Grab-Bag: Top 10 Glorified Celebrity Film Cameos

*Update: I decided to change the title of this article due to the fact that Jesse Eisenberg filmed his role for "Camp Hell" in 2007 as a favor for a friend. Therefore, it was not stunt casting, but an inflated cameo.

Note:

Before I begin this list, I have to lay down a few rules to narrow my selection. First of all, I am restricting my selections to feature films. I will also only include small roles that were used to market the movie.  

Top Ten Glorified Celebrity Film Cameos

With the unanticipated release of “The Other Woman” approaching, 20^th Century Fox continues to show off Nicki Minaj’s bit role in a lot of the advertising. Some trailers on YouTube even have her name top-billed in the title, as if it stars her. Considering that she received no such top-billing on the poster or even her name listed in the trailer, her role is most likely an example of an overblown cameo. For as long as I can remember, studios have had this habit of casting well-known celebrities to give their movie more marketing credibility. Audiences are fooled into thinking that their favorite celebrities are starring in the movie, but when they actually see it, said celebrities are only on screen for a couple short scenes. This edition of “Grab Bag” will go over the most obvious examples of this in recent years.

10. Liam Neeson – “Battleship”

Sure, Universal made the “genius” decision of casting Rihanna as a naval officer, but at least she had a decent amount of scenes. Liam Neeson, however was only in the movie for about five minutes. This would be forgivable if it was a surprise cameo, but he was prominently featured in the film’s trailers. There are even reports of tour guides at Universal Studios Hollywood stating that the movie starred Liam Neeson. Unfortunately for Universal, the stinted performances of Taylor Kitsch, Rihanna, and Brooklyn Decker weren’t enough to salvage the film from flopping at the box office. Just goes to show that borderline false-advertising doesn’t always lead to more bums in the seats.

9. Fan Bingbing – “Iron Man 3”

Speaking of which, there was a considerable amount of hype about the Chinese version of “Iron Man 3.” Ever since it was announced that there would be exclusive scenes with Chinese actors included to appeal to the lucrative Chinese film market, many people wondered what those scenes would involve. When it was announced that Chinese actress/fashion icon Fan Bingbing would be appearing in the Chinese cut, I’m sure many international fans were more than ecstatic. Unfortunately, not only did her scene last the time of a hiccup, but her character wasn’t even given a name. This attempt at pandering was so obvious, not even the Chinese audience it was intended for cared for it.

8. Chris Brown – "Think Like a Man"

To be fair, Chris Brown was perfect for his role in this film. Here he plays an unlikable womanizer that ditches Megan Goode’s character after a one-night-stand.  On the other hand, besides his scene that was prominently featured in the trailer, he has two other appearances that each last about ten seconds long. Basically after his first scene, he literally quickly walks by Megan Goode in a couple of other scenes and gets her name wrong. It is sort of funny, but it is nevertheless a bloated cameo, and one that the studio implied to be a bigger role in the advertising. Unlike the next few entries on this list, at least he didn't receive top-billing. 

7. Brad Pitt – “12 Years a Slave”

Okay, before you freak out, let me say that “12 Years a Slave” was my absolute favorite film of 2013, and Brad Pitt did a fine job in his role. However, in terms of the marketing for this film, his role was bloated to the extreme. While his character does play a pivotal role, he has about one scene in the whole film that lasted less than ten minutes. What’s even worse is that in some countries like Italy, he was not only given top-billing, but his face took up most of the controversial poster (seen above). His giant floating head barely left any room for the film’s true star, Chiwetel Ejiofor. Again, Brad Pitt is a fine actor and “12 Years a Slave” is a fantastic film, but this example of a glorified cameo is quite obvious.

6. Chow Yun-Fat – “Pirates of The Caribbean: At World’s End”

While the third installment of Disney’s “Pirates of the Caribbean” series had a bizarre cameo from Keith Richards, at least Disney had the decency to have him as a surprise appearance. It wasn’t exactly a well-kept secret, but they didn’t deliberately use his name to promote the movie. Famous Hong Kong actor Chow Yun-Fat is another story. In what I’m guessing was an attempt to appeal to the Chinese market, Disney gave Chow Yun-Fat a nice spot in the film’s marketing, top-billing his name left and right. In the actual film though, his character pops in for a couple of scenes before leaving. This likely disappointed his fans that were excited to see him add some more kung-fu-flair to a swashbuckling adventure. It doesn’t seem that Disney learned their lesson either, as they would later try to pull this off in the Chinese version of “Iron Man 3" (see number nine).

5. Lil’ Wayne- “Hurricane Season”

Originally intended for theaters, this Forrest Whittaker post-Hurricane-Katrina-sports-drama was thrown onto DVD shelves in early 2010. In addition to Lil’ Wayne’s stage name featured at the top of the DVD cover, various hip-hop websites like allhiphop.com reported on the rapper’s film debut with much enthusiasm. Not only does his total screen time amount to about two minutes, but his performance was absolutely baffling. Considering his apparent affinity for cough syrup and weed, it wouldn’t surprise me if he was high while the camera was on. Indeed it may be amusing to some, but his part just isn’t big enough to prevent this from being another brief appearance disguised as a lead role.

4. Pitbull- “Epic”

Indeed it is only a voice-only role, but the fact that he is in this movie is completely random. This character was not only featured in the trailers and the poster, but Pitbull himself received top billing on each of them. The sheer amount of screen time he had in the film’s marketing seems to be longer than the actual film. Not to mention that despite playing a toad, Pitbull essentially plays himself in this movie. His character, Bufo is a smooth-talking tough guy that loves parties. This is pretty much the basis of every one of Pitbull’s songs. Despite this character having his own poster and behind-the-scenes featurette, he is in the movie for two short scenes, never to be seen again afterwards and barely contributes to the overall story.   

3. Nicki Minaj – "Ice Age: Continental Drift"

Ah, poor Nicki. She not only inspred this list, but is on it with an entirely different role. This example is essentially the same case as Pitbull in “Epic.” Her character was featured in all of the trailers and she received top billing in both the trailer and the poster. It’s even made by the same studio, Blue Sky, which makes one wonder if they have a habit for this kind of thing. Here, Nicki Minaj plays a mammoth with a bad attitude. Strangely enough, she is a member of a gang of mischievous mammoths whose leader is played by fellow rapper, Drake. At the very least, Drake has a relatively significant role in the movie and actually has a decent amount of lines. Nicki, however, has about three lines. She had so few lines, that I could still remember “Gross! It’s that weirdo who chills with possums!”   

2. Jesse Eisenberg: “Camp Hell”

This example was so bad, that Eisenberg himself sued its distributor Lionsgate for $3 million dollars in damages. Anybody who is a regular visitor of Redbox is likely to have seen Eisenberg’s face featured prominently on the cover of the film’s DVD (seen above). In fact, despite how small his role was, his was the ONLY face featured on the DVD cover. Fresh off his fame from films like “Zombieland” and his Oscar-Nominated performance in “The Social Network,” Lionsgate took full advantage of Eisenberg’s mere cameo appearance in this low-budget horror film that nobody’s heard about. Luckily, the people who decided to mislead the consumers were too stupid to get away with this.

1. Kim Kardashian – "Temptation: Confessions of a Marriage Counselor"

After his failed attempt to defend his casting of the unlikable Kim Kardashian, Tyler Perry’s career took yet another beating with what many describe as the most desperate attempt at stunt casting in recent years. Besides this film, Kardashian has only appeared in the horrendous 2008 spoof film, “Disaster Movie.” However, her role in “Temptation” is even worse because the movie actually takes itself seriously. With all of the instances of marital issues, unfaithfulness, and domestic violence in the trailer, Tyler Perry shoots himself in the foot by having Kim Kardashian’s name appear next to a smug-looking Kardashian smiling at the audience.  Even the addition of the Eminem and Rihanna song “Love the Way You Lie” couldn’t save Kardashian’s appearance in the trailer to be laughed at by countless moviegoers. She isn’t even in the movie for that long, even if her awful delivery of Perry’s terrible dialogue makes it feel like hours. Kardashian would eventually go on to win a Razzie for Worst Supporting Actress for this role; a well-deserved ending to one of the most overblown cameos ever.

Grab-Bag: 6 Cartoons too Dumb to Exist (but they do)

Yes, another type of post. But unlike my regular reviews and my "Second Chance Reviews," this series is not a type of movie review. Rather, Grab-Bag allows me to share my random thoughts on film and television media. It is also inspired by cracked.com and their posts.

Gilligan’s Planet

            You’d think that if somebody walked into a studio and said “’Gilligan’s Island’ is cool and all, but it should be in space,” that they’d be laughed out of the office. Apparently though, CBS thought it would make the perfect Saturday morning cartoon. Apparently, in an attempt to get off the island, the Professor was able to build a spaceship. Unfortunately, the spaceship rockets too far off and the gang gets stuck on another planet that just happens to support human life. What’s even stranger about this show is the fact that they got most of the original cast members (except for Tina Louise) to reprise their roles. Not surprisingly, the show was cancelled after one season and 13 episodes. However, one still has to give it credit for making more sense than the last season of “Lost.”

Laverne and Shirley in the Army

                  On the subject of classic sitcoms, I can only imagine what the thought process was to decide that Laverne and Shirley should be enlisted in the U.S. military. Like “Gilligan’s Planet,” this show had the main cast reprise their roles. Some new cast members include a strict drill sergeant and a talking pig named Sgt. Squealy. Now, simply centering a show around two sitcom characters joining the military would be weird enough, but adding a talking animal to the mix is just pushing it. What’s next? How about a show where the cast of “Full House” is hired by a talking tiger named “Putin” to work for the KGB?

Sonic Underground

            Pretty much every kid who grew up in the early 90’s is familiar with the “Sonic the Hedgehog” games. They were music games about a dystopian society where music is banned. After finding his long-lost siblings, Sonic must fulfill a prophecy to defeat the evil dictator, Dr. Robotnik and restore peace by finding their mother: the noble Queen Aleena. To do this, players must use the power of magical musical instruments to defeat…oh wait…that’s just the bizarre premise for this show. Now, this isn’t the first cartoon based on the “Sonic the Hedgehog” video game series, but it is certainly the weirdest. Remember the “Sonic the Hedgehog” game where you played musical instruments to defeat your enemies and performed songs that would make the collaboration album of Metallica and Lou Reed sound good? I didn’t think so. Besides the inaccuracy to the games, this show makes the odd decision to not only have Jaleel White (who played Urkel on Family Matters and Sonic on previous shows) reprise his role as Sonic, but to have him play Sonic’s sister, Sonia. Now, I have nothing against his performance as Sonic, but his portrayal of his sister sounds EXACTLY like Urkel. I just can’t help picturing Urkel in a dress reading the lines.  Oh, and the songs are terrible…

Kung Fu Dino Posse

            Between “Battletoads,” “Street Sharks,” “Cowboys of Moo Mesa,” and “Cheetahmen,” the 80’s and 90’s had its fair share of “Teenage Mutant Ninja Turtles” rip-offs. However, in 2009, the Starz Network decided to air this poorly-made knockoff. Created by Peter Lenkov, the man responsible for last year’s notorious flop: “R.I.P.D.,” “Kung Fu Dino Posse” centers around four dinosaurs who are awoken from a frozen state to fight crime in modern times. Now, putting aside that this show is a knockoff of TMNT, I’m not quite sure why they chose the word “Posse” to describe them. Apparently the words “Team” and “Group” weren’t cool enough, so they had to use a word commonly associated with a duo of rapping clowns.  One would be quick to notice that the animation is so choppy, that it makes knockoff Disney animatronics look smooth. The dialogue barely even syncs up with the characters’ mouths. Moreover, the premises of the episodes range from generic road trips to a disturbingly juvenile episode involving using flatulence to power a jetpack-diaper. I felt my IQ lower by 100 points just by typing that.

Almost Naked Animals 

            Can you believe that this is for kids? Yes, it sounds like something you’d see on Comedy Central or MTV, but this Canadian catastrophe recently aired on Cartoon Network in the U.S. On a network famous for successful shows like “Adventure Time” and “Regular Show,” one would think that there would be some form of quality control. Filled with ugly character designs, poor animation, constant toilet humor and forced acting, one at least has to give this show credit for being memorably terrible. Just one frame of this show is bound to give anyone with a respect for animation a heart attack. In addition to Justin Bieber’s behavior, the mere fact that this show exists can easily leave another unfortunate stain on Canada’s reputation.        

           

Super Duper Sumos

           

            Sumo wrestling: an honorable tradition that has a significant place in Japanese culture. It is a sport where the athletes skillfully craft themselves to be immovable objects with specific diets and exercise.* Yep, sounds like the perfect setup for a slapstick kids’ show to me. Kids surely don’t need to know about the tradition of sumo wrestling. All they need to know is that sumo wrestlers look fat and have big butts, so they are therefore hilarious. This show is so reliant on fat jokes, that its theme song has the line “they’ve got guts AND BUTTS.” In fact, when I’ve first heard about this show, I couldn’t decide whether the creators wanted to make kids laugh with fat jokes or if they had some Sir-Mix-A-Lot-style obsession for large posteriors. The world may never know, but considering that there's an episode called "I'm Too Sexy for my Butt," I’m going to assume the latter. Oh, and there was a video game based on it too…the cover speaks for itself…yes, that is their version of a “high five”…God help us all.

*Note: Sumo wrestlers are actually not healthy. However, they still work hard and do not stuff their faces with junk food. 

Divergent (PG-13): Mostly Succeeds

Score: 3.5/5               

              “Divergent,” at least to me, was a perfect example of why Rotten Tomatoes shouldn’t be a be-all-end-all declaration of whether a movie is enjoyable or not. While this movie may not win over anyone who dislikes the young-adult genre, it’s still worth checking out even if you haven’t read the book. I dare even say it was quite good.

                “Divergent” stars Shailene Woodley as Tris, a young woman living in a dystopian society divided into several factions. Now, for those of you who are quick to unfavorably compare this to the “Hunger Games” series, this is pretty much where the similarities end. Instead of being forced to fight against the other factions to survive, Tris faces the dilemma of being grouped into one of the factions via a government-run aptitude test. Once she discovers that her results are inconclusive (or as the movie calls it: “Divergent”), she is put in danger. Since divergent people are a sign that the government’s control is weak, the government actively seeks to destroy them. It is up to Tris to use her wits and physical prowess to avoid persecution for the government and hide her divergent results.

               

                While its premise alone is quite fascinating, “Divergent” does a fine job of setting up its world, and gives plenty of details to the audience about how it works. The fantastic blend of real-life sets and digital imagery is a pleasure to watch, and it really gives the viewer a sense of immersion. From underground caves to city catacombs, fans and non-fans of the novel will likely be delighted seeing author Veronica Roth’s work come to life.  

                Some of my favorite scenes involved dream-like simulations where the characters’ fears were put to the test. One scene involves Tris trying to stop a dog that was friendly to her from attacking a young girl in a hall of mirrors. A lot of creativity and effort was clearly put into bringing this scene from the book to the big screen.

                Shailene Woodley is truly outstanding in her role as Tris, taking on the role with great skill. From happiness and confidence to sadness and fear, Woodley remarkably relays these emotions to make Tris an absolutely riveting character. It certainly does help that her character is is so well written.  From the very beginning to the tail-end of the movie, the audience is given plenty of time to feel for Tris. Throughout the movie, she must make difficult choices, and every one of them is shown in full detail thanks to the fine screenplay and exemplary cinematography.

One particular scene involves the moment where she must choose what faction to join despite her inconclusive test results. Her parents are both part of “Abnegation,” the faction in charge of community service. On the other hand, her dream as a child was to join “Dauntless,” a faction dedicated to law enforcement and military duties. Without the proper test results to guide her, she must choose between the two in a scene that involves plenty of close ups to build a heavy sense of tension.

I’m not going to spoil anything about the plot, but I will say that there are plenty of dark, unexpected twists. These moments of shock and surprise give the screenplay a lot more meat to it than it could have had.

The cinematography alone is another high point of this movie. Every action setpiece of this movie is finely shot, and every punch and fall is hard hitting and realistic. One scene involving a human knife-throwing target was so suspenseful, that I (and I’m sure many other audience members) flinched at the excruciatingly close impact of the knives around the person’s body.

To be fair to this film’s critics, the love story does feel a bit unnecessary. Watching Tris as she builds friendships and evades her enemies would have been a fine concept on its own. Unfortunately, she is given a rather bland character as a love interest named Four (played by Theo James). James’ performance isn’t nearly as up to par as Woodley’s, and his character just seems too flawless to really care about. Add that to the fact that he has a troubled past, and this character just came across as a gary-stu/obligatory male love interest. On the bright side, his character does help Tris throughout the story, so he isn’t completely pointless. To be honest, he didn’t really seem like that major of a character, and Tris still rightfully held the spotlight.

While it may not be a groundbreaking sci-fi film, Divergent is still a pleasure to watch. Even its weak love story takes a back seat to immerse the audience in a fascinating world. Fans of the book will most likely enjoy it, and even non-fans will get a kick out of its many plot twists and dreamlike visuals.

Second Chance Reviews: Grown Ups 2 (PG-13)

Score: 0/5

                      Grown…Ups…2…

            Now, I had no plans on seeing this when it was in theaters. In fact, I made a vow to stay as far away from it as possible. However, as much as I wanted to tear this movie apart based on the abysmal trailers and reviews, I couldn’t fairly criticize it since I hadn’t seen it. So, with the introduction of my “Second Chance Reviews” series, I thought I’d give this movie a fair criticism by watching the whole thing and writing a review. Now, before I begin my immense critical thrashing of this sequel, I want to address something: I didn’t totally hate the first “Grown Ups.”

            Of course, I’m not saying it is a good movie; there are still some moments of pointless toilet humor and a complete absence of conflict or story. On the other hand, the actors were likable and had good chemistry on screen together. It wasn’t too painful to watch, in fact, it was kind of nice to see these real-life friends interact on screen. Now…for the sequel…I’m going to try my best to be civil with this review, but let me tell you, it’s not going to be easy. That is because this pile of vomit deserves to be chucked into the nearest back alley trash can.

            All of the likability of the first “Grown Ups” is gone, and in its place is a cringe-worthy series of gross-out gags and bad puns strung together by robotic dialogue. The humor in this movie is on the level of a grade-school dropout and just to demonstrate how atrocious the jokes are, allow me to provide a few examples. WARNING: the mere description of these “jokes” can be harmful to the human brain.

            Let’s start off with the very first joke to start off the movie. Adam Sandler’s (I’m not even going to bother looking up his character’s name) daughter leaves the front door open and a deer enters his bedroom. His wife (played by Salma Hayek) wakes up and startles the deer, causing the deer to urinate all over Adam Sandler’s face and mouth. The deer proceeds to run down the hallway and urinate on Sandler’s son in the shower. Now, this joke was in the trailer, so if this was one of the funniest scenes according to the marketing team, I’d hate to see what they consider to be unfunny garbage. Though to its credit, it pretty much sums up the movie, and such a joke is the perfect way to start a horrendous abomination.

            Other jokes that Sandler seems to think are comedy gold are scenes involving a man accidently eating Cheetos that were stuffed up his nose, “burp-snarting” (which according to the movie is a burp, a sneeze and a fart in perfect sequence), and an effeminate male cheerleader licking bird feces off of a windshield. These jokes are only part of what seems like a constant barrage of audience-insulting toilet humor.

            Now please…for those of you who actually find this funny…please explain to me why such unpleasant gags are considered funny to you. If I were to meet someone who thought that licking bird droppings of a window was funny, I would think they have problems. So tell me, why on God’s green Earth do you find this repulsive, lazy disgraceful “humor” enjoyable. I’m just baffled here; can you tell me why this is worthy even of a chuckle?

            Not only is a lot of the humor disgusting, but most of it is just lazy and predictable. In one scene, a psychotic bus driver (played by Nick Swardson of the box-office-disaster: “Bucky Larson: Born to be a Star”) walks past a bathroom display in a K-mart and falls asleep in a nearby bed. When a staff member tries to get him out of the bed, he wakes up in a semi-conscious state and uses the toilet (complete with lots of “hilarious” farting sounds). The minute he walked by that toilet display, I knew that they were going to use this ridiculous joke. This joke isn’t even new; it’s been done before on an episode of “Rugrats” and in “Jackass: The Movie.”

            This movie is so lazy, that it even has to flat out explain the jokes to the audience. In one scene, Adam Sandler is at the supermarket with his daughter. A gay aerobics teacher that his wife thinks is attractive shows up and the daughter calls him “stud muffin.” This would have been a passible joke on its own, but she literally says “Mommy calls him stud muffin, so I call him stud muffin.” Do the filmmakers honestly think the audience isn’t smart enough to get the joke without bluntly explaining it? Was this film truly made for the half-witted?

            Not to mention, the dialogue is robotic and extremely forced. The way that the characters’ lines were written and delivered reminded me of “Birdemic: Shock and Terror,” but not in a funny way. It almost seems like Sandler just came up with a bunch of terrible jokes and slapped them together with a script that even the worst fanfiction authors would be ashamed of writing.

            Saying that this movie is an insult to filmmaking,” would be an understatement. I could quote Roger Ebert’s review of “Caligula” by saying that “Grown Ups 2” is “sickening, utterly worthless, shameful trash. If it is not the worst film I have ever seen, that makes it all the more shameful: People with talent allowed themselves to participate in this travesty.” However, even saying something that harsh seems like honoring this rancid middle-finger of a movie.

                 

                 

Second Chance Review: Cloudy with a Chance of Meatballs 2 (PG)

Score: 2.5/5

*SPOILER ALERT: 

CONTAINS SPOILERS FROM THE FIRST FILM*

Recently, I’ve been a bit unsatisfied with the lack of variety on this blog in terms of what movies I review. I mainly review new theatrical releases and not much else. Therefore, I have decided to introduce three new types of posts that I will write sporadically.

The first is “Second Chance Reviews,” in which I will take a look at films that I wanted to see in theaters but didn’t get the chance to. For example, I wanted to see “Cloudy with a Chance of Meatballs 2,” but I simply didn’t have time to check it out when it was in theaters. Now that it is out on DVD, I will finally be able to see and review it, making it my first “Second Chance Review.”

“Cloudy with a Chance of Meatballs 2” attempts to bring back the clever charm that made the first so memorable. The results are mixed.

As a fan of the original “Cloudy with a Chance of Meatballs,” I had my doubts about a sequel. I was especially concerned that the original writers (Phil Lord and Chris Miller – writers of “The Lego Movie” and “21 Jump Street”) did not return to write the sequel. Though they still helped conceive the story, the writers of the box-office bomb, “The Incredible Burt Wonderstone” took the helm this time around. The first film had such a tight ending that I honestly could not think of how they could continue the story. The answer is simple: they didn’t.

The beginning of this sequel completely contradicts the ending of the first movie, which didn’t seem in any way to imply a sequel. To demonstrate this, I will provide a brief summary of the first film.

In the first movie, a down-on-his-luck inventor named Flint Lockwood (played by Bill Hader) invents a machine that turns water into food. After it gets launched into the sky, the machine mixes with the moisture in the atmosphere to turn rain into food to feed his whole town. However, in a rage of gluttony, the mayor of the town (played by Bruce Campbell) manipulates Flint into ignore the dangers of his machine and use it more frequently. Eventually the machine malfunctions and sends humorously cataclysmic storms of food onto the town. Flint eventually succeeds in shutting off the machine and is crowned as a hero once he does. In the credits, it is shown that the town is revived from the disaster and Flint and his father start a company using a special rubber Flint invented as roof sealant.  

However…according to the sequel, another famous inventor named Chester V shows up after the first movie and offers to clean up the leftover food that destroyed the town. He then offers Flint a position at his company “Live Corp.” to which Flint accepts. This triggers the plot of the second film. This was quite jarring, especially since the movie starts off by showing clips from the first movie. It’s almost as if Sony wanted a sequel so badly, that they had to change the ending of the first movie.

                Moreover, this sequel continues the first movie is with the sudden introduction of a new character. His name is Chester V (played by Will Forte of “Nebraska”), a Steve Jobs-esque genius that apparently inspired the main character Flint Lockwood to invent things.

                “Now just hold the phone here,” I immediately thought to myself. In the first movie, Flint’s mother inspired him to invent to tell him it was okay to be a “nerd,” before her death later on in his life. Sure, she’s mentioned in this movie as one of Flint’s inspirations, but with the introduction of Chester V, she is no longer the main influence for his inventions. That’s right; they actually changed one of the main character’s backstories for the purpose of introducing a sequel. I was truly taken aback by this, but I was willing to ignore it if the rest of the movie was good.

                 Besides the massive continuity errors from the first movie, the sequel on its own does have quite a few positive aspects. One of these aspects is the “foodimals,” a group of food/animal hybrids created after the events of the first film. They alone made me want to check this movie out, and the creativity used to put them together is astounding. One “foodimal” is the apple pie-thon; a snake with apple pie and vanilla ice cream for a head, a strawberry twizzler for a body and tic-tacs for a rattle. Another is a mosque-toast: a mosquito with toasted bread for wings, a cinnamon stick for a body and raisins for eyes. These and more are bound to delight the viewer, and it is a pleasure to watch them on screen.

                The scenery itself is beautiful, lush and charming as well, with bogs made out of pancakes and syrup and mountains of rock candy. The art department certainly deserves all the praise it can get for creating such wonderful visuals. The same goes for the animation, which is fluent and smooth as can be. It really is one of the best looking animated films I’ve recently seen. It’s just unfortunate that the screenplay that the film sets its foundation on is not as astounding.

                Don’t get me wrong, this film does have its moments, and there are some clever jokes and quirky dialogue scenes that elevated the film for me. One instance is a character trying to storm off while struggling to walk in maple syrup. The food puns, a criticism among many reviews, was actually something I didn’t mind and found kind of cute. The dialogue itself flowed well too, and it could have thrived with a better story.

                Before I get to the true flaw of the screenplay, the increased use of juvenile humor compared to the first film is quite irritating. The first film did have toilet humor, but it was only one or two tiny jokes that barely distracted from how good it was. This film piles on more gross-out jokes, which is really out of place in a film about food. Jokes involving a strawberry defecating jam and a monkey writing with fecal matter really bring the value of the screenplay down. On the contrary, the toilet humor is nothing compared to the real problem with this movie: mediocre conflict.

                The first film had fleshed out conflicts like Flint’s relationship with his father (played by James Caan) and Flint’s ambition to be liked for his ambitions and inventions. In this film, they decide half-way through to introduce a conflict of Flint shunning his friends’ advice in favor of Chester V’s. This could have been a decent conflict if they fleshed it out more, but instead it pops out of nowhere like the Kool Aid Man bursting through a wall.

What’s worse is that this turns out to be one of the main conflicts in the movie. It is sort of implied in the beginning when Flint takes the position at Chester’s company instead of making a new one with his friends, but his friends encouraged him to take the position, and it seemed like the reasonable thing to do. It’s not even mentioned until midway through when Chester suggests that Brent (played by Andy Samberg) may still be a bully since he was one before Flint became a hero. It feels like the writers forgot to add a conflict and decided to throw one in at the last minute.

               

                 Cloudy with a Chance of Meatballs 2 is not an awful film. Like I said, it does have its charm and its clever moments. Kids that loved the first will definitely get a kick out of it. Compared to the first film, this film’s taste buds aren’t as refined.  

Final Grade: C+

Need for Speed (PG-13): A Bumpy, but Fun Ride

         

          About a month ago, I placed “Need for Speed” as number five on my top five list of least-anticipated spring movies. While this movie certainly does have its flaws, it is far from the disaster it could have been. I dare even to say that with the delay of the next Fast and Furious movie, this is a pretty decent holdover for vehicle-based action fans.

                

          “Need for Speed” tells the story of a driver and mechanic named Tobey Marshall (played by Aaron Paul of “Breaking Bad”). Marshall seeks to avenge the death of his brother by defeating his slaughterer, millionaire car-enthusiast Dino Brewster (played by Dominic Cooper of “Captain America: The First Avenger”). Not wanting to be bested, Brewster places a bounty on him, and it is up to Marshall to get to the race before Dino’s goons kill him.

Let me start out by saying that I have not played any of the “Need for Speed” video games, even as a kid. I’m personally more of a fan of the Midnight Club games. Nevertheless, I’m at least sure that fans of racing games in general will love the set-pieces in this movie. Many of the vehicle stunts use real cars, and the near-flawless cinematography fits the high-octane race scenes perfectly. Viewers will certainly be on the edge of their seats with every crash and tight turn. The cars themselves are also pleasing to look at. From Ferraris to Lamborghinis to Mustangs, every vehicle is sleek and a pleasure to watch race on the track.

The race and chase scenes themselves are were this movie really shines. With every set piece come the sounds of revving engines and screeching tires, set perfectly to fine camera work and editing to give a truly exciting experience. While I am not one to complain about the use of CGI, the lack of it in the film’s production gave a much more believable look to the crashes and races, especially when the film cuts to go-pro-filmed footage of the airborne vehicle. To me, the use of the go-pro gave me the same exciting, immersive feeling that I felt while watching the barrel scene in “The Hobbit: The Desolation of Smaug.” When used well, I can honestly encourage filmmakers to use the go-pro camera to film

              

          A common criticism of the plot is that it is completely ridiculous and not in any way plausible in the real world. While this is certainly true, I feel that in an action/eye-candy oriented film like this, that it is best to leave your complaint notebook at the door and immerse yourself in the film’s world.  

When the suspension of disbelief is applied the story itself is not half bad. “Need for Speed’s” story was conceived by Academy-Award nominated screenwriter John Gatins and his brother George. Without giving anything away, the plot provides plenty of interesting events to keep the story moving and even bothers to throw in some character development. It’s far from an all-out character study like “Her,” but there are still a decent amount of scenes that bother to get the audience to care about the characters. Each character is given a decent amount of screen time, and I actually walked out remembering some of the characters. From the brooding but sincere Tobey Marshall to the comic relief of his friend Benny (played by musician Scott Mescudi –a.k.a. Kid Cudi), I felt that the fleshed out characters really added some meat to the action.

Though the story and characters themselves are not too shabby, I had a lukewarm opinion on the screenplay. Unfortunately, John Gatins only helped conceive the story. His brother George wrote the screenplay by himself, and his results are mixed. In films like “Fast and Furious 6” and “Iron Man 3,” the screenplay is well balanced with good humor and light drama to blend well with the fun factor. Here is a different story; the film’s tone will often switch from humorous antics (one such scene involving streaking at an office) to borderline-melodramatic scenes (such as one hospital scene). It is quite jarring and it feels as if Mr. Gatins was trying to take the film more seriously than it should have been taken.

Another thing I have to say is that this film felt a tad too long. Clocking in at over two hours, “Need for Speed” does contain some scenes that feel like they could have been cut and are there just for filler. While I did admire the development of the characters, some of the dialogue simply repeats what was already stated, leaving me to say “OK, I get it” a few times in my mind. Perhaps if the film was trimmed about 10-20 minutes short, then it would have been much smoother to suit the sleek action sequences.

This film is far from perfect, though to be honest, I was honestly entertained by it. While it’s impossible to deny that Hollywood has had a bad reputation adapting video games into movies, this was honestly a pretty good attempt. It’s not the saving grace of video game adaptations, but in my mind it is absolutely a step up from busts like “Resident Evil: Retribution” and “Silent Hill: Revelation.” If you love thrilling races and colorful cars, I can almost guarantee that you’ll be entertained.

Final Rating: B