Let's get straight to the point - "Horrible Bosses 2" is an unnecessary sequel. The lazily made plot easily shows this fact clearly and the writers really had a hard time putting up a creative twist that's up to par to the first film. Although this is the case, what makes this sequel at least watchable, is it being extremely funny. The undeniable chemistry between the trio of Jason Bateman, Charlie Day and Jason Sudeikis salvages "Horrible Bosses 2" in more ways than one.

Fed up with answering to higher-ups, Nick (Jason Bateman), Dale (Charlie Day) and Kurt (Jason Sudeikis) decide to become their own bosses by launching their own business with a revolutionary product called the Shower Buddy. But slick investor Burt Hanson (Christoph Waltz) soon pulls the rug out from under them and instead of actually funding their product, Burt found a way to not only bankrupt the group but also to get their products and patent for cheap. Outplayed and desperate, and with no legal recourse, the three would-be entrepreneurs hatch a misguided plan to kidnap Burt's adult son Rex (Chris Pine) and ransom him to get enough money to pay off their start-up loan.

Add "Horrible Bosses 2" to the long list of sequels that fails to at least match up to its predecessor. This sequel is easily of lower quality to the exceptional first film from three years ago. The biggest gripe for us is the story itself. It's convoluted and at times, pushing the limits of silliness, even for a comedy film. We felt that the film tries too much to make a story out of a sequel and yet it ultimately fails hard to make things interesting in that aspect. What makes the film good though is the trio of Bateman, Day and Sudeikis. These three guys shows a camaraderie like no other and makes most of the film extremely laughable. Their mix of serious, crazy and dumb personas give this series its own character. The script, from time to time, is classic too and even had time to make odes to jokes and scenarios from the first film. While some may find the extra vulgar nature of the jokes somewhat off. We ourselves found it to be on the positive end. If you're planning to watch "Horrible Bosses 2", expect it to be dirty, dirty fun.

Rating: 3 reels





Why you should watch it:
- the trio of Bateman, Day and Sudeikis still has its unique charm on our funny bone

Why you shouldn't watch it:
- subpar sequel to one of our favorite films three years ago
- the plot is convoluted and lacks effort


"The Hunger Games: Mockingjay - Part 1" is a gripping political drama. It shows the gritty reality the citizens of Panem face day to day - one that plays both sides of the propaganda coin. As much as the meticulous nature of the film is notable, it cannot hide the fact that, at its core, it lacks the narrative depth that plagues most if not all multi-part films.

The Games may have been obliterated for good, but the fight to survive is about to intensify. Faced with daunting odds, Katniss (Jennifer Lawrence) must put into motion courage, strength and empowerment against the Capitol. This is the moment when she realizes she has no choice but to open her wings and fully embody the Mockingjay symbol. To save Peeta (Josh Hutcherson), she must become a leader the revolution.

What stands out with "Mockingjay - Part 1" is its slow pace. It takes its time to unravel what it has to say and what it has to unveil to its audience. Coupled with beautiful cinematography, the film takes a very serious political tone leaving it unmatched at this point when compared to other films in the genre. The slowness does take a toll. At the end of the film, audiences will feel nothing has really happened narrative wise. It feels totally unnecessary to make this a two-part film. Even the great acting can't hide the silliness of trying to prolong this series to another season. But at this point, the film succeeds in setting up the last film in the series.

Rating: 3 and a half reels





Why you should watch it:
- superb cinematography
- mature and political tone is unmatched

Why you shouldn't watch it:
- feels like filler material just to setup Part 2


"Big Hero 6" doesn't shake the all too familiar superhero origin story but this doesn't mean its not worth seeing. In fact, while "Big Hero 6" did take the road more traveled, it did enough new things to make it truly worth a look at. Simple, colorful and most importantly wittily funny, "Big Hero 6" is the perfect mix of your typical Marvel superhero action with a touch of youthful charm.

Robotics prodigy Hiro Hamada (Ryan Potter) learns to harness his inner genius no thanks to his brilliant brother Tadashi (Daniel Henney) and his like-minded friends: adrenaline junkie Go Go Tamago (Jamie Chung), neatnik Wasabi (Damon Wayans Jr.), chemistry whiz Honey Lemon (Génesis Rodríguez) and fanboy Fred (T.J. Miller). When a devastating turn of events catapults them into the midst of a dangerous plot unfolding in the streets of San Fransokyo, Hiro turns to his closest companion — a robot named Baymax (Scott Adsit) — and transforms the group into a band of high-tech heroes determined to solve who the mysterious Kabuki-masked villain is.

Story-wise, "Big Hero 6" isn't revolutionary. It's all too familiar territory to the point that it's quite easy to predict who our heroes are up against. While the predictable story could easily put up major red flags, in this case it doesn't. The key factor here is how the film found ways to incorporate deep feelings into the story. What you get is a roller coaster ride of emotions. From laugh out loud moments to teary-eyed scenarios, the film has it all. Surprisingly, most of this emotional pull is brought up not by a human character but by the robot Baymax - a performance that could even rival Wall-E. Visually speaking, the film is a hoot to look at. The East meets West style itself had its charm but it is also astounding to see how realistic the visuals and animations are. There were numerous times were things looked real that we had ourselves doubting if we were watching a computer-animated film. "Big Hero 6" brings another set of superheroes successfully into the fray. It's funny, it's flashy and ultimately splendidly enjoyable.

Rating: 4 reels





Why you should watch it:
- Baymax brings and carries the film with his witty charm
- East meets West visuals are perfectly crafted and animated

Why you shouldn't watch it:
- the origin story brings nothing new into the mix


"Interstellar" is not Christopher Nolan's best. In fact, it is rather flawed in many, many ways. But even though this is the case, "Interstellar" still brings a lot into the foray. Stunning visuals, extremely deep philosophical undertones and an ambitious scale, the film still packs an emotional and intellectual punch that will keep people talking for days.

An agricultural crisis has hit Earth and its human population has struggled for years in trying to find a solution. As crop after crop die off, mankind has only a couple of generations left before the point of no return. A team of explorers, led by skilled pilot Cooper (Matthew McConaughey), undertakes the most important mission in human history; traveling beyond this galaxy via a newly-discovered worm hole to find out whether mankind has a future among the stars.

The grand scale of "Interstellar" is something to experience. In every aspect of the film, you feel a hefty quality that tells you that a special kind of attention to detail was used. In some ways this grandiosity works but in some it doesn't. Surprisingly, the film struggles a lot in telling its story. For a film bound in scientific claims, key plot points and scientific ideas in which it revolves around in felt too concise and confusing at times. In fact, missing one scientific idea could mean missing the whole point of a reveal. The film's almost three hour running time also felt little too long and we both agree that certain aspects of the story could have been trimmed or outright removed. Additionally, the film's third act could make or break the film for some. Without revealing much, we feel it's going to be controversial, talked about in days, weeks, months and probably years.

We cannot deny though that the film's biggest asset is its visuals specifically of those in space. We expected this from the get-go but seeing it first hand, we can honestly say that we were still blown away. The cosmos has never looked so beautiful and awe-inspiring ever. Acting-wise, Matthew McConaughey brings a stunning performance. Emotional is the number one word here and he instantly connects with the audience on this one. In the end, the film struggles to balance its epic ideas into a cohesive whole but "Interstellar" is still a damn great film to watch from one of the best directors of our generation. Even though this is not his best work, it's still better than most films out there.

Rating: 4 reels





Why you should watch it:
- stunning visuals of the cosmos
- superb emotional acting from Matthew McConaughey

Why you shouldn't watch it:
- the film struggles to create a cohesive and understandable plot

The gruesome, no-holds barred, hyper violent nature of “John Wick” strikes a chord and combined it with stunning fight choreography and excellent cinematography means this film is wickedly fun and wickedly amazing to watch. Minus the simplistic plot revolving on vengeance, “John Wick” will entertain and will surprise.
After the sudden death of his beloved wife, John Wick (Keanu Reeves) receives one last gift from her, a beagle puppy named Daisy and a note imploring him not to forget how to love. But John’s mourning is interrupted when his 1969 Boss Mustang catches the eye of sadistic thug Iosef Tarasov (Alfie Allen). When John refuses to sell the car, Iosef and his henchmen break into his house and steal it, beating John unconscious and leaving Daisy dead. Unwittingly, they have just reawakened one of the most brutal assassins the underworld has ever seen.
Intense - this is the keyword that holds “John Wick” together. From the film’s first fifteen minutes or so, you’ll get an idea what all the fuss is all about. The film is not afraid to dig deeper into territories that even other darker films would not dare go into. Let’s just say the film ends up killing a dog and that dog triggers Reeves’ character into overdrive against the Russian mob. If it sounds silly, it kinda is. The film does not hide this fact and even implores this more and more int the plot. But minus the simplistic, formulaic and crazy plot, we get outstanding, gruesome and fresh fight choreography instead. Not a bad trade off especially how bad-ass Wick is. Enemies will drop as expected but the film found numerous ways to do these things new. In the center of all things is Keanu Reeves who was amazing in this one. Overall, this is easily his best films in years. If you haven’t watched “John Wick”, you should!
Rating: 4 and a half reels





Why you should watch it:
- intense, stunning fight scenes
- this is a beautiful film to watch
- Keanu Reeves is back

Why you shouldn’t watch it:
- the revenge style plot is nothing new