22 Jump Street (2014)

I think I've lost my touch with comedy.  I really do believe it.  I used to enjoy these Jonah Hill/Seth Rogen raunchy type of films back when they were still fresh (such as Superbad, Pinapple Express, and the 40 Year Old Virgin).  However, as of late, I've stopped caring and found every new release from them (with the exception of This is the End) to be very tedious and just plain unfunny.  So, seeing Jonah Hill's name kinda took me.  It's not the directors' fault that I didn't really care (They really have no association with the Apatow gang), but just seeing Hill's name took me out.  And it didn't help that the trailers for the film were bland.  And the first one wasn't good.  So it's a safe bet to say that I went in with low expectations.  Thankfully, the film wasn't as bad as I thought it would.  Unfortunately, that doesn't mean it was good either.

22 Jump Street is basically a rehash of the first film, but set in a different location: College.  Officers Schmidt (Hill) and Jenko (Tatum) are infiltrating a college to find the supplier of a new drug: Wyfi (Not sure I I spelled it right, but it went something like that)  Same old, same old stuff.  However, the film is "self aware" of this and pokes fun, which made many people gush over it.  I didn't, and it's not like the film constantly poked fun at it.  It was just in a couple of scenes and that was it.

I can't hold a comedy film to the same standards as, let's say the Godfather, for the simple fact that the comedy isn't going for that.  This film prefers to go for a much more less serious vibe.  I could point out various plot holes and inconsistencies, but I don't cause they weren't really trying to make an award winning masterpiece. However, if I don't find a comedy to be funny, then what's the point of watching it?  Therein lies my first problem.  The film just wasn't funny.  Many jokes fell flat and the few jokes that did work were stretched out until it was just unfunny.

I find it hard to convey my exact criticisms on the film, save for the fact that it's unfunny, because there's just something about this film that I didn't enjoy.  Is it entertaining?  Mildly.  I found some of the action sequences to be a little enticing.  The two leads, along with supporting cast member Ice Cube, are very likable and have great chemistry.  The film perfectly captures the essence of college.  So what is it about this film that doesn't work?  It's a very vague question in my mind.  And I may find out as I continue to write on.

I think it might have been due to how obnoxious it was.  The film glorifies it's wit to an unbearable point.  When a film isn't amusing, yet it thinks it is, there's a problem to be had.  That's what maddened me so much about this film.  I love for a movie that has confidence, but there's a fine line between confidence and brash, and this film is brash.  A film so conceited and self glorifying usually gets my blood boiling.  And this film did, but I couldn't hate it cause others in my theater seemed to enjoy it, so I guess it's just me.

Now, with all that said, there are some positives within this film.  As previously mentioned, the two leads do decent with what they're given.  Both are likable, especially Hill, who I usually tend to find annoying.  Tatum and Hill's chemistry work in the film, and even though there isn't comical gold, the film is somewhat entertaining because of them.  With that said, they're not the bright spot of this film.  Instead, that title belongs to Ice Cube, who actually makes the film more worthwhile than it would've been.   He has one moment, in particular, that made he film much, much better, and it was one of the few comical moments in the film.  Unfortunately, it dragged on a bit, ruining the joke.  But, I found myself cackling during the first few punchlines.

Overall, 22 Jump Street is a missed opportunity.  Very few of the jokes hit, and the film is overly obnoxious with it's self referential gags and conceited tone.  However, I cannot say the film fully appalling, just bland. Lest I face the wrath of Phil Lord/Chris Miller fans, I'll just say that they did an okay job directing.  The two leads make the film work through their chemistry, and it's action scenes are thoroughly entertaining.  Ice Cube is also very enjoyable to watch as he literally chews the scenery up in one scene.  However, the film is nothing more than an exercise for me.  Partly cause it thinks highly of itself and partly because I just don't find it funny.  In the end of the day, 22 Jump Street is a good time killer, but nothing more than that.

6/10

Deliver Us From Evil (2014)

Where do I begin on this?

Deliver Us From Evil is director Scott Derrickson's 5th film in the director chair.  Derrickson himself is a hit-or-miss director.  When he hits gold (Sinister), it's really impressive.  However, when he misses (The Day the Earth Stood Still remake), it's perplexing that a director of his talent failed to conceive a worthwhile film.  After viewing Deliver Us From Evil, it's more in the ballpark of the latter.  The film attempts to be many things it's not.  One side is a story of redemption and struggle.  On another, it's a cop investigation film.  And on the final side, it's a possession story.  It sounds like an original idea, and one that could be rather impressive.  It starts off intriguingly, but then it devolves into a wide array of jump scares and knife fights.

Deliver Us From Evil chronicles the true story of Detective Ralph Sarchie, a tough-as-bricks cop who lost all faith in God.  Then, he investigates a case that ends up proving the existence of true evil, and, of course, he slowly begins to unravel the truth of whether a Devil exists.  Apparently, the film is base on real life cases that did happen and the officer did write a book on it, though the film stylizes all of it.  After reading up on it, I thought the film could've been infinitely better had they actually followed the book.  Unfortunately, the film doesn't go for a unique film, and end up feeling like a run-of-the-mill horror escapade.

And that's the first major flaw in this film.  It takes a rather unique premise and makes it into a by the books horror film.  It has a lot of horror tropes thrown in, and it's not the good ones.  There's the obligatory exorcist scene.  The main character regains his faith in God.  All the scares in here have a big "boom".  Something always happens to the cross.  And that's just scraping the surface of this film.  It's not necessarily boring, but it's been done multiple times and by better horror films.

The acting from the most part ranges from "Good" to "Laughable".  Eric Bana is good, not great, as Sarchie.  I can't fully fault him for the fact that he wasn't given anything to work with and some of the lines themselves are hilarious.  "You're in my house?" Sarchie says casually as he realizes that a possessed serial killer is lurking in his home.  Yeah, the script was awful.  The acting from the two possessed folk is downright laughable.  I began grinning at the sight of the possessed lady and her attempt at being menacing.  The main antagonist, the possessed guy, is not anywhere close to being scary, and around the time he begins a knife fight with Joel McHale, I didn't laugh.  Instead, I groaned.  How could a film with this much promise fail!?

*SPOILERS IN THE NEXT PARAGRAPH*

Joel McHale is the only highlight in this film.  He's used more as a comic relief character throughout the most part.  However, he gets very limited screentime and he exits the film in the aforementioned knife fight between him and the demon.  The quickest tonal shift seen in film history, I think.  It goes from horror to action in a blink.  It just became laughable.  I thought that if you're going for a horror vibe and want to throw in a knife fight, you should make it much more brutal rather than the tactical method both fighters used.

*SPOILERS DONE*

Then, the film attempts to balance a cop investigation film with a paranormal film.  Think an episode of Cops being spliced in with scenes from the Exorcist and you can get this film.  Only thing different, is the locale.  Once you get passed the different scenery, you get every horror film made.  The ending exorcism is nothing interesting.  However, I'll say that the inclusion of "The Doors" music did catch my attention...in the worst possible way imaginable.  They never really explain what was the point of it's inclusion.  They explained why most of Sarchie's visions were used (He had superpowers?  That's just outright stupid), but they never explained what significance the Doors had.  Was it there in an attempt to seem original with the unoriginal content, Derrickson?

Now, while I've been seemingly ranting on this film, there are some notably good things in this film.  Whether you're laughing unintentionally or not, the film is pretty entertaining.  I wasn't really bored to tears by this film, so isn't that worth something?  Also, while the film did rely on a lot of horror tropes, one good deviation from the usual tropes is the priest.  Usually in any horror film, the priest is some nice guy, who has barely any faults.  In here, the priest is a highly flawed man, and it felt refreshing after being bombarded by the usual steps.  However, there's one thing that happens to his character that makes him less interesting during the exorcism scene.  And, as mentioned before, the acting is good for the most part.

Overall, Scott Derrickson attempts his 2nd homerun (after hitting it with Sinister), but strikes out.  Deliver Us From Evil is just as generic as it's name(for a horror film).  It relies heavily on tropes that have been done to death now, and isn't exactly new.  In fact, the only inventive things to be scene are minuscule by comparison.  The film attempts to mold a cop drama, redemption, exorcist themes all together and the final product is less than rewarding.  Ending it on a positive note, the film isn't boring at least.

4/10