macblackslair

In the near future, mutants and ordinary humans alike are under attack and losing the battle. So our heroes from former installments try to prevent this war by sending Wolverine (Hugh Jackman) back to the past so he can fix the mess a certain blue lady (Jennifer Lawrence) is creating. In the year 1973, Wolverine meets young and depressed Charles Xavier (James McAvoy) and Erik Lehnsherr (Michael Fassbender) again. Will he succeed in uniting the two mutant geniuses and change everything?

That said, "X-Men: Days of Future Past" is a thrilling experience. The chemistry between James McAvoy and Michael Fassbender is amazing, as are their performances. Again. Nicholas Hoult does a fantastic job as Hank. Hugh Jackman is Wolverine, meaning he IS THE Wolverine. "Game of Thrones" star Peter Dinklage does a great job as Dr. Trask. And yes, I love Jennifer Lawrence as Raven. Plus, we see Ellen Page and Omar Sy, and Patrick Stewart and Ian McKellen are great as ever.

I like the performances and the acting in general. There are quite some emotional scenes. Needless to say that James McAvoy pulls them off so well it almost hurts.

"X-Men: Days of Future Past" promises fun as well. Action sequences are spiced with nice effects and flavored with some humor. Evan Peters who plays Quicksilver is amazing in his role and gives you something to watch in amazing 3D.

Last but not least, the cinematography is fantastic. Yes, I have seen even better results, but scenes, cuts, and effects fit the movie. 3D looks and feels great.

Overall, I rate it as one of the best X-Men movies so far. Although I am aware of some logical gaps (considering the original X-Men movie time line), I accept "X-Men: Days of Future Past" as a more or less alternate canon time line. By doing so, it is easy to enjoy these two hours full of mutants, their powers, and their fears.

So what is "Tokarev" about? The title suggests that a Soviet handgun must be part of the story.

Paul Maguire (Nicolas Cage) is successful, married for the second time to a beautiful woman (Rachel Nichols), and has a gorgeous teenage daughter: Caitlin (Aubrey Peeples). Caitlin spends a night with two friends when the action kicks in. Someone kidnaps the girl. So Paul, obviously a former criminal, tries to find out who did it and why. A thrilling hunt for information on Caitlin's whereabouts begins.

At least that is the premise. Unfortunately, the whole script is a mess. The beginning seems similar to "Taken", but there are major differences. It starts off pretty good though. However, what looks promising fails to satisfy the audience.

Rachel Nichols, while being beautiful, appears to be too young to portray Paul's second wife. Emotional shots are far too long. Nicolas Cage does an okay job. Still, his character remains shallow and it is hard to believe that he is indeed suffering. The chemistry between Nichols and Cage is not good. I cannot care for their relationship or their future.

The worst part about "Tokarev" is the twist at the end of the movie. It is ridiculous.

It seems like the writer was running low on good ideas for a convincing and thrilling finale. "Tokarev" is definitely not worth spending time watching it.

Let's nail the facts right here: Riddick is fun, Riddick is out of space, Riddick is smoking hot and (still!) freaking sexy Vin Diesel. What else do we have here?

The third installment of the series, simply called "Riddick", starts with an impressive planet full of atrocities and nasty beasts. Cinematography looks fine, as do the alien creatures. Riddick fights for survival on a planet that seemingly tries to suppress his attempts.

Now and then, we catch glimpses at the past and at the Necromongers who betrayed our beloved antihero.

After half an hour or so, we meet some extremely 'nice' mercenaries who, to our surprise, ahem, find their way to said planet and try to hunt down Riddick. They are not aware, however, of the extreme violence radiating off the planet. Besides, what or who could be more dangerous than Riddick cut loose?

If you feel reminded of "Pitch Black", it may have to do with the somehow similar story. If you liked "Pitch Black", you will most probably enjoy "Riddick" as well, to a certain degree at least.

I, personally, would have preferred a smarter pacing during the whole merc-scenes. They seemed a bit lengthy at times. I would also have wished for some answers considering the second movie. I had expected more scenes with Vaako (Karl Urban). It was okay, though. It's still Riddick, isn't it?

It's still fun and I'm still looking forward to the next Riddick movie.