Rating: ★★★

From the hearty tales of the Emerald Isle comes this rom-com, Irish Wish. Directed by Janeen Damian, this cute in-flight to Ireland is an hour and thirty-three minutes of laughter and folklore wrapped in friendship and love.

Plot Overview

Irish Wish brings us Margaret "Maddie" Kelly, a role  brought to life by Lindsay Lohan. Maddie's life turns upside down when the man she secretly loves decides to marry her best friend. The plot thickens when she chooses to be the bridesmaid at the wedding, set in the quaint and picturesque towns of Ireland.

Cast & Characters

One of the film's strengths lies in its casting. Lindsay Lohan is perfect as Maddie Kelly, balancing comedy, and romance. Ed Speleers as James Thomas and Alexander Vlahos as Paul Kennedy engage in believable chemistry with Lohan. The supporting cast, including Ayesha Curry, Jane Seymour, and Elizabeth Tan, also deliver performances that enrich the story and satiate the audience.

Direction & Screenplay

Janeen Damian encapsulates the Irish charm and magically weaves it with a modern-day love story. Kirsten Hansen's writing is light-hearted, keeping the audience glued and entertained.

Critique

While the movie offers an engaging love triangle set amidst the lush Irish landscapes, it doesn't shy away from cliches often associated with the genre. Yes, it's filled with romantic tropes - but that's part of its charm. It's lovely seeing Lindsay Lohan on the big screen again, and the on-screen chemistry between Lohan, Speleers, and Vlahos makes it an enjoyable watch.

Conclusion

In the end, Irish Wish is an enjoyable romcom that beautifully explores an Irish wish. The belly-full of laughs combined with moments of tenderness justifies its 5.2 IMDb rating. It's not the best movie ever created, but it's certainly cute, funny and undeniably entertaining. This film feels like a warm cup of Irish coffee on a rainy day – familiar, yet pleasantly heartwarming.

Having seen a lot of movies that butchered the books that I love when it were adapted to film, I learned to lower my expectations. It is very rare that the movie is better than the film, in this case: The Fault in our Stars.

The film follows Hazel and Gus, played by today’s well-loved pair – Shailene Woodley and Ansel Elgort, as their relationship develops from their first meeting at a cancer support group until the time they set off on a surprising and exciting journey to Amsterdam.

Shailene Woodley is a force to reckon with. I can’t help but smile whenever I see her portray Hazel Grace as I envisioned her in the book. It was her quiet confidence, yet strong performance that glued all the pieces of the film together. I will look forward to seeing this girl become one of the most sought after actresses of this generation.

Ansel Elgort was all charm. Just the right ingredient to support Woodley’s character. Being a fan of the book, it was a dream cast specially seeing Peter Van Houten come to life thanks to Willem Dafoe. What can be felt in the book is the overflowing love of the characters to each other, the good news is this love is felt throughout the movie.

They gave justice to the most memorable scenes on the book,  the Anne Frank House, the restaurant where they had their first date, the “literal heart of Jesus” where the support group is held. It was a faithful depiction of what was in the book that I am sure the fans will love.

Overall, the film was worth a watch whether you have read the book or not. It is a breath of fresh air after watching all of the computer graphics heavy movies that are available in theaters.

The Showbook Rating : 4 out of 5 stars

“The Fault In Our Stars” opens June 5 in cinemas from 20^th Century Fox to be distributed by Warner Bros.

“What if you were stuck in a house with your friends as the world was ending outside?” says Seth Rogen, who, with his writing and directing partner Evan Goldberg, answers that question in the new comedy This Is The End.

In “This Is The End,” six friends – who just happen to be James Franco, Jonah Hill, Seth Rogen, Jay Baruchel, Danny McBride, and Craig Robinson – are trapped in Franco’s house as the end of the world begins outside. And we’re not talking about any old California-slides-into-the-ocean earthquake… we’re talking the fire-and-brimstone Apocalypse – the real Biblical deal.

Seth Rogen was successful in creating a film that I would love to watch over and over again. This film is peppered with cliché, crass humor, dick jokes which might make some moviegoers cringe. But even if you feel like you are watching a “stupid” film, the timing, the writing and how the funny elements was injected into the film was smartly positioned in such a way that once they hit the punchline, you’re in for a great laugh!

Yes, James Franco plays James Franco, Jonah Hill plays Jonah Hill, Seth Rogen plays Seth Rogen, and so on.  But of course, they’re not really playing themselves. “People think they know everything about you based on the characters you play,” says Rogen.  “So we thought it would be funny to play into that – to have these characters that behave in the way that everybody thinks is what we’re like off-screen.  There are elements of our real selves, but we all twisted them or exaggerated them to make it funny.”

Definitely a must-watch for those who would like to be entertained this weekend! Watch out for the end scene and the cameo appearances of Rihanna and Emma Watson.

The film got a lot of street credibility on Facebook, as memes and links about the Annabelle doll and  the movie flooded my Facebook Newsfeed. It maybe because of the typhoon Maring where a lot of us Filipinos are just at home waiting for the er- floods to subside, or is just curious about all the hype. So what’s our verdict?

“The Conjuring” is based on how world renowned paranormal investigators Ed and Lorraine Warren were called upon to help a family terrorized by a dark presence in a secluded farmhouse. 

Forced to confront a powerful demonic entity, the Warrens find themselves caught in the most horrifying case of their lives.

Plot

We see a lot of time and tested elements of a horror flick in this film. But the decision to veer away from the computer graphics and just use the good old horror trickery of whispers-here-door-creaking-there-then-the-massive-scare is quite effective. Although the tiny funny inserts were cute, James Wan was successful in delivering a good horror film that urged people to talk about it after watching the film.

The fear of the unknown, the use of everyday things in the film had a lasting effect. I see myself occasionally glance at my shoulder as I finish some stuff at 2am in the morning, and ensure that my feet is conveniently under the covers of my blanket for almost a week.

Casting

We see some horror film regulars such as Vera Farmiga (Orphan, Up in the Air) and Patrick Wilson (Insidious). The Perron kids breathe life in the film as they are the first ones who experienced the infestation and described what they seeing in crisp horrific detail. It was a smart cast. No time was wasted for bad acting in this film.

Cinematography

Weirdly one of the film’s strongest points. The small details mattered a lot in this film, from the wardrobe, the everyday items, the opening billboard, the film stayed true to its era that it will be confusing to say that the film is made on 2013. I’m sure the hipsters will love the little details.

The Verdict:

It was a good creepy film. Definitely something that should be watched on the big screen. Stop the torrents guys ;)

The Showbook rating: 4 out of 5 stars

"The Conjuring" has been rated R-13 by the MTRCB and is now in theatres.

I hate seeing the Wolfpack go.

It’s been two years.  Phil (Bradley Cooper), Stu (Ed Helms) and Doug (Justin Bartha) are happily living uneventful lives at home.  Tattoos have been lasered off, files purged.  The last they heard from disaster-magnet Leslie Chow (Ken Jeong), he’d been tossed into a Thai prison and, with him out of the way, the guys have very nearly recovered from their nights prowling the seamy side of Las Vegas in a roofie’d haze, and being kidnapped, shot at, and chased by drug-dealing mobsters in Bangkok.  The only member of the Wolfpack who’s not content is Alan (Zach Galifianakis).

Still lacking a sense of purpose, the group’s black sheep has ditched his meds and given into his natural impulses in a big way—which, for Alan, means no boundaries, no filters and no judgment—until a personal crisis forces him to finally seek the help he needs.And who better than his three best friends to make sure he takes the first step.This time, there’s no bachelor party.  No wedding.  What could possibly go wrong?   But when the Wolfpack hits the road, all bets are off. “The Hangover Part III” is the epic conclusion to an incomparable odyssey of mayhem and bad decisions, in which the guys must finish what they started by going back to where it all began: Las Vegas.

I am just ecstatic about this film is not seeing Chow again. The writer is very successful in making Chow such a hateable character that I almost want to walk out everytime I see his face (That would be a series of walkouts and walkbacks if that happens). Zach Galifianakis character has a certain charm to it, the plain cluelessness of his character and disgusting antics, although disgusting is still funny.

The third installment is quite different from the first 2 films. There was a seriousness to it making me think that the message that the movie is trying to send across is “Hey, we kind of matured a bit.”  Which is true with two of the main characters Phil and Stu. Reading through some of the reviews of The Hangover 3, I see that a lot of people hated it. Maybe it is the toning down of the story that did not win the hearts of the fans of the first two. While some like it. As for me, I missed the craziness of the first 2 movies that was quite lacking in the third one. Maybe it was the most logical development of the film as the two guys Phil and Stu kind of lead family man lives, but looking at it into another angle I hope that the writers sustained the level of crazy that the old ones have.

In conclusion, The Hangover 3 is still great comedy that I would recommend to those who are looking for a great laugh. Don’t forget to see the clip after the credits.

The Showbook Rating: 3 out of 5 stars

The Showbook Rating 3/5 stars

“I beg permission to mention by name only four people who have given me the most affection, appreciation, encouragement, and constant collaboration. The first of the four is a film editor, the second is a scriptwriter, the third is the mother of my daughter Pat [Patricia Hitchcock], and the fourth is as fine a cook as ever performed miracles in a domestic kitchen. And their names are Alma Reville.”

-- Alfred Hitchcock

For some who may be itching to see a film about how marvelous and intriguing Alfred Hitchcock is, better look somewhere else. For this film is all about the softer side of the great director – particularly the heartaches, the inner side – the complex love story of Alma Reville and Alfred Hitchcock.

The film lets us in the process of making the spine-tingling 1960 thriller – PSYCHO, before it became the director’s most controversial and legendary film. A movie that according to this story, was a labor of love of husband and wife Alfred and Alma Hitchcock.

Anthony Hopkins lets us in to another spectacular performance as Alfred Hitchcock. In a time where the ingredients to get an Oscar is to lose weight, gain weight, change your voice, it was quite a surprise that Mr. Hopkins did not get an Oscar nod this year. Having watched some of the entries, I believe that he should at least be part of the nominees. I do not know much about Alma Reville to say that Helen Mirren did a good job in the film, but in a rather weird way, she was able to show that she is the star of the show, that Alfred Hitchcock is who he is because of her.

Great actors, great concept, however I felt that there is not much room to become stellar in the material that was presented. I felt that the dilemmas presented are quite shallow and the building up is not sufficient. There are also some scenes that puts Hitchcock in a rather unfavorable light, which was a little disappointing. Even the dilemmas that Alma Reville goes through, it felt like some scenes have to be stretched out just to make something out of the characters.

Ultimately, what resonates in the film is the genuine love of Alma and Alfred Hitchcock for each other. You watch the film because of Anthony Hopkins and Helen Mirren. The banter between the two was fun, the chemistry is spot on, and the acting, superb. It won’t hurt to watch PSYCHO too, to know why this film mattered.

One thing that I hate about some Academy nominated films is that you go out of the movie theatre, feeling that you’ve been preached, or with a heavy heart due to the complexities of the story and the problems of the character, or just plain dumbfounded because you failed to understand a thing about the movie you just watched. This is somehow the feeling that I am expecting to have before I watched “The Descendants” but I was completely mistaken.

The Descendants is a story about family with George Clooney’s character, Matt King, in the center. Matt King is  a privileged Honolulu attorney who is tasked to be the trustee of their families inherited properties. His character is a “hapa-haole” or half-white. His great-great-grandmother was Princess Margaret Ke’alohilani, one of the last direct descendants of King Kamehameha, who fell in love with her haole (Hawaiian for white or foreign) banker, Edward King, leading to Matt’s current life as a Honolulu lawyer with deep, tangled roots in the islands.

But his rich roots didn’t help at all in being a good husband and father to his family. Instead, he became an “understudy” father and a non-existent husband. But after his wife went into a coma after a boating accident, he is compelled to reevaluate his marriage and life. His mischievous daughters don’t trust him, his imperiled wife has been cheating on him and his broke cousins see him and the land trust he controls as a piggy bank. To add insult to injury, he’s surrounded by a lush, fertile, awe-inspiring landscape that defies his inner turmoil.

The Descendants made me laugh and cry at the same time. George Clooney may be great in the film, but the real rockstars are the writers: Jim Rash, Nat Faxon and Alexander Payne. The movie was a complete irony that worked. A film that may seem to be serious but was full of comedy, a complex storyline and drama. Even the setting speaks a ton that you are not seeing an ordinary movie.

The characters are colorful in their own ways. George Clooney's performance was heartfelt. I must say that this is a stripped down Clooney. Out of the snazzy costumes and portraying a disgruntled father, this is his performance that I liked best so far.

I particularly loved Nick Krause’ character "Sid”. He stole the scene in almost all those times where he opens his mouth. The banter between him and Clooney was just funny. Amanda Miller’s character “Scottie King” may be a little bit shocking but this kid did not cringe a bit in those scenes.

Great ensemble with a moving story. This is one film that proves that you don’t need monster special effects to produce a great film. Hoping to see more of Alexander Payne’s work.

Rating: 4 stars

“The Descendants” opens February 15 in theaters from 20^th Century Fox to be distributed by Warner Bros.

Alvin, Simon, Theodore and the Chipettes are back in Alvin and the Chipmunks: Chipwrecked.  Due to their rowdiness, the chipmunks wreak havoc – to themselves. They accidentally got shipwrecked after a huge accident in the cruise. They are marooned in the island of Scilly, where they met a castaway who are about to turn things around.

I was quite hesitant to watch this sequel because I was not able to watch the first and the second one. Although I’m quite familiar with the Chipettes, I thought there will be some plot  points that will not be clear to me. But after watching this film, I found out that the sequel can stand on its own. There was a little introduction about the Chipettes that would make those who were not able to watch the first movie still catch up.

Although it may not be at the same caliber as that of other well loved animated/semi-animated films, it was still able to entertain. There are just silly characters that I hope the producers would bury 10 feet under a dark, murky grave because they are just not necessary in the film. Some of the humor worked, some are just plain corny and creepy. I don’t think putting a psychologically disturbed castaway and a guy who will not take off his chicken suit would teach the kids any lesson at all.

Putting those two characters aside, I felt that Dave, Alvin, the Chipmunks and the Chipettes are better off without any annoying supporting actors. Watching the chipmunks stylize the island is just fun, and their humor worked for me. I must say that Theodore is one ball of cuteness all throughout the movie, well, all of the ‘munks did anyway.

In true blue ‘munk fashion, there are contemporary song and dance numbers that are cute and funny. They used some famous pop hits…and old ones. I personally loved Funky Town and Bad Romance.

Ultimately, you watch this film with the kids. This movie do not have any ambitions to bag an award or to amaze you with a smart plot, rather it is there to celebrate the well loved characters we all know as Alvin, Simon and Theodore. Maybe you can have space in your heart for the Chipettes too. :)

Rating: 2 spotlights

“Alvin and the Chipmunks: Chipwrecked” opens January 8 from 20^th Century Fox to be distributed by Warner Bros. nationwide.

A Game of Shadows may not be as entertaining as the first Holmes movie, but with Robert Downey Jr. as the famous detective alongside Stephen Fry, Rachel McAdams, Noomi Rapace and Jude Law, what can go wrong?

Guy Ritchie adapted some tested “tricks” he used from the first film and improved it on this one. Like how Holmes dissects/narrates his plan of attack to the audience before he does it, the interesting camera angles which highlights the fight scenes, and of course the dry humor.

Visually, I must say that Guy Ritchie has a keen eye to detail. I love how this period was depicted in the film, as seen in the furniture, the costumes, and the setting. There was this scene where a common fight sequence was, in my own terms, beautiful due to the use of interesting angles. Its the first time that I have seen such artistry in a somewhat common scene we see in action movies.

Alas, I felt that his attention to detail was a letdown in the numerous sequences of the movie. For a fast-paced movie, 2 hours felt like 3 hours. Although it was necessary in the film, the do-now-explain-later scenes where Holmes explains his strategy is a little overused. I would appreciate it if Ritchie lets his audience think instead of providing the explanations…all the time. It felt that it sucked out the mystery out of a mystery movie.

However, the witty banter of Robert Downey Jr. and Jude Law saves the rather stretched and “spoiled” parts of the storyline. It was clear that Ritchie is showering “bromance” all over the place. Even though there are weak parts, it is still filled with witty dialogue and must-hear dry humor. Some are courtesy of Fry of course.

Overall, you will watch it because you need to watch how Robert Downey Jr. gives life to Sherlock Holmes, how Jude Law transforms into Dr. Watson and definitely the awesome fight scenes. Just have the mindset that you have to be in “thinking mode” when you watch this movie. Spoiler: Great wit in the ending.

The Showbook Rating: 3.5

Parental Advisory: There are a lot of fight scenes that might be too much for 12 year old below kids.