Empire State

Empire State is a movie, apparently based on a true story. Here is what the plot synopsis is on IMDB: After failing to get into the police academy, Chris Potamitis (Liam Hemsworth), settles for a security guard job with the EMPIRE STATE Armored Truck Company. Chris makes the mistake of mentioning the company's lax security to his best friend, Eddie (Michael Angarano), and is soon unwittingly drawn into an elaborate scheme to rob the abundant amounts of cash being stored there - resulting in the largest cash heist in U.S. History. As the stakes continue to rise, Chris and Eddie must outwit James Ransone (Dwayne Johnson), the veteran NYPD Detective that is hot on their trail, as well as the local crime bosses that want to know who pulled a job on their turf, or suffer the consequences. Written by Lionsgate

Sounds a lot more thrilling than it actually was. While we both found it annoying and painstakingly dull, Levi has a few things he would like to start off with.

Levi:  Okay, so I’ll start with some things I liked. The production looked good, this is set in the 1980s and the products and sets looked pretty good. The acting was decent, Liam Hemsworth was . . . okay, sometimes his New Yorker accent was a little questionable but he wasn’t offensive, The Rock was amusing smug playing the nice guy cop and probably was the most consistent throughout. Angarano was . . . gosh I am scrapping for compliments, he played the part he was given. He was written as this loudmouth wise guy that eventually is consumed by greed, and Angarano got that across.

Alright that is really all the good things I can say about this movie. The directing and the script are TERRIBLE, turrible with a u. Just . . . who thought this is how people talk??? I wish I could fully describe in text what I mean. Okay literally the first scene establishing our main characters:

You have Eddie storming out of a store and his boss following behind. Eddie is yelling.

Eddie: I quit! You hear me? I quit!

Boss: No man you’re fired!

Eddie: No you’re wrong I quit!

Boss: No you’re fired!

Eddie: No I quit!

Boss: No you’re fired!

Eddie: No I quit.

Chris pulls up in a car and he and Eddie get in a fist fight with some of the boss’s workers, and while the fight is going on:

Eddie: I’m outta here man I quit.

Boss: No you get out of here, you’re fired!

Eddie jumps in Chris’ car to drive away:

Eddie: I quit.

Boss: Nah you’re fired!

GAAAAAAAAAAHHHHHHH!!!! It was ridiculous!! That’s literally how that scene played out except swearing in every sentence. There was no change in emotion or volume while the men were talking, they just kept saying the same thing over and over again. And they were talking at the same time over each other so it was even more grading on the ears.

And I thought wow that was rough, maybe that’s just how Eddie talks, but no, EVERYONE IN THE MOVIE TALKS LIKE THIS!! Repeating dialogue with the same emotion over and over again while other people are talking. Every other scene is like this, Chris gets in a fight with a mob boss and plays out just like the scene I described, PEOPLE DON’T TALK LIKE THIS!!! I’m sure that there are people who do it, but not every character in the movie!!! This is poor writing and terrible directing to allow scenes to play out like this. ARHHHHHHHHHHHHHHG!!!!

I didn’t care for this movie . . .

James: Well isn’t that the point? You forgot to mention the third billed actor, and that was Emma Roberts. That’s probably because she only had three lines in the whole movie. Her character was completely irrelevant to the story. There was a moment where I thought there might be a thing between her and Chris but nothing happened. Just like everything else in this movie, nothing really happened.

I disagree with one thing, I would not call Liam Hemsworth’s performance ok, it was very very bad.

Levi: I said he was dot dot dot okay, not offensive, he’s just doing his normal Hunger Games performance, could have been a lot worse.  

James: It was like if an amateur actor was told hey try to do a New York accent and couldn’t decide if he was from Boston, New York, or Asgard. I will go further to say Liam Hemsworth is not a good actor. His brother is a good actor, but there is a reason Liam hasn’t gotten any roles outside of the Hunger Game franchise. There’s nothing interesting about him. His biggest attribute is that he is Chris Hemsworth’s brother. He tries too hard. It's like the director said Liam look sad, so he put on a pouty face. Take Liam out and put Chris in and this movie is 50% better at least-

Levi: No actor could save this movie because of the God awful script, no way.

James: Hell, put in Luke Hemsworth and this is better. No it could never be good with the script, but don’t let the script cover Liam’s lackluster acting. Movies only go as far as its star and he failed. We love Nic Cage because even when the script or story is shit, he gives it his all and it makes the movie entertaining. Liam did nothing to make this any better, he only made it worse.

Levi: I disagree, an average actor can fill a role, but the movie itself can become great on it’s script and direction, I would rather have those two than an A list actor.

James: So if Leo phoned in his role for the Revenant, and did a half ass British accent or called everyone bro, you’re saying the script and great directing would save it? Yeah a movie needs great writing and directing, but with a bad performance by the lead it can never be great.

Levi: I’m saying a movie can go farther than it’s star if it has the other elements. And honestly Leonardo didn’t say much in the Revenant, it was a very physical role, but I stand by it, the Revenant had amazing direction and a story that made people feel, and that’s what you have to do.

James: But if Leo was bad, people wouldn’t have been able to appreciate the rest as much. Or take Scarface, if Pacino did the whole movie without the vigor and passion he put into that role, that movie loses a lot of what it was. Writing and directing don’t mean as much if the actors can’t deliver. But part of the blame for this movie also goes to the bad directing. It was all around bad. And Eddie was supposed to be the likable annoying friend role, but there was nothing likeable about him the whole movie. He was annoying. Very very annoying. Anyway we have to end this movie differently. Obviously it’s a true story so we can’t change the outcome but we can change how the pieced the final scenes together.

If it were up to me I wouldn’t have ended the movie immediately after the “climax”. The climax was pretty weak in itself. They could have dramatized it a bit more and had a showdown between the Rock, Chris, and Eddie. With Eddie saying “I’m not going to jail bro.” -

Levi: Five times in a row, while Chris is yelling his lines over and over again.

James: - And the Rock saying “No one has to go to jail Eddie. (wipes chin smoothly with his own hand). It would end with Eddie throwing his gun down, crying and saying:

“ I don’t wanna go to jail,” over and over and over. Is this a great ending? No. But there is no way to take a pile of shit and smear it in a way to make it into something beautiful.

Levi: Agreed, there’s not much that could be done, maybe . . . you know what, I cannot think of anything to improve the ending.

James: So this movie is so bad in a way that it just can’t be saved?

Levi: Possibly, with proper direction, this would make a better bio pic than a crime thriller. I was a little confused if this was a true story, because this was the biggest heist in US history! And I had never heard of this movie. That says something.

James: Yeah they really didn’t do enough with the biggest heist in history. They build it from the beginning how much was stolen but I could see everything coming. Right when he got the desk job I thought, oh now he’s just gonna let Eddie break in. Maybe there wasn’t enough to work with the real story to make it interesting. I don’t know. This is a bad movie, and sadly not in a funny way, which makes this the worst kind of movie. But it’s on NETFLIX!

National Treasure?

National Treasure is a movie about Nic Cage dedicating his life to finding a treasure that may or may not exist. IMDb’s synopsis is “Benjamin Franklin Gates descends from a family of treasure-seekers who've all hunted for the same thing: a war chest hidden by the Founding Fathers after the Revolutionary War. Ben's close to discovering its whereabouts, as is his competition, but the FBI is also hip to the hunt.” 

 

If you ever had a social studies class in the past 12 years, you’ve probably seen it. Before we get into how we wanted it to end, we first have to establish whether or not this is a good movie. Aaaaaaaaand scene.

Levi: Well I for one really enjoyed it, I remember watching this growing up and thought it was the coolest thing ever. The film actually opened me up to the world of Nic Cage. And history. But mostly Nic.

It’s a fun, not taking itself too serious action adventure. Of course a lot of the history is made up, but a great deal of it is true, and they don’t try to blur the line between the two. I actually did want to learn more about the Founding Fathers and Revolutionary era America after seeing this. And it also brings in this modern day- Indiana Jones treasure hunt with interesting clues and---

James: CLUEEEEEEES!

Levi: -- Yeah we’ll get to that. Anyway, it has all these elements of a old treasure quest but also a 2000s spy and heist movie. Pretty good acting across the board, decently filmed and produced, with a lot of actual stunts instead of huge amount of CGI which was very common at the time. I will say it’s not the greatest Cage performance, but it’s not like he slept through it. So overall an enjoyable film.

James: When talking about this movie, you can’t let nostalgia cloud your judgement. Yes, we all remember watching it during US History class and pointing out the references, but to me, it tries too hard to be smart. An obvious example, all the main characters’ names are founding father or Revolutionary references. That’s like if all the main characters in Oceans 11 were named Hearts, Diamond, MGM Grand, Casino, or Moneybags. There’s being subtly clever and then there is being belligerently clever, and National Treasure just is a little too in your face. When judging a Cager, you have to look at the supporting cast. This was right before the Cage-Drop (when his career fell off for most people) so they were able to get three quality actors around him. Sean Bean (who somehow doesn't die for once), Jon Voight (CLUES), and Bridget Von Hammersmark (Diane Kruger). Bean plays a fairly convincing, albeit gullible, villain who wants to solve the puzzle by illegal means. Jon Voight is what he always is, a washed up father who tries to stifle his son’s passion (see Sky, October). Von Hammersmark goes from being offended that Cage stole the Declaration of Independence to being turned onto Cage for some questionable reason. Real quick, here’s the five best scene stealers besides Cage from this movie: I say 5. Phil (a henchman with a name) 4. The kid who helps them crack the code, because he made bank off of it, 3. Hammersmark even though she didn’t really do that much. 2. Voight. 1. CLUUUUUUUUUUES.

Levi: Objection! Voight and CLUES are the same thing!

James: Yet they need each other. Without CLUES Voight wouldn’t have had any lines, and without Voight we would never have heard the downside to following CLUES. For those wondering what we mean, watch the movie, or even fast forward to every scene Voight is in, and drink for when he says CLUES. You will have a good night.

Levi: Or make a drinking game of it. Anyway, everyone does kind of have their shtick, Riley is the techno wiz-

James: Riley was miscast. Shia LaBeouf would have been perfect.

Levi: Oh dear god! Well, he would have been a bankable star at that time, maybe a little young.

James: Riley is just too early 2000’s smart ass for me. He really doesn’t do a great job at anything. He fails when Cage is stealing Declaration, he pays a kid to crack a code, and he gets reminded every scene that he isn’t as smart as he thinks he is.

Levi: You want to talk about nostalgia (And it isn’t clouding my judgement!!), the technology in this movie is a fun trip, with the shocking technique of setting security cameras on loops and tracking cell phones through GPS, simpler times.

James: Another thing that confuses me, everyone treats each other like crap. From the outset, Cage puts down every idea Bean comes up with. I could see why Bean doesn’t want to work with him (although Bean has a history of not wanting to work as a team)...

Levi: How do all our discussions come back to Lord of the Rings?

James: Because LOTR is the GOAT. Anyway, Riley and Cage give each other shit the whole movie about their intelligence, and Hammersmark is very cold to Cage at the beginning. The FBI director keeps threatening that someone has to go to jail, which seems very black and white to me. A crime happened, but instead of figuring it out, let’s just put someone in jail to make it look alright.

Levi:I mean Cage did break the law, but yeah the fact that only a certain person should go to jail is ludicrous.

James: No,  this is Ludacris:

 

Levi: Multiple people did end up in prison. But Phil was just doing what he was told man! He didn’t ask for this!

James: Fun fact, the actor who plays Phil, Stephen Pope, is actually a stunt actor. He has done stunts for movies like The Departed, Wolf of Wall Street, and Zombieland. I like how he got an actual part in this. Anyway, back to the point, I just think it tries too hard to be clever, and it slams history in your face to cover up the holes in the movie. You like it because it brings history to mainstream entertainment, which is cool, but not enough for me. So, now we have to decide what we would have changed in the plot.

So, SPOILER (Do you have to say spoiler for a 13 year old movie?) Voight (CLUES) fools Bean at the end by telling him the treasure is in Boston. Why Bean would believe someone who has been out of the game for 20 plus years I don’t understand. Here’s what I would have done as Bean, taken Cage and Voight with me. Without them, that group is just a bunch of sheep with no wolf to get them going. Riley would have just hit on Hammersmark and she wouldn’t have had Marcel nor Lt. Aldo Rain to save her. Thus, they would have got to Boston, found out Voight was lying, probably leading to killing him off. Cage would have been kept alive to find the actual treasure. He would have escaped, leading to an epic fight scene with Bean where Bean dies and Cage goes to save the possibly already dead duo he left behind. They never find the treasure, but they do find friendship, inside of a jail.

Levi: See, this decision shouldn’t have come up in the first place. First of all ‘One if by land, two if by sea,’ isn’t a totally obscure historical fact. That is another thing I didn’t like, either you’re super history man Benjamin Gates, or you totally oblivious to all historical fact.

Anyway, even if Bean or Phil weren’t familiar with the event, Bean contradicts himself by thinking they need to travel ALL THE WAY FROM NEW YORK TO BOSTON, INSTEAD OF LOOKING AROUND THE IMPRESSIVELY INTRICATE HOLE FOUR STORIES INTO THE GROUND. He said himself while they were in the church that it would be weird if the map brought them to the church and then took them somewhere else!!! And then they travel down this huge marvel of architecture and after for searching for TWO MINUTES, he thinks Boston is the answer. Why not call Voight (CLUE!) on his bluff and make them look for the door. If they refuse start wasting the non-history privy cast members: aka Riley. Boom, there might be a struggle, but you have pretty good odds, because even if our heroes overpowered you, you still have a crew waiting upstairs ready to kill if you don’t return with the group. Bean gets the treasure and probably kills the rest of the cast. All because he didn’t want to dust the walls a little bit.

James: I am just picturing either of our ideas happening in a Disney movie. Either the main character and his friends go to jail after his dad is killed in front of him OR the witty friend is executed, the villain gets the treasure, and the main character dies. Not sure if they would run with it, but it does make a little more sense. Anyway, that does it for National Treasure. Any last thoughts?

Levi: Like I said before, a fun action flick, I don’t think it’s trying to be in your face, just trying to sprinkle in historical references and nods into a modern day treasure hunt.

James: Agree to disagree. I say it’s not good and you say it is. That’s a lesson: nostalgia never dies. Well, that does it for this “treasure”, but we will be back. Let us know if you want us to discuss a movie (thanks to Ragin Cajun for suggesting this one), it does not have to be a Nic Cage movie. We take (arguably) bad movies and make them better.

The Trust

We recommend you watch this movie (on Netflix) to better understand this discussion (but we don’t recommend this movie, if that makes sense)

Saying The Trust is a Nicolas Cage movie is like saying basketball is a sport...it is. For those of you under a rock since 2005, Cage doesn't really make "good" movies anymore. According to IMDB the highest rated Cager (Cage movie) ever is Adaptation, and that was in 2002, and got a 7.7 from users (Kick Ass is not a Cager just as Kick Ass Two is not a Jim Carrey movie). After that you have to go to 1995 for Leaving Las Vegas, the movie he is most known for, to see good ratings. Anyway, when grading a Cager, the criteria for "good" is not the same as the criteria you would use when grading any other actors' movies. Cage is a good actor. A really good actor. In fact, he is so good that it is detrimental. He tries to do too much. Patience and Cage are two things that are never put together. Anyway, today Levi and I are breaking down The Trust and saying where it went wrong and how to fix it. 

 
 

Synopsis: The Trust is a movie that came out in 2016 starring Nicolas Cage and Elijah Wood. Here is the plot synopsis courtesy of IMDB: "Waters and Stone are two nobody police officers who work in the evidence room of the Las Vegas Police Department. When Stone discovers an unusually high bail receipt in connection to a drug bust, the two friends set in motion a plan to find the source of the money".  This trailer will make this all make much more sense.

Spoiler (like you were going to watch this) breakdown: Cage and Wood break into a vault that they discover through spotty means (Cage goes undercover as a hotel room service person). To break in, they drill a hole through the floor of an apartment occupied by a tattooed man (whom Cage kills after being spit on) and a woman (whom Cage almost kills multiple times but doesn't).  They break in, and find out there are diamonds in the vault. Wood suddenly realizes he doesn't want a part of this (not sure why he waited till then to have this epiphany) and tries to convince Cage to leave the diamonds. Cage insists to take them, Wood shoots Cage in the neck. The two have a shoot out where neither seemingly get a clean shot off, and Cage ends up dead. Wood leaves with the girl. However, Wood had allowed the girl to call her friends earlier, so her friends find the van Wood is driving and shoot him. The end. 

 
 

James: Ok, we left out quite a bit of information there. My biggest qualm is that there is no reason for Cage's character to take the heel turn that he did. At first, he is an anally careful cop, but then all of a sudden, he is killing people left and right. Did you see enough to believe the turn? 

Levi: Absolutely not, it's hard to tell what Cage and the filmmakers were trying to get across. Was Stone just plain crazy, or just really hated being called names? ("Corny" is what I believe the gun dealer called him.) Or maybe Stone just didn't want to pay for the guns. My personal theory is Stone is tired of being pushed around, as he has been at work and by his father. Since he is working outside of the law he now has this unprecedented freedom, and now he is not going to take crap from anyone anymore (ergo the cold-blooded killing of the tattooed man, and wanting to kill everyone else). And he loves this new rush that this freedom brings, that was missing in his life before. That's why he is so obsessed with pulling off this job, because it will mean he can keep this freedom and not go back to his old, mundane life. 

James: OK, but what about Wood's character (Waters)? He never cared from the beginning about anything (unless you count prostitutes and smoking) and never questions the morality of robbing someone until he finds out they're diamonds. 

Levi: Wood is indeed supposed to be the guy we are to root for. He joins the job for the money at first but then he comes to the conclusion that this isn't worth it. Whether it's out of a sense of morality or survival is unclear, thought I would go with the latter. For some reason when he sees the room full of diamonds, he suddenly believes the job is no longer worth it (although from a monetary standpoint IT MOST CERTAINLY WAS!! $$$). Maybe he has seen too many B action movies, but he thinks diamonds mean this is some kingpin's stash and it's stupid to try and make off with the money. He is acting purely out of self-preservation. You could argue wanting to spare the woman's life gives him the moral high ground, but at the end he was going to drive and leave her IN THE MIDDLE OF THE NEVADA DESERT!! He didn't care about her, he didn't want her identifying him after the fact. The whole movie he was only interested in saving his own ass. 

 James: Wood's character, Waters, is similar to Wood's character in the show Wilfred. Doesn't care about anything, and is trying hard not to be Frodo. But Waters has some very Frodo moments. He trusts the girl to make a phone call (as Frodo trusts Golum non stop), he backs out at last minute (see Doom, Mt.) and the movie opens with him and a prostitute (likely in some extended unrated edition of LOTR somewhere). Poor Wood can't avoid Frodo. Alright, now it's time for us to change things. What would you have done differently as Waters? 

Levi: First of all, hey, I know stealing diamonds from drug lords isn't the safest thing to do---

 James:Do they ever establish who owns the diamonds? What if it's just a celebrity or something? What if it's Mike Tyson? Sorry, go on.

Levi: But stop standing around and staring at things and maybe you can get out of there by making sure nothing ties you to the crime! Also, Waters borrow $10,000 from a crazy ass cop who steals it from a meth/cupcake shop as protection money!! (Long story) YOU need money Frodo! Even if you're not comfortable with stealing the whole room of diamonds, you still need to pay the insane policemen back! Just steal about 10 Gs of diamonds and then your conscience is clear. Third, giving the girl a phone call was just plain stupid. YOU DIDN'T EVEN ASK WHO WAS THERE WHEN YOU DIALED THE NUMBER!! And finally after he killed Stone, which was probably going to happen regardless, I would not have taken the girl anywhere, JUST LEAVE! She had not seen his face, she had no idea who he was, just take a handful of diamonds and then give the police an anonymous tip and they would find the girl. Boom! No hit squad, no debt and no death. You would live to sail away with the elves. 

James: I guess Frodo never really recovered from that wound. Anyway, so on Cage's part he could have done a few things differently. First off, killing Wood right after Wood re-opens (OPEN IT OPEN IT OPEN IT) the door. Actually that's all he needed to do. Instead he had a grandiose vision of going to the Bahamas with Wood. Quick side note: How the hell did Cage pay for two tickets to the Bahama's when he couldn't put any of his own money towards the drill? I think he was richer than he led on to be. I digress, since he no longer cares about anything other than the diamonds, and he notices Wood is already debating leaving, he kills Wood and the girl, takes the diamonds, and goes with his dad to the Bahamas.  

Well, that's the most that has ever been written about this movie, and it's safe to say that record will hold. Wood should have GTFO with some diamonds, and Cage should have killed Wood and taken all the diamonds. Wow. Any last comments? 

Levi: Just that the ending of this movie made me physically angry. So many things could have prevented it, plus Cage's death was total BS. Up till the end it was just a confusing, mediocre heist film.  

James: But it was solid Cage movie, as far as they go. That does it for The Trust, maybe watch it if you're bored as hell and enjoy bad Cage movies. Otherwise, let us know any movie you want discussed. We watch bad movies, and make them...less bad.