2015 confirmed that the years of movie stars carrying huge box office weight are behind us more than ever. Stars and starlets who heralded huge hits in the past were in some of the biggest flops of 2015; Bill Murray with Rock the Kasbah, Sandra Bullock with Our Brand is Crisis, Hugh Jackman with Pan and Chappie, and Bradley Cooper with Aloha and Burnt. Yet Hollywood works in circles, so someone is bound to rise from the ashes to become a true “movie star”.

In 2014, Chris Pratt became the talk of the town after a giant year with Guardians of the Galaxy and The Lego Movie. He even had a pretty good 2015 starring in Jurassic World. Yet, Pratt doesn’t have all of the characteristics of the Golden Age of Hollywood’s leading men and women. His expressive charisma and good looks don’t completely compensate for his limited range. It’s hard for him to carry a film without strong assistance from a supporting cast, which was noticeable in Guardians of the Galaxy but was more obvious after playing second fiddle to Bryce Dallas Howard in Jurassic World.

Jurassic World movie stars Chris Pratt and Bryce Dallas Howard

Furthermore, Pratt’s mark has never actually been tested; nothing has been sold on his image alone. The Marvel, Jurassic Park, and even Lego brands all have a built-in fan base that assures their films from being box office failures. In fact, many of Marvel’s biggest actors have proven to disappoint outside of the franchise: Chris Evans hasn’t led a non-Marvel film to a gross over $60 million; Robert Downey Jr.’s biggest hits have all been franchise films; Chris Hemsworth has had many leading endeavors tank. Marvel hasn’t historically made any bonafide box office stars; why would Chris Pratt be different?

But another talent has been awoken and he has been thrown into the center of the public’s eye: Oscar Isaac. In Star Wars: The Force Awakens, Isaac’s Poe Dameron isn’t as utilized as heavily as Finn and Rey, but the part does draw resemblance to the introduction of Harrison Ford’s Han Solo in A New Hope. The two are both cocky, sharp-witted pilots who play the magnetic, charming sidekick. What Isaac has in The Force Awakens that Ford didn’t in A New Hope is experience and a tangible acting prowess.

Oscar Isaac as Poe Dameron in Star Wars: The Force Awakens

While A New Hope was essentially Ford’s acting debut, Isaac already has many acting roles under his belt showing his versatility and range. His first leading performance as Llewyn Davis in the Coen Brothers’ Inside Llewyn Davis earned him critical praise and more than a dozen Best Actor mentions. In 2014, he received accolades for his leading performance in A Most Violent Year. And his most impressive box office turn was from this year, Ex Machina, which boasts many critical mentions and award traction.

These indies are obviously in the little leagues when it comes to box office and public visibility, but with The Force Awakens, Oscar Isaac will now become a household name. On top of red carpet events and press conferences, Isaac has been making the rounds on talk shows displaying his confidence and personality. His real life persona is a dashing combination of Pratt’s goofiness and Tom Cruise’s charm, but his talent and scope arguably exceeds them both. Add in his musical talent, and Isaac becomes a double threat that is easy for the public to latch on to.

A pondering Oscar Isaac in Ex Machina

Even though Poe Dameron seems underutilized in The Force Awakens, it’s worth noting that Han Solo’s presence is much more noteworthy in the next two installments of The Empire Strikes Back and Return of the Jedi. With all signs pointing to a derivative series and some characters out of the way, Isaac’s Poe could have much more to do in the next episode. Furthermore, The Force Awakens is only the beginning of Isaac’s blockbuster reign; he is playing the titular villain in the upcoming X-Men film.

With a strong platter of future releases, Oscar Isaac has the potential to latch on to Hollywood and leave a lasting impact. The Star Wars series has started and killed many acting careers, especially Hayden Christensen and Mark Hamill who struggled to brand themselves outside of the series. But Isaac isn’t like these two; he has already proven himself to be strong enough in his past endeavors to outlast the curse. After his franchise contracts run up, he will be one of the most in-demand actors in Hollywood. His possibilities will be endless.

It’s hard to imagine now, but when Marvel Studios began erecting what we now know as the Marvel Cinematic Universe back in 2008, the mighty heroes that make up our beloved Avengers—Iron Man, Thor, Captain America, The Hulk, Black Widow–were generally regarded as B-list superheroes. Most people at the time were somewhat familiar with the characters, but very few in the general public obsessed over them like they did Wolverine, the X-Men, or DC Comics icons Batman and Superman.

Since then, Marvel has racked up an impressive catalogue of good-to-excellent superhero movies, building a thriving ecosystem and even managing to make D-list outcasts The Guardians of the Galaxy a worldwide phenomenon. But for comic book fans like myself, there has always been that one hangup that’s been needling at us since the MCU’s inception: Where’s Spider-Man?! It hurt my heart a little to watch the Avengers kick ass all over New York City without the web-head swinging around, making snarky remarks, and helping them knock out some baddies.

Now that our childhood dreams are coming true and Spider-Man is confirmed to be joining the MCU, there are a few questions on my mind as to how this will affect Marvel’s future plans, which had up until now been thoroughly mapped out through 2019. Peter Parker’s entry into the fold is going to shake things up big-time, so join me as I speculate what the Spidey-fied future of the MCU holds in store.

[Note: The most obvious question on some people’s minds is, “Who will they cast as Peter Parker?” While it’s an interesting question, I don’t feel particularly inclined to speculate since at this point we know so little and it’s so early on in the process. Maybe in a future piece. For now…]

Will Joss Whedon Stick Around?

Joss Whedon has been the mastermind behind the MCU since his debut directing 2012’s The Avengers, and since then he’s been a consultant on virtually every Marvel Studios production, helped create Agents of S.H.I.E.L.D., and taken on this summer’s gargantuan Avengers: Age of Ultron. He said recently that he “couldn’t imagine doing this again”, revealing that he has no intention of directing any more Avengers movies.

But Mr. Whedon is a comic book fan at heart, and like every other comic book fan on earth, he’s got to know how unbelievably perfect a candidate he would be to helm a Spider-Man movie, or at least write one. The prospect of him bringing Peter Parker to life with his witty, subversive writing style is the stuff dreams are made of, and if you’re a Buffy fan (or a Runaways fan–woot!), you know that he was born to make this movie. Teen angst, simultaneous wisecracking and skull-cracking, devastating deaths in the family–he’s been doing this shit for years. With hope, Joss will see this as a once-in-a-lifetime opportunity to deliver us the definitive Spider-Man experience.

How Big a Role Will Peter Parker Play in Civil War?

In Civil War, Marvel’s year-long mega-event that sold zillions of comics in 2006-2007, the super-powered population is split in two following the government passing the Superhero Registration Act, which forces individuals with extraordinary abilities to register and act under government regulation, and reveal their secret identities. Tony Stark leads the superheroes in support of the act, Steve Rogers leads those who refuse to register, and a cataclysmic war erupts across the nation with heroes fighting heroes and villains running amok like never before. Guess who’s right smack-dab in the middle of the conflict? Your friendly neighborhood Spider-Man, of course!

The third installment of the Captain America movie series, Captain America: Civil War, will focus on the popular storyline, and it was confirmed this morning that, now that Spider-Man is a member of the MCU family, the character will make his debut in the Joe Russo-helmed film. In the comics, he’s the face at the center of the debate over the Registration Act, and of the most pivotal moment of the entire storyline revolves around him, so it would be great to see him make a huge impact in the script. (Recreating the aforementioned pivotal moment in the film would be tricky, though, for reasons I won’t spoil here.) I’m keeping my fingers crossed that it’s not a shoehorned, throwaway cameo, which would hurt my soul. If the fine folks at Marvel can find a way to work him into the movie in a major way, it would serve them well.

How Will The Netflix Series Be Affected?

Marvel and Netflix are gearing up to unleash five binge-watchable shows on the streaming service, the first of which being the 10-episode Daredevil series (starring Charlie Cox as the blind crimefighter) launching on April 10, with the others–AKA Jessica Jones, Iron Fist, Luke Cage, and The Defenders–rolling out over the next couple of years. Like Agents of S.H.I.E.L.D. and Agent Carter, the five series exist within the MCU, though their stories will be mostly contained to the harsher corners of New York City.

With Peter Parker now fighting crime on the same streets as the Defenders, will he make an appearance on any of their shows? Daredevil and Spider-Man are frequent partners in the comics and share a common enemy in Wilson Fisk, a.k.a The Kingpin, who’s being played by the great Vincent D’Onofrio. (I wouldn’t rule out D’Onofrio making an appearance in the upcoming Spidey movie, by the way.) I know for a fact that I would lose my mind if I saw Peter Parker and Matt Murdock cleaning up thugs the NYC streets together, and now that it’s in the realm of possibility, I’m holding out hope for the crossover of my dreams.

Will J.K. Simmons Reprise His Role As J. Jonah Jameson?

Everybody knows that J.K. Simmons‘ turn as J. Jonah Jameson–the huffing, puffing, hard-ass editor-in-chief at the Daily Bugle and obsessive hater of Spider-Man–in Sam Raimi‘s original Spider-Man trilogy was one of the best things about those movies. He was so funny and so perfectly over-the-top that he made a bigger impression than characters that got triple his screen time. I left Whiplash craving more of Simmons screaming and fuming until his veins popped, and him returning as Peter Parker’s crotchety boss for the franchise reboot might be just the thing I need.

In a recent interview on Sirius XM’s The Howard Stern Show (credit to /Film for the scoop), he was asked by the legendary host if another Spider-Man movie was in the cards. His reply was cautiously optimistic: “I just heard that we…that’s a possibility.” When asked if he’d be interested in returning to the role, Simmons replied with an enthusiastic, “Absolutely.” Seems like a no-brainer.

Will the Release Date Shifts Affect Storylines?

The first MCU Spider-Man movie is slated for a July 28, 2017 release. Consequently, every movie after it has been moved one slot back on the release calendar. For example, Thor: Ragnarok, which was bumped off its July 28, 2017 release date by Spider-Man, will now release on November 3, 2017. What’s notable are the shifts to the movies releasing adjacent to Avengers: Infinity War, the two-part event slated for release May 4, 2018, and May 3, 2019.

Black Panther was originally coming out before Infinity War: Part 1, but is now scheduled to release after it. This either means that the events of Black Panther have no bearing on the events of Infinity War, or that the story will have to be tweaked to fit in with the grander MCU arc. It’s all very confusing, and it’s going to be interesting to see how it all plays out. I predict a sweep of raging migraines striking the masterminds at Marvel Studios any second now…

Not everyone likes the terms “overrated” and “underrated,” and it’s easy to understand why. For some, the words aren’t so much about the films they are applied to as much as a commentary on people’s opinions, and that direct line of attack on the majority can seem a little arrogant. But on the flip side, it’s hard to find two better words that describe what it’s like to disagree with the consensus.

And here at Way Too Indie, we have a wide, diverse group of writers. Want proof? Just look at our list of the Best Films of 2014, where we have a feel-good foodie comedy, a 3+ hour Turkish drama and an animated kids’ movie all on the same list. But there are plenty of times where we don’t all agree on the same thing.

This year we decided to give all of our writers an opportunity to vent out their frustrations at some of the films that either got too much love or not enough. We assigned all of our writers with a task: pick one film you find overrated, one you find underrated, and explain your picks. Read on to see the results, and don’t forget that these picks reflect each writer’s individual thoughts, not the site as a whole. Or, to put it a different way: make sure your hate mail goes to the right person.

Way Too Indie’s Most Overrated and Underrated Films of 2014

Dustin Jansick

Follow on Twitter

Whiplash is Overrated

Damien Chazelle’s Whiplash received overwhelming praise during its festival run and now sits at a whopping 96% Fresh rating on Rotten Tomatoes, creating the perfect storm for overestimation. Especially considering the film is a glorified sports movie that substitutes drum sticks for sporting equipment. And like most sports movies, Whiplash is wholly predictable and light in the story department. Here an aspiring drummer (Miles Teller) wants to join an elite jazz ensemble so badly that he’ll letting nothing—and I mean nothing—stand in his way. He briefly courts a pretty girl only to dump her just as quick, trying to show how little he cares about anything else. Then there’s the ludicrous car wreck scene where he crawls out of the vehicle covered in blood, yet he’s only concerned with getting to the performance on time (and somehow he manages to play!) The saving grace of the film is the fully committed J.K. Simmons as a perfection-demanding band instructor that most drill sergeants would be afraid of. When someone isn’t playing at his precise speed, he stops the show, humiliates the person in front of everyone, and insists the tempo changes. When played faster, it’s too fast. Slower, and it’s too slow. This gets repeated over and over until the point is made frustratingly clear. While it’s true Whiplash is exhilarating at times, as a whole it’s a slightly above average film about pushing people past their limits.

Like Father, Like Son is Underrated

Unlike the film mentioned above, Like Father, Like Son turns an outlandish situation into an unexpectedly profound narrative. Two Japanese families learn their children were switched at birth after six years of raising them as their own. Writer and director Kore-Eda Hirokazu explores the complex debate between nature and nurture without a predetermined right answer, making a case for both sides. Does six years of parenting outweigh genetics? You be the judge. Kore-eda adds to this philosophical dilemma by introducing contrasting social class between the two families: one family has a ton of wealth but lacks affection while the other family lacks financial prosperity yet provides undivided attention to their children. Like Father, Like Son displays expert craftsmanship, delightful performances (especially the adorable six-year-old), and an emotionally stirring narrative. Like all great films, Like Father, Like Son encourages discussion and inspires you to think. For reasons I don’t understand, the buzz generated during its Cannes premiere (has it really been two years?!) quickly faded. It’s a shame because this film deserves more attention.

C.J. Prince

Follow on Twitter

Boyhood is Overrated

I didn’t particularly care for Boyhood, which left me feeling pretty cold emotionally when I saw it earlier this year. I couldn’t explain my issues with it more succinctly than Fandor’s Kevin B. Lee, who said Boyhood “feels too much like an all-purpose anthem for the coming-of-age experience” and “lacks the intimacy and specificity” of Richard Linklater’s best work. The film never delves too much into its characters’ lives, sketching out details just enough to ensure as many people can relate to it without getting too precise, perhaps out of fear of alienating viewers.

In a way, I can’t blame Linklater for doing it this way; the shooting method probably made it difficult to get too detailed or specific (it could also explain why Linklater largely eschews narrative). But by doing this, Linklater sacrifices the emotional impact of the story for me, and that broadness leads to something bland. Yes, everyone has something they can relate to in Boyhood, and that’s the problem. It’s perfectly content with doing very little, acting as a blank canvas for viewers to project all they want on to it. And a blank canvas can be pretty boring to look at.

Oculus is Underrated

While everyone and their mother believes The Babadook is the best horror film of 2014 (I came very close to making it my overrated pick), I’m going with Mike Flanagan’s Oculus. It’s a horror film with an unconventional villain: a haunted mirror with the ability to mess with people’s heads, making them see things that aren’t really there. The more time one spends around the mirror, the harder it gets to discern between reality and illusion. And what Flanagan does so brilliantly is make his own film feel like it’s under the influence of the mirror, slowly throwing viewers into a headspace where it’s impossible to understand whether or not what’s on screen is actually happening.

It starts when the mirror shows its malevolence to the film’s two protagonists. The editing starts violating expectations, heightening the awareness of elliptical cuts (in other words, you can no longer fill in the blanks between each shot). And then the film’s flashback structure collapses in on itself, suddenly merging past and present into one. By its climax, Oculus reaches a disorienting fever pitch that’s a marvel to behold. Most horror movies have a hard time creating actual characters; Oculus gets inside its characters’ heads with an effectiveness rarely seen in today’s horror films.

Blake Ginithan

Follow on Twitter

Guardians of the Galaxy is Overrated

Comic book movies are a dime a dozen now a days, thus one only really needs to be good to stand out. Marvel seemingly has a stranglehold on the market at the moment and is releasing anything it can to make money. Guardians of the Galaxy is neither enjoyably good nor enjoyably bad. It’s pure middle of the road boredom. I’d rather watch a gloriously bad movie that shoots for the stars than a film that plays everything by the numbers. Guardians of the Galaxy is a very bland comic book movie that isn’t interesting for a second. It contains not a single exciting character and not a single enjoyable scene. The action scenes fall pretty flat and the choice to use soul and funky pop songs as the soundtrack is a pretty dire, annoyingly distracting decision. Guardians of the Galaxy isn’t bad by any means; Chris Pratt proves that he will be a movie star in no time and director James Gunn shows he can handle a big budget. But Guardians of the Galaxy only shoots for middle ground and never once wants to rise above the crème to become something better.

Edge of Tomorrow is Underrated

I’m convinced the Tom Cruise we see outside of the movies (the one who jumps on couches) has ruined the Tom Cruise we see on the silver screen. It’s unfortunate, because Tom Cruise shows with Edge of Tomorrow that he is far and away the best movie star of all time. Here Cruise turns in one of his best performances not just of the last few years, but possibly of his entire career. It’s easy to dismiss Edge of Tomorrow as a sci-fi knock off of Groundhog Day but it’s so much more than that. The way we see Cruise’s character go from a complete pussy to an ass-kicking soldier throughout the course of this movie is sensational. And who better as his sidekick than Emily Blunt, who proves she can destroy aliens as aptly and easily as Ripley could? We can talk about the weak ending all we want, fine, but to deny everything you see before it is a sin. Edge of Tomorrow is one of the best Hollywood big budget films to be released in some time. It’s fun, grandiose, energetic, loopy, amusing, kinetic, emotional, and pulsating. Edge of Tomorrow was wrongly missed out on during its initial theatrical run.

Ananda Dillon

Follow on Twitter

It Felt Like Love is Overrated

The great part about the Internet is I don’t need to worry about all of you out there shaking your heads at my opinion on It Felt Like Love. I hear what many of you have said about the film (including quite a few WTI staff; read our review): about how it portrays the difficulties of growing up in this modern age of sexual inundation on youth; about how honest Eliza Hittman’s depiction of crossing the line from girl to woman is conveyed; about its realistic and observational style of filmmaking. I’m sorry, but no. I was a teenage girl and nothing Lila (Gina Piersanti) experiences in this film resonates with any memories I have. I get that she’s a motherless, confused young lady motivated by envy and peer pressure, but her every decision in this film is so awkward it’s painful. Not even as a teenager did I know anyone so utterly unable to pick up on social cues. First she throws herself at a boy who, even as a known player, quite obviously wants nothing to do with her. Then it ends with her throwing herself into the way of molestation. It’s not an honest coming-of-age; it’s a scary look into worst-case-scenario for an oblivious girl being taken advantage of. Adding to the uncomfortable viewing experience is a lack of plot and excruciatingly slow pacing. It seems to me it’s easy to confuse amateur, awkward filmmaking for deliberate depth, and I found this film too uncomfortable to enjoy.

The Signal is Underrated

So it only received middling reviews after its Sundance premier and then limited release this year, and even I decried its more flagrant failings in my review, but despite what you’ve heard I’m here to say The Signal is still worth watching. In part it’s worth a watch only so that later when director William Eubank is off making huge sci-fi films that have us all (finally) buzzing, we’ll be able to say “I’ve appreciated his work since The Signal.” So there are bragging rights involved. But additionally The Signal also proves that a perfect film is near impossible to find, and what Eubank gets right far outweighs what he gets wrong. In fact, it’s less that he gets much wrong; he’s just missing a few key elements… like enough plot points. But let’s be honest; if any genre is guilty of putting form over function, it’s sci-fi. So even though the film decides not to answer all our questions, ultimately what we’re left with is the memory of the film’s stunning visuals. Eubanks got his start as a cinematographer, and The Signal showcases some imagery that would leave Michael Bay drooling. The film manages to be stylistic and artistic while also bombastic and blockbuster-looking, which is no easy feat. And despite plot discrepancies, there is no denying the steady tension he incites with this mystery. The reveals are truly shocking, and so, in some ways, you could argue The Signal is TOO good. It sets itself up so well in the first two-thirds that almost no ending could really satisfy. At least that’s my generous conclusion. But trust me on this, The Signal may be a head-scratcher, but it’s not a waste of time.

Bernard Boo

Follow on Twitter

The LEGO Movie is Overrated

I must preface this by saying that The LEGO Movie was one of my favorite films of the year, which I understand may come off as a bit, well, confusing, as I’ve chosen to also label it as one of the year’s most overrated films. Phil Lord and Christopher Miller’s brand of witty, subversive humor speaks to millennials so directly that I understand (and share) all the adoration. But what bothers me about the enthusiasm behind The LEGO Movie is that it seems to come from a place that’s unreasonably dismissive of kids movies. Almost every time I read praise for The LEGO Movie, there’s some line that essentially says it’s “got heart, unlike other dumb kids movies”, which I can’t help but read as ignorant snark. All-ages movies are NOT intrinsically inferior. For every bad kids movie, there’s an equally horrendous rom-com, horror movie, or indie drama (just go to your local indie film festival for proof). Yes, The LEGO Movie is excellent, but excellent kids movies aren’t all that rare. Wreck-it Ralph, whose similarities to The LEGO Movie are innumerable, is just as good, just not edgy enough for cynical bloggers. Consider other kids movies from this year: Big Hero 6 wasn’t “dumbed-down”; The Boxtrolls was incredibly sincere and well-written; How to Train Your Dragon 2 is one of the best movie sequels of the past 5 years. The LEGO Movie was the best of the bunch, but geez…let’s all calm the eff down.

The Better Angels is Underrated

Most of the criticism levied against A.J. Edwards’ The Better Angels, a hypnotic period piece about a young Abraham Lincoln (played by Braydon Denney and referred to in the script as simply, “Abe”), is that it derides too blatantly and too much from the work of its producer, Terrence Malick. There’s fairness to that point, but the comparison seems to cloud the fact that, informing all of the low-angled, heavenly nature shots, there’s a beautiful story of spirituality and family that’s quite good. More importantly, these themes make the Malick-ian imagery entirely appropriate for the story Edwards is trying to tell. Terrific performances from Denney, Diane Kruger, Brit Marling, Jason Clarke, and Wes Bentley give the black and white visuals further richness. No, Edwards doesn’t do Malick better than Malick does Malick, but Malick’s given him the Malick stamp of approval, so if you love Malick like I love Malick (who doesn’t love Malick?), give this arthouse origin story a second (or first) try.

Aaron Pinkston

Follow on Twitter

Jodorowsky’s Dune is Overrated

Every year is basically a great year for documentary film and 2014 is no exception. The pitch-perfect, clear-eyed portrait of Roger Ebert in Life Itself; the cloudy and pained portrait of a pastor in The Overnighters; the experimental vibrancy of Manakamana; the political nuance of Citizenfour—these (and many other) docs gave us integral and beautiful stories from around the world. Jodorowsky’s Dune is a fine film in itself, but it comes nowhere near the best docs of the year, though it seems many would hold it there. It knocks on two of my biggest cinematic pet peeves—one is basically unavoidable given the film’s story, while the other is completely inexcusable. First, I am always wary about using interviews as a shortcut to verify art, and this film goes there a lot, with talking head after talking head exclaiming how amazing Jodorowsky’s Dune would have been without letting the art speak for itself. Alejandro Jodorowsky is a very compelling figure and his films are among the most bizarre and wonderful ever made. And for some reason Frank Pavich makes a documentary chronicling the tale of the filmmaker’s flawed attempt at bringing the un-filmable novel Dune to the cinema with all the slickness and mainstream vibe that Jodorowsky despises. Sure, watching Jodorowsky ramble on about his worldview is something to see, and the “bringing the team together” section of the film is indeed entertaining, but overall, Jodorowsky’s Dune feels like a lot of wasted potential, much like its source story. Maybe that is what they were going for…

Noah is Underrated

Darren Aronofsky made his biggest movie in 2014, an oft-told tale which manages to feel very personal. Noah has its supporters (who might even outnumber its detractors), but I can’t help but get the feeling that it has already been forgotten. It has basically zero awards buzz, despite Aronofsky’s momentum after his most successful film Black Swan. I can only hope that it bounces back through a strong, loving minority that have championed Aronofsky’s The Fountain, but it probably is slightly too mainstream-feeling for that sort of audience to even give it a chance. Noah, though, is an almost perfect blend of the Hollywood blockbuster and its creator’s vision—it remains a little weird (the stop-motion rock monsters and animated sequences and such) though is probably Aronofsky’s most approachable work. Biblical epics are very hard to bring to the screen without pandering to the religious folks who pay to see them, but Noah balances ideas of the Christian God with atheist philosophies extraordinarily well. I am not a religious person, so I greatly appreciate the filmmaker’s focus on the relevant themes of this story with a naturally questioning tone. For a non-believer, he tells this story with a lot of grace. I was left deeply pondering our impact and place on this world, which is the right effect Noah’s tale should have.

Edward Haynes

Follow on Twitter

Palo Alto is Overrated

Directed by Gia Coppola, this drifting, meandering, dull film has arguably drawn more praise than it deserves because of the legacy of the Coppola name. Adapted from James Franco’s series of short stories, Palo Alto attempts to weave the lives together of its leads into one coherent piece of storytelling, but ultimately fails. It’s also filled with unlikable characters, who are difficult to relate to and painfully irritating. This would not necessarily be an issue if Palo Alto offered any sort of meaningful insight into youth culture, but you don’t learn anything from this film that couldn’t have been picked up from MTV. One redeeming feature in the film is Emma Roberts’ performance as April, but this is ruined by weak dialogue and an uninspiring performance by James Franco acting alongside her. It’s shot beautifully; Gia’s style is reminiscent of Sofia Coppola’s. You can have all the great cinematography in the world, but it won’t save a film with a poor script.

Obvious Child is Underrated

Obvious Child is a film that takes a refreshingly personal and honest approach to abortion. This alone is reason enough for the film to be commended, but just as importantly, Obvious Child puts as much emphasis on being an entertaining, funny and enjoyable film as it does on conveying any political message. This has possibly led to the film receiving less attention come awards season than it might have gotten had it conveyed its pro-choice message more forcefully. Yet its subtlety and reluctance to judge others make it an evocative and poignant film. Obvious Child also deserves praise for creating easily some of the most likeable characters of the year in a romantic comedy. Jenny Slate is brilliant in this film, funny and intelligent, as is Jake Lacey in a role that refreshingly subverts the ‘man-child’ stereotype perpetrated by Judd Apatow films. The need for more sweet and heartfelt romantic comedies like this has never been more apparent considering the cynical phase the genre seems to be in at the moment.

Michael Nazarewycz

Follow on Twitter

Wild is Overrated

Inspired by actual events, Wild tells the story of Cheryl Strayed, a woman with a troubled past who, in an effort to find herself, embarks on a 1,000-mile hike on the Pacific Crest Trail. It’s important to note that anyone who pulls themselves out of the darkness of addiction is worthy of praise, but as backstories go, Strayed’s is not all that remarkable. There’s no lack of people who’ve partaken in self-destructive behavior after a personal tragedy, and director Jean-Marc Vallée does nothing to indicate why Strayed’s story is more deserving to be told than anyone else’s … other than that 1,000-mile hike, of course. As for that hike, Vallée may highlight Strayed’s physical challenges–water shortages, backpack weight, bad shoes, etc.–but it is only ever an exercise in list-making. The hike is presented less as a journey and more as a highlight reel of Strayed’s most memorable moments on the trail. With both past and present unremarkable, tying them together is almost impossible, and the result is a random collection of flashbacks shown during oft-unrelated moments along the linear hiking trail. Witherspoon may shine, but her commitment to character is only a distraction.

John Wick is Underrated

To say John Wick is “underrated” is to make something of a relative statement. The film has certainly received praise, but that praise has felt somewhat faint. “John Wick is a great movie … for what it is.” But “for what it is” should be a compliment, not a caveat. In a cinematic action landscape that is overcrowded with men in tights, John Wick, starring the sharply dressed and perfectly stoic Keanu Reeves, is part homage to the action films of the ’80s and part ballet of violence, with every scene meticulously choreographed, blocked, shot, and edited. The excellence of the technical execution is what makes the film work, and all credit belongs to Chad Stahelski and David Leitch. Between them, the first-time co-directors have over 150 stunt-related film credits. This experience gives them the understanding necessary to turn John Wick from just another shoot-em-up to something stylish in design, exhausting in execution, and incredibly satisfying in total. Awards season always brings a lament that comedies don’t get their due. Maybe it’s time to include action films to that list.

Nik Grozdanovic

Follow on Twitter

We Are The Best! is Overrated

Being derisive about Lukas Moodysson’s raucously titled We Are The Best! — currently standing at 97% on Rotten Tomatoes – might peg me as a self-loathing killjoy, but let me make something clear: I don’t hate it. The moments we spend with Bobo and Klara are filled with insatiable sweetness, which obviously touched a nerve (you’d have to be literally made of stone if you walked away feeling spiteful). But it’s nowhere near as good as critics make it out to be.

By placing it entirely in a 13-year-old world, the film is akin to spending an afternoon with 2 obnoxious pre-teenage girls who are screaming terrible lyrics in your ear and desperately seeking your attention. And it’s funny, because Bobo and Klara hate attention, but Moodysson’s complete imbalance of tone and stubborn insistence to keep the film’s rhythm strumming the same note for the full hour and 40 minutes is so desperate for it, the movie becomes an utterly disjointed experience. It’s as if the girls are directing him, which is fun for the first twenty or so minutes, but then it becomes a movie that feels like it’s directed by a 13-year-old. Yeah, I get it, THESE KIDS ARE SO CUTE, but that’s not enough to keep me interested in their impulsiveness and immaturity, regardless of how much your nauseating cinéma vérité in-your-face camera wants me to. Barkhammar, Grosin, and Liv LeMoyne are the best thing in it so Moodysson clearly knows how to create a freeing atmosphere on set. Too bad his direction smothers this freedom and, by unsubtly using a music genre only most adults can relate to, creates a manipulative and glaringly twee film, which is the complete opposite of punk, creating even more discord. But, yeah, they’re so adorable!

The Rover is Underrated

Premiering at Cannes, the follow-up to David Michôd’s critically acclaimed Animal Kingdom with Guy Pearce and a post-Twilight Robert Pattinson in central roles had most everyone smacking their lips in anticipation. However, the film’s anti-narrative approach to a story set in a post-apocalyptic Australian desert world, and the opaque development of Eric (Pearce) and Rey (Pattinson), left critics feeling, well, very critical. It currently stands at 65% on Rotten Tomatoes, but I’m convinced The Rover is headed toward years of re-evaluation with a more sober hindsight on its quiet, gripping, and poetic powers.

Let’s get the obvious out of the way; Pearce and Pattinson (yes, Pattinson) are both exceedingly intense, determined, and unwaveringly subtle in embodying their characters. The kind of performances commanded by quick looks and haunting stillness; they both add layers without speaking a word. Michôd’s bold approach (he must have realized he’d alienate so many people) to have almost no exposition and just let this one simple story (which he developed with Joel Edgerton) of a man wanting his car back in a financially fossilized and Godforsaken world speak for itself. It’s a sign of respect towards the fundamental rule of this craft; showing without telling, so being shot on 35mm film becomes even more symbolic. Natasha Braier’s cinematography also stands out thanks to the format, however, and the film’s colorful supporting characters all weigh in with their own individual ways. Not a perfect film by any stretch, but absolutely more worthy of praise than scorn.

While the summer’s biggest blockbuster Guardians of the Galaxy continues to woo audiences, the film divides our panel in our very first episode of the Way Too Indiecast. On the surface, this multi-million dollar budget comic book movie from Marvel seems anything but indie, but director James Gunn got his start in low-budget B-Movie productions. Which leads into our second topic, indie directors breaking into mainstream movies. We discuss how directors like Rian Johnson, Christopher Nolan, Darren Aronofsky, and others have handled the transition from small indie productions to major blockbuster franchises.

Topics

• R.I.P Robin Williams (1:50)
• Guardians of the Galaxy (7:50)
• Indie Directors Go Mainstream (21:25)

Please take a minute to subscribe to our podcast and leave us a review on iTunes. We appreciate the feedback. Also, feel free to leave us a comment below and share this with your friends!

Most people–hell, most comic book readers–have little to no knowledge of the Guardians of the Galaxy, a team of misfit, cosmic Marvel superheroes introduced in print in 1969. James Gunn, the director of Marvel Studios’ film adaptation of the D-list franchise, has a similar level of notoriety, with his work (Slither, Super) mostly only familiar to indie and indie-horror geeks. Why would Marvel take such a risk, dumping millions of dollars into producing a movie with minimal name recognition?

Well, let’s look at it from this angle: What if all of the scumbag bounty hunters, smugglers, and monstrous brutes from Star Wars got their own movie? What if you infused it with the attitudinal, irreverent humor from the first Iron Man movie, cranked up to 11? And what if you slapped on a bitchin’ ’70s soundtrack on top of it all, just for the hell of it? That’s Gunn’s film in a nutshell, and it’s totally awesome, off-the-wall, sci-fi fun. Marvel knew they had a gem on their hands, and with Guardians of the Galaxy they’ve unleashed on us a hell of a good time at the movies. And a talking tree. And a talking raccoon. And Chris Pratt’s abs.

Pratt plays Peter Quill, an earthling abducted as a child in the ’80s who now thieves, gets laid, and causes a general ruckus across the galaxy in his spaceship, the Milano (named after Gunn’s childhood crush, Alyssa Milano). We meet Quill (or Star-Lord, a self-appointed moniker he desperately hopes will catch on) in treasure-hunter mode, looking to loot a mysterious sphere from a tomb on a seemingly deserted, dusty alien planet. He navigates the rocky terrain with some clumsy of rocket shoes, a bug-like space mask, and his trusty Walkman, which cues Redbone’s “Come and Get Your Love”, the first of the film’s many retro-tastic tunes only Gunn has the cajones to blanket a multi-million dollar movie in. In an homage to Raiders of the Lost Ark, Quill steals the sphere, eludes laser-toting baddies, hops back into the Milano, where he’s startled by a drowsy one-night-stand he forgot spent the night. Whoops.

Quill bands together with all manner of galactic riffraff to protect the sphere from warmonger Ronan the Accuser, the film’s dark, creepy big-bad played by an imposing Lee Pace who has evil intentions of using the thing to destroy the planet Xandar. Quill’s band of outcasts are Gamora (Zoe Saldana), the green-skinned, badass daughter of Thanos, the biggest villain in the galaxy; Drax the Destroyer (hulking WWE alumni Dave Bautista), who’s hellbent on avenging the death of his family at the hands of Ronan; Rocket (Bradley Cooper), a genetically engineered talking Raccoon with a heavy-artillery fetish and a Joe Pesci temper, and his amiable tree-creature BFF, Groot (voiced by Vin Diesel).

Pratt is the absolute right man for the job, with the film’s subversive, witty material playing precisely to his strengths. Fans of his work in Parks and Recreation are guaranteed Guardians ticket-buyers, and they won’t be disappointed. Diesel and Cooper (with great help from the talented visual effects team) make Rocket and Groot an irresistibly lovable on-screen duo, and almost steal the show altogether. Bautista surprisingly hangs right in there with his more experienced cast mates, drawing just as many laughs with Drax’s lack of capacity for sarcasm and metaphor. Saldana often gets lost in the noise, as the other Guardians’ unique, colorful personalities make the more conventionally sketched Gomora feel a little stale.

Guardians is refreshingly detached from Marvel’s flood of Avengers movies (though it does technically exist in the same universe), offering up an edgier, funnier brand of superhero action. The film feels even more like Star Wars than J.J. Abrams’ 2009 Star Trek reboot did, delivering big-time adventure while being thoughtful enough to highlight the well-written core-character relationships above all else. The action is sufficiently epic and more brutal than any Marvel movie before, with even the good-natured Groot doling out heaping helpings of bone-crushing violence. (A scene in which the gentle giant pulverizes a group of hapless grunts mirrors Hulk smashing up Loki in Avengers, but gets an even bigger laugh.)

Gunn does a great job of preserving his wacky indie sensibilities and incorporating them seamlessly into a giant, crowd-pleasing blockbuster film, a feat that takes more finesse than his Troma-boy resume may lead you to believe he’s capable of. While it isn’t as out-there as Slither or Super, Guardians feels like a Gunn film through and through.

The film hits a few tonal stumbles along the way, with the heavier dramatic scenes between the core characters feeling slightly out of place. (A tortured existential outburst by Rocket feels the most awkward, though it’s effectively acted by Cooper and the animators.) The myriad supporting characters–Glenn Close as the leader of Nova Corps, Xandar’s police force; John C. Reilly as a Nova Corps officer; Benicio Del Toro, in a brief appearance as the Liberace-like Collector–are good fun, though they’re too great in number for any to make a lasting impression. Michael Rooker’s Yondu, Quill’s venomous abductor and adopted father figure, sticks out amongst the supporters with his wicked volitility.

Visually, Gunn and DP Ben Davis use every color of the rainbow to give Guardians a distinctive sci-fi look, with each detailed environment looking more imaginative than the last. This is an oddball movie that’s as funny as Galaxy Quest and as thrilling as any Marvel movie that’s come before, and it’s cause for excitement for the futures of both Marvel Studios and Gunn’s career.

Guardians of the Galaxy trailer