out of this movie. Of course, right after their scene, the movie went back to being dull and uninteresting.

Overall, this movie sucked! It's too early to call this the worst of the summer, especially considering there's a Michael Bay film on the horizon, but it wouldn't surprise me if it would end up being the worst. It's nothing more than a paycheck for the actors and a cash-grab for the studio. Don't bother seeing it.

My Score: 1.5 out of 5!

Bridesmaids - Review

To those who still say I don't review enough chick flicks, here's two in a row for you. I guess Bridesmaids isn't really in the same vein as the typical chick flick, as it's not a romantic comedy or really much of a romance movie in general. I've actually heard Bridesmaids described as the female version of The Hangover. Personally, I don't think its quite like that, but there might be some truth there. Nonetheless, all that really matters is whether the movie is entertaining or not. So, is Bridesmaids the breakout comedy of the summer or just another ho-hum chick flick???

Bridesmaids stars SNL-Alum Kristen Wiig as Annie, a love-torn and financially broke middle aged woman doing her best to make it by. After her childhood friend Lillian (Maya Rudolph) becomes engaged, Annie is chosen to be her maid of honor. In spite of her personal problems, Annie is determined to be the best maid of honor she can be as she leads a group of colorful and eccentric bridesmaids alongside competing with Lillian's new best friend, Helen (Rose Byrne).

Alright, let's get this out of the way... is Bridesmaids funny? Yeah, it actually is. My expectations for this film were low, not necessarily because it looked bad (I actually hadn't seen any clips or trailers for it), but that it didn't come off as anything more than the typical romcom/chick flick. After watching it though, I'll say this... Bridesmaids actually has less in common with chick flicks and more in common with guy-centered comedies like The Hangover. The movie is full of in-your-face humor complete with gross-out gags, profanity-laden jokes, and sexual-based humor. The catch this time... instead of featuring a group of horny and immature guys, it boasts a cast of eccentric middle-aged women. Basically, its a chick flick that takes a piss on the stereotypical chick flick. It's a funny hook and it works.

In my opinion, in order for a comedy to be successful, it must start with good characters. If you have a group of characters each with their own unique and funny contrasting personality, a good story will usually follow. This is where Bridesmaids hits it's biggest stride. Kristen Wiig as Annie is the lead character and serves as the everyday and relatable figure. You also have the rich and semi-snobby bitch, the naive virgin (okay not quite a virgin, but close enough), the sarcastic and frustrated mom, and the tough butch chick. On top of the personalities being varied and funny, every actress brings their own charm to the role. Make no mistake, whenever the group is on screen together, the movie is hilarious and damn-near flawless.

As funny as the varied cast can be, there is one performer who totally steals the show. Kristen Wiig as Annie shows that she is not only a hilarious comedian but a great actress in general. Her comic timing is spot-on and the way she handles herself with the more dramatic scenes (more on that next) is quite commendable. She is definitely a talented actress, and while her work on SNL definitely got her some prestige, I imagine Bridesmaids will be her big break into stardom.

Bridesmaids scores mainly thanks to it's performances and characters, and while the script is far from bad, it doesn't usually hit as hard as the cast. The title is a bit misleading. A movie called Bridesmaids implies that the focus is on a group of Bridesmaids, but in reality the bridesmaids themselves are actually the supporting story. Instead, a majority of the story is centered around Annie, her life and her dilemmas. With that, you essentially get a comedy-drama with elements of a gross-out comedy. Annie is developed just fine and there's plenty of humor to go around, but some of the more dramatic moments come off as a little off-beat. I felt for Annie's character, and seeing her somewhat-depressing situation get worse and worse as the movie progressed was a bit frustrating to watch. I had similar feelings when I first watched Meet The Parents... they're both funny movies but can be so painful to watch sometimes. Plus, the ending was awfully predictable and at 2 hours and 4 minutes, the movie was about 20 minutes too long. No massive flaws but a noticeable few.

That is about all I have to say about Bridesmaids. I wasn't expecting much out of this one, but it turned out to be a legitimately funny and entertaining movie. If you can stomach some crude and sometimes gross humor, I'd definitely check this one out.

My Score: 3.5 out of 5!

Love and Other Drugs - Review

Alright already! I'll review a romantic comedy! I guess my list of reviews is a little lacking in the chick flick department, so I suppose this review is somewhat overdue. It's not that I hate romantic comedies per se, it's just that I usually have nothing to say about them. The genre contain the most cliche and predictable types of movies in Hollywood today. Don't get me wrong, there are exceptions, but not that many. For every Chasing Amy or 500 Days of Summer, there's at least 20 run-of-the-mill Sandra Bullock or Katherine Heigl comedies. You know what I'm talking about... generic guy-meets-girl storylines consisting of good looking stars that generally have little to no chemistry in a predictable and formulaic plot. It's not only that they're incredibly predictable, but it's the fact that the filmmakers and actors behind the movie have virtually no interest or passion for the movie they're making. Oh sure, you're typical run-of-the-mill action or horror movie is usually just as predictable, but the emotional impact of the average action flick is typically more relevant than that of a romantic movie. If you like romcoms, that's fine. They've just never been interesting to me. Love and Other Drugs, however, aims to change that by presenting a more open and adult-oriented romance movie. Is it something new and different, or just another forgettable romantic comedy?

Love and Other Drugs stars Jake Gyllenhaal as the straight-laced suave womanizer Jamie Randall and Anne Hathaway as the free-spirited artist Maggie Murdock. The year is 1996 and Jamie is a pharmaceutical salesman for Pfizer the same year they reveal Viagra to the world. Jamie's salesperson like frivolity and natural charm make him a hit with the ladies, but he refuses to be held down for anything more than the occasional one night stand. Maggie's free spirited nature and similar attitudes regarding commitment usually make her immune to a suitor's calling, but even she finds herself taken in by Jamie's charm. The two begin a casual sexual relationship with no strings attached, until they're both caught off guard by their evolving feelings for each other.

Let's get this out of the way first, on the surface, Love and Other Drugs isn't much different than your typical romantic comedy. It's still your basic guy meets girl story. You have an unlikely couple who hate each other at first, than become friends with benefits, and then fall in love. That being said, Love and Other Drugs address a topic that many romcoms like to skirt around... sex! Most of the genre's typical offerings are little more than watered-down romances consisting of hugs and holding hands. So instead of believable love affairs, you get syrupy sweet Hallmark tripe that only barely resembles romance. I'm not saying that all romcoms need copious amounts of nudity to be good, but when one aims to create a believable and adult romance, it certainly doesn't hurt.

The adult themes of Love and Other Drugs can be pretty explicit, and those who aren't a fan of harsh language and sexual content probably will want to avoid this one. For those, however, who were hoping to watch a romcom with a relevant story and believable characters might actually want to give this one a chance. Don't get me wrong, Love and Other Drugs is far from perfect, but unlike most of the half-assed and assembly-line romcoms released every year, this one actually tries. It takes a couple stabs at the morally questionable practices of the pharmaceutical industry while aiming to present rateable lead characters. While still coming off as something of a Hollywood archetype, the two main characters are presented in a fairly believable way. This is partly due to the well-written dialogue and also how the two actors sell their roles.

Anne Hathaway and Jake Gyllenhaal are both great actors and good choices for these roles. The two work off each other well, deliver their dialogue with finesse, and have solid chemistry together. There are some dramatic undertones beneath the movie's comedic surface too, giving the actors a little more challenge. I don't want to dwell on them too much in this review because I don't want to spoil too much of it. I'll say this... these weren't easy roles for the actors, as not only do they touch on some important dramatic themes in addition to the comedy, but they also had to be comfortable pulling off the sexual content. Just so everyone knows, yes, they both spend a good portion of the movie without clothes. If you choose to watch this movie for the sole reason of seeing either Jake Gylenhaal or Anne Hathaway naked, you'll probably be satisfied, but there's definitely more to Love and Other Drugs than just explicit sex scenes.

While the two main actors holds the movie together, the supporting cast comes close to ruining their efforts. Well, I guess it was mainly just one cast member... Jamie's fat and geeky brother Josh Randall. Played by Josh Gad (I guess Jonah Hill was unavailable), he should be nominated for one of the most annoying and one-note supporting characters ever shown in a movie. He just spends almost all of the movie whining and complaining. By the end of the movie, I couldn't stand him. The rest of the cast actually isn't that bad. Hank Azaria has some funny moments as the semi-corrupt Dr. Knight. Oliver Platt was somewhat amusing as Jamie's supportive sales mentor Bruce Winston. I suppose, Josh Gad aside, that the supporting cast was mostly passable, just nothing special.

Overall, Love and Other Drugs tries hard, but does it succeed? For the most part, yes. The movie is still quite predictable, the supporting characters are hit and miss, and the movie doesn't embrace it's promising ideas as much as it could have. Nonetheless, Hathaway and Gyllenhaal are great, their characters are believable, the laughs are plentiful, and it's damn sexy too! For such a promising concept, I wish they could have spent just a little more time to perfect the script, but it's still worth a watch. Check it out.

My Score: 3 out of 5!

Thor - Review

Alright! The summer movie season has officially began! First up to bat is the Norse God of Thunder himself... THOR! This particular version of Thor is based on the Marvel comic character and is set in the Marvel Studios movie universe, which also features Iron Man, The Incredible Hulk, Captain America, and others... all of which are counting down to the team-up movie, The Avengers, due for release in 2012. Before the team comes together, though, we have plenty of individual movies to enjoy. The two Iron Man movies both delivered and The Incredible Hulk was a blast, and Thor... well let's take a look at it, shall we?

Thor, of course, has its roots in Norse mythology. Only now, its re-imagined for the Marvel Universe. Thor is the powerful God of Thunder from the distant land of Asgard. The son of the aging King Odin, Thor is prepared to be crowned the new King once his father steps down from the throne. Thor's arrogance and recklessness, however, get the best of him. After Asgard is infiltrated but not harmed by a small band of Frost Giants (Asgard's neighboring world and former enemy), Thor heads to the Frost Giant world to confront them. Due to his violent impulses, Thor attacks the Frost Giants and endangers the alliance between the two groups. As a punishment, Odin casts Thor out of Asgard, strips him of his powers, and exiles him to Earth. Meanwhile, Thor's mischievous brother Loki takes control of Asgard will dubious intentions. Now, Thor must learn humility and find a way to regain his power and return to Asgard.

Let me get this out of way first. I've always enjoyed comic books and superheroes. Thor, however, was never one I really cared for. I've never had anything against Thor comics, I just never really got into them. Because of this, I can't really comment on how faithful the movie is to the comics. I can, however, say this... Thor is a hell of a lot of fun and a great way to start the summer movie season.

I have to say this, Thor surprised me a bit by actually breaking away from some of the recent comic book movie trends. Unlike the dark subject matter of the Batman series, the adult-themed subplots of Iron Man, or the graphic violence of Watchmen or Kick-Ass, Thor actually approaches its plot with wider audiences in mind. Now don't get me wrong, I love seeing comic book movies going in darker and more dramatic directions, but too much of that can be a little overwhelming. The fact that Thor was a more lighthearted and fun-themed comic book adaptation was actually quite refreshing. It has a fun fantasy-themed story, imaginative worlds created via colorful settings and art direction, some light humor, and of course some exciting action scene. It's action-packed but not graphic, dramatic but not depressing, and funny but not campy. It's not the best superhero movie ever, but it may be most balanced. I might even go as far to say that it might be one of the best straightforward fun superhero movies ever made.

All of this is brought courtesy of director Kenneth Branagh. A director whose background is primary based Shakespeare and a rather hit-and-miss filmography raised a few eyebrows when he was first announced. Only as soon as the movie begins was it clear how good of a choice he was for this movie. The script's Shakespearean overtones (particularly with the Asgard scenes) were tailor-made for his directorial talents. The scenes on Asgard have a bit of an epic and dramatic feel to them, while the Earth scenes are more like a typical science fiction movie. Probably the biggest surprise was how funny the movie usually was. When Thor arrives on Earth, there are some amusing fish-out-of-water moments as Thor adjusts to life on Earth. The humor never overshadows the plot and made the movie more enjoyable. Overall, Branagh does a commendable job with the movie, balancing it's dramatic and humorous tones, along with providing an exciting superhero flick.

Aside from Branagh, the film's biggest accomplishment has to be the casting of Chris Hemsworth as the mighty Thor. A relatively unknown actor, Hemsworth's performance would either make or break the film. To anyone who had their doubts, let me say this... I know the summer has just started, but I'm going to bet that Hemsworth will be the breakout star of the season. He sells his role efficiently, pulls have the action scenes, and embraces the character with an enjoyable sense of passion.

The second most enjoyable character would probably have to be Tom Hiddleston as Loki, the God of Mischief. Similar to Hemsworth, he approaches his character with a commendable intensity and sells the whole "God of Mischief" vibe efficiently without approaching camp. The rest of the cast is all good, but there's not a whole lot I have to say about them. Natalie Portman made for an enjoyable love interest to Thor and Anthony Hopkins does his usual great job as Odin. There's also Stellan Skarsgård, Kat Dennings, Clark Gregg, Rene Russo, and others... all of whom do a good job. Not much to say other than that it's a well cast movie.

The movie doesn't have any serious flaws to hold it back in any significant way, but there are a few things worth mentioning. The cgi was artistically impressive, but the technical execution isn't always perfect. There were more than a few shots that could have been rendered a little better. None of the cgi was in-your-face awful, but never did I think that I wasn't watching a computer effect. I will say this, most of the action is still awesome nonetheless. Some of the supporting cast doesn't have as much relevance to the plot as they could have, namely some of Thor's Asgardian friends. The characters are enjoyable but generally underutilized and could have been something more. Thor isn't perfect, but none of these flaws hurt my enjoyment of this movie significantly.

So that's Thor... and it's awesome. It's exactly what I look for in a fun summer blockbuster. It's big, it's exciting, and it's funny. It has enough action and humor that is accessible to both kids and adults. It may not be the best ever, but if the rest of the summer has movies as enjoyable as Thor, we'll be in a for a great movie season. I'm keeping my fingers crossed.

My Score: 4 out of 5!

Limitless - Review

I was originally planning to have a review of Fast Five up this weekend, but it looks like it might be a little while before I see that one. So instead, here's a review of another movie I saw recently, Limitless. This one has been in theatres for a while, and I've actually been curious about it. A movie about a pill that makes you super smart definitely has potential. Let's see if Limitless lives up to my average expectations.

Limitless centers around Eddie Morra, an aspiring writer living in New York City. Eddie is facing a number of personal problems. His girlfriend left him, he's broke, and despite having a writing contract with a major publisher, he hasn't written a word on his new book. While walking down the streets of New York, Eddie happens to run into Vernon, the brother of his ex-wife. Vernon offers Eddie an experimental new pill called NZT, a drug that allows humans the ability to access 100% of the brain's power, as opposed to the normal 20%. While skeptical at first, Eddie takes the pill, and discovers it's incredible effects. His mind is clearer, he's more observant, and most importantly, he's substantially smarter. So now, with NZT clearing his mind and giving him limitless potential, Eddie aims for the top, only to find himself in a situation way over his head...

The movie's premise isn't the most intriguing I've ever heard, but it still has lots of interesting potential. A drug that makes you super smart... yeah, there are definite possibilities with that premise. For a while, the movie does a decent job with it too. Eddie's inhibitions practically disappear as his memory is working better, he's solving complex problems, and as his new-found knowledge leads to a number of lucrative possibilities. Now, with a better grasp of math and formula, so he changes careers from writing to the stock market. For the first act, Limitless has a good grasp on it's concept. It set up the story well and kept me interested.

Unfortunately, the second act is where the movie falls apart. It throws in a barrage of below-average supporting characters that have little to no impact on the plot. One is a sleazy businessman named Carl Van Loon played Robert De Niro. While De Niro is great as always, his character's impact on the plot wasn't particularly substantial. Another sub-plot involves a Russian loan shark named Gennady (Andrew Howard). He ends up becoming the primary villain, which is fine, but unfortunately his subplot comes off as undeveloped as full of holes. For instance, Eddie borrows money from him even though he was beginning to make a fortune from the stock market. Also, despite his increased mental ability, Eddie forgets to pay him back. Seriously, none of that adds up!

Finally, you also have a tacked on-subplot about a shady figure after Eddie's supply of NZT. And of course, since this is Hollywood, there is a tacked on love story... no point to that at all. One more thing I must mention: without spoiling anything, the ending of Limitless is awful! They could have gone with a more poignant and impactful ending, but they opted for the conventional and Hollywood route and missed a great opportunity. What a waste!

Even though the story usually doesn't add up, the acting holds it together... almost. Bradley Cooper is a damn fine actor, and he proves that he is capable of holding his own in a leading role. As I mentioned before, there's also Robert De Niro... who is as awesome as he usually is. Andrew Howard does a serviceable job as the brutal Russian loan shark Eddie makes a deal with. There are some other cast members thrown in the mix, but not a whole lot to say. Overall, the acting is quite good and I don't have any real complaints about any of the cast. It almost makes up for the missed opportunities of the script. Just not quite.

The director, Neil Burger, clearly has some skill. As I've already established, the script is full of problems, but Burger's directing prowess comes close to salvaging some of those issues through the good performances and some stylistic visuals. A lot of the cinematography is quite good, the editing is creative, and the production design isn't too shabby either. In a few different scenes, where the effects of NZT are being displayed, the movie uses this interesting cloning-like effect. It's hard to explain, but if you see the movie, you'll know what I'm talking about. Not all of the effects are perfect though. Some of the stylistic film making is taken to an extreme, with in-your-face zoom and warping effects that get kind of annoying after a while. Still, for the most part it works.

Limitless is one of those movies that I hate to give a bad review. It means well and it tries hard, but it simply makes too many missteps along the road. About 40% of Limitless is quite good, but the rest is a series of plotholes, unnecessary characters, and uninspired writing. I can't quite say, "don't see it" but I can't recommend it either. Maybe worth a rental down the line, but don't expect much.

My Score: 2 out of 5!