Movie Podcast Weekly Ep. 132: Furious 7 (2015) and Get Hard (2015) and Wild Card (2015)

Episode 132

Hi, and welcome to Episode 132 of Movie Podcast Weekly. In this show, your usual hosts welcome special guest Willis Wheeler to help them review Furious 7. We also bring you Feature Reviews of Get Hard and Wild Card. Andy also tells us the harrowing tale of how he nearly got in a physical altercation after his screening! Don’t miss it!

If you’re new to our show… Movie Podcast Weekly typically features three hosts — Jason, Andy and Karl — along with frequent guests. We give you our verdicts on at least one new movie release from the current year that’s currently playing in theaters, as well as several mini reviews of whatever we’ve been watching lately. And we usually provide specialized genre recommendations. New episodes release every single Tuesday.


SHOW NOTES:

I. Introduction
— Welcome special guest Willis Wheeler


[ 0:02:34 ] II. Mini Reviews and Miscellany
Andy: Story of conflict from Andy’s screening of Get Hard
Karl: “Handel on the Law” show
Andy: Whiplash
Willis Wheeler: iZombie (TV series), Mad Max, Silent Rage, Wrestlemania XXXI
Jason: The Village, Signs
Andy: Streaming: Girl Most Likely, Scoop, Airplane!, Welcome to the Jungle (2013), November Man, The Double (2011), The Double (2013), Foxcatcher, Tusk, The Imitation Game


III. What’s New in Theaters This Past Weekend
Furious 7
Woman in Gold
5 to 7
Lambert & Stamp
Effie Gray


FEATURE REVIEWS HAVE TIME STAMPS:

[ 1:03:04 ] IV. Feature Review: FURIOUS 7 (2015)
Jason = 7.5 ( Theater / Buy it! )
Karl = 9 ( IMAX Theater / Buy it! )
Willis Wheeler = 8 ( Theater / Buy it! )


[ 1:21:32 ] V. Feature Review: GET HARD (2015)
Andy = 4.5 ( Avoid )


[ 1:29:17 ] VI. Feature Review: WILD CARD (2015)
Jason = 7.5 ( Strong Rental )


[ 1:35:58 ] VII. Specialty Segments:

ANDY’S UNSEEMLY HOMEWORK:
Southern Comfort (1981)
Andy = 5.5 ( Rental )
Jason = 5.5 ( Rental )


VIII. Wrap-Up / Plugs / Ending


COMING UP ON MPW NEXT WEEK:
Episode 133 when we’ll be reviewing “Son of a Gun” and either “Woman in Gold” or “Danny Collins” or “The Longest Ride.”


LINKS FOR THIS EPISODE:

Willis’s links:
Two-Drink Commentaries
NFW Commentaries Podcast
The Wild Man’s YouTube Channel
Willis Wheeler on TV’s Toy Hunter
Terror Troop horror podcast
Cinema Beef Podcast
Willis on Twitter: @NastyWillDC
Willis on Facebook

Jason highly recommends trying out Mattroid and William Rowan Jr.’s new, must-listen show — The SciFi Podcast

Provo Film Society on Facebook
Provo Film Society on Twitter

Jason recommends supporting: Operation Underground Railroad

Contact MPW:
E-mail us: MoviePodcastWeekly@gmail.com.
Leave us a voicemail: (801) 382-8789.
Follow MPW on Twitter: @MovieCastWeekly
Leave a comment in the show notes for this episode.

Listen to MPW:
Add MPW to your Stitcher playlist: Stitcher.com
MPW on iTunes
MPW’s RSS feed
Right-click to download the MPW 100 Rap

Keep up with Josh:
Twitter: @IcarusArts
Josh covers streaming movies on: Movie Stream Cast

If you’re a Horror fan, listen to Jason and Josh on HORROR MOVIE PODCAST

We’d like to thank The Dave Eaton Element and Dave himself for the use of his music for our theme song. Buy Dave’s Eaton’s music: BandCamp.com


If you like Movie Podcast Weekly, please subscribe and leave us a review in iTunes. If you want to support the show, we have PayPal buttons in our right-hand sidebar where you can make a one-time donation or you can become a recurring donor for just $2 per month. (Every little bit helps!)

Thanks for listening, and join us again next Tuesday for Movie Podcast Weekly.


49 thoughts on “Movie Podcast Weekly Ep. 132: Furious 7 (2015) and Get Hard (2015) and Wild Card (2015)

  1. @Jay – If you’re looking for a good Jason Statham film, check out THE MECHANIC (2011) >> http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0472399/

    It’s my favorite of his movies. I don’t think it’ll blow your socks off, but it’s a really solid crime/action movie with some heart. It’s been a few years since I’ve seen it, but I would probably give it a 7.5/10. Worth noting that it’s a remake of a 1972 Charles Bronson film by the same name, which I have not seen.

    Btw, nice job with the on-time release. I’ve noticed you definitely stepping up your game the last week or so… hopefully you’re fully recovered from the F13 franchise coverage.

    • Sorry bro, but Jason Statham’s best action film to date is THE TRANSPORTER. The Mechanic is pretty solid and I’d probably score it the same as you, Dino. Ben Foster is awesome in The Mechanic though. I’ve always though he’s a very underrated actor. His work in the 3:10 to Yuma remake was incredible. Anyway, Jason Statham’s best overall movie is Snatch. Can we at least agree on that, Dino? Haha.

      By the way guys, there is no way that Jason Statham would go down with one of The Rock’s punches. Don’t get me wrong, The Rock’s a scary dude, but Jason Statham is a pretty tough son-of-a-gun. He’s a trained martial artist and even though he may not be on the level of the greats, I think the dude can do some heavy damage. I was actually pretty bummed out that he didn’t get enough screen time. ****SPOILER ALERT**** I hope that this is not the end for him and that he returns for vengeance in the future ****END OF SPOILER**** A much bigger crime than that though was that Paul Walker (may he rest in peace) was somehow able to stand toe to toe against one of the greatest martial artists of our time, Tony Jaa. That was just by far the most ridiculous thing in the entire movie. And if you’re not familiar with what Tony Jaa is capable of, I suggest that you watch ONG BAK and THE PROTECTOR. The guy is a beast. Anyway, I do have a few other complaints, but those are the two major ones in my list. All in all, FURIOUS 7 wasn’t too bad. It’s more like a 7 for me.

      • @Juan – Confession time: I’ve never seen any of THE TRANSPORTER films, so they have no bearing on my “favorite Jason Statham film” comment. And, SNATCH is good, but it’s not really what I would consider a “Jason Statham movie,” know what I mean? But, yes, probably the best overall movie in his filmography.

        You’re absolutely right about Ben Foster in THE MECHANIC, though. He was awesome.

        • Well, that needs to be corrected soon, son! The Transporter was the modern action movie (modern at the time) that reignited my love for the action genre and made me take notice of who this Jason Statham character was. I think you’ll really enjoy it. The Transporter is a classic in my book and I’d say it’s a 9.5.

          • I want to watch Homefront just to see Jason Statham beat the crap out of James Franco!

  2. I saw “The Mechanic,” but I’m not really behind it as much as Dino is: http://bit.ly/1CVa8wZ

    Apparently there’s a sequel coming out next year, though, so what do I know? :-)

    Remember back in the day when Jay used to be a ballbreaker about everyone keeping their mini-reviews to one or two per episode? I think Andy may have set the MPW record for most mini-reviews in a single episode with this one. He might have set the record for most total mini-reviews (by all contributors combined) in a single episode.

    I’m intensely curious now to know what Jay and Karl could possibly have hated so much about “Fast & Furious 6” that isn’t also a problem with “Furious 7.” I may even have to eventually see “6” and “7” just to compare notes. I thought the original was decent, “2 Fast 2 Furious” was corny and kinda boring (the title is almost better than the rest of the movie), and never saw “Tokyo Drift” or “Fast & Furious” (No. 4). I had a “Jay and Karl watching ‘Fast & Furious 6’ ” experience with “Fast Five,” for whatever that’s worth: http://bit.ly/1a5O9cA

    Also, I have to give a back-catalog shout out to Jay’s review of “Bad Milo” in Ep. 55. You almost killed me, sir. I was at the tail end of a long run, and my throat was pretty dry. Jay’s rage against the machine (so to speak) kept making me laugh, and then I would start to wheeze and choke. It’s a very enjoyable review, especially with Josh repeatedly trying to soften the edge of Jay’s wrath. Wolfman, you need to go back and relisten to that exchange, and then cut Jay a huge break the next time you feel like *he’s* trying to put words in *your* mouth by explaining to the listeners what you really mean about something you just said. :-)

      • :-) Setting aside “The Mechanic” and its many other (for me) problems, I find that I don’t have a whole lot of patience for hit man (or woman) characters in general. Most movies never even address what, to me, would be the baseline requirement for the job of being, essentially, a high-functioning sociopath. I think most actual hit men would function very much along the lines of Michael Shannon in “The Iceman.” What the countless action movies like “The Mechanic” insist on, is something entirely different. Arthur Bishop is a mentally and emotionally stable smooth operator, an inscrutable badass who takes no more notice of what he does for a living than if he drove a garbage truck. He’s got money, enjoys the comforts of life, and the entire effect of killing people repeatedly is that he occasionally grimaces a little over drinks at the bar, or maybe has a hard time concentrating during sex. And that’s not the exception: It’s the template. I’d bet that for every one “The Iceman,” there are several dozen of “The Mechanic.”

        • That’s a fair point, and a theme that’s running rampant throughout modern action films in general. These movies are definitely set in some bizarre alternate universe.

          Going back to THE MECHANIC, I think it’s important to add the qualifier that it’s a Jason Statham movie… so, expectations be lowered.

          • Point taken. Though even for a Jason Statham movie, I still feel like “The Mechanic” is a special kind of bad.

    • Cody,
      I have to make a very important correction here… I was not the ballbreaker about the number of Mini Reviews… It is always Karl.

      Anytime you ever sense a concern over time or length or the amount of coverage, Karl is always behind that.

      There’s something about the 2-hour mark — listen for it. Once we start exceeding 2 hours, Karl immediately starts getting very crabby.

      I recall one episode on the CTS Podcast (it was our Extreme Cinema show) when the three of us were all in the same room together at Karl’s house. And I remember that as we exceeded the 2.5-hour mark and approached 3 hours, Karl was actually making me nervous!

      Indeed, Karl is the one who recommended that we implement the 2 Mini Review rule on MPW, which Andy ignores because he doesn’t say much about each film, anyway.

      You can pin many unsavory things on me, rightfully so, but please don’t lay this thing to my charge… I’m the last person to restrict movie reviews… My pet peeve is having restrictions (especially on time length) for movie podcasting.

      Much love,
      J

      • Sorry, Jay, I promise to never again put the hammer in your hand when it is actually Karl who is cracking down. :-) I always love to hear behind-the-scenes details like this. It’s obvious that the Irishman has a temper, but I’d never have suspected that running time was one of his triggers. I’ve listened to every episode of the show now, and never picked up on the crankiness that you’re describing. Although I guess he does register a somewhat subtle complaint in the just-referenced Ep. 55 when he busts out the fake snoring in the middle of your mini-review of “Jug Face.” (A genuinely funny interruption that in no way detracts from your genuinely intriguing review. Sounds like my kind of horror film.)

      • So I guess you could say that Karl is like the Hitler of MPW.

        He likes things to run on time.

        • And I hope to god Karl doesn’t take offence to that. I just couldn’t think of anyone else as obsessed with punctuality as Karl aside from Hitler.

          I wasn’t implying that Karl is responsible for genocide.

          Boy I feel like I’m digging a hole here.

  3. I thought the comedy movie “Welcome to the Jungle” was a racist fish-out-water tail about Tim Allen being an asshole to his son who was raised in a jungle.

  4. By the way, if you guys are taking suggestions for next week’s reviews, then please try to catch Ex Machina. It looks really good and it’s a sci-fi, so maybe Karl could take the lead on that. Anyway, just a suggestion.

    • You’ve got it, Juan. Thanks for the request! (We love getting requests for things you want us to cover — especially new stuff.) If I can find “Ex Machina” this weekend, I’ll review it.
      J

  5. And a 10/10 for “Signs”!? Even with it’s tapestry of bland, cliché moments and that terrible ending?

    “The Sixth Sense” and “Unbreakable” are far superior movies in my (outspoken and ignorant) opinion

    • I think, objectively, I agree with you, although I remember “enjoying” SIGNS the most. I guess it’s just more my kind of movie.

    • David,
      I’ll suspend my rage (ha ha) to hear your thoughts on “The Village.” Tell it. What’s your verdict of my all-time favorite film?
      J

      • “The Village” is an odd one for me, Jay. I still prefer “The Sixth Sense” and “Unbreakable”; the denouement of both of those movies feels way more organic and satisfying to me. “The Village” is getting close to the point where Shyamalan started to transform from a filmmaker who was remarkably deft with a twist ending into a filmmaker for whom the twist had become a clumsy obligation. The twist in “The Village” is actually pretty good but I can’t say that I love the way the reveal is handled. I do very much love the atmosphere and setting of the movie though and I feel like the film as a whole is pretty unfairly underrated due mostly to the subsequent Shyamalan backlash. I think it fares better than “Signs” and any of his later films because his penchant for somewhat unnatural and “scripty” dialogue (a weakness that by this point had really begun to show) actually works brilliantly in the context of the setting. It makes sense that these characters would talk the way they do. The same can’t be said for something like “The Happening”.

        So while I don’t share your total adoration for “The Village” I do think there’s definitely more good than bad in it. I can’t remember if I’ve rated it in the past but I’d say It’s probably a 6.5/10 for me. Don’t get too mad though, I am pretty harsh with ratings.

  6. Andy seems like a nice guy, but…he is so incredibly wrong so often.

    Get Hard did not reinforce stereotypes, it made jokes about them.

    It is crude, but there is a difference between racist jokes and jokes about racism, just as there are jokes about homophobia and jokes that are actually homophobic. The difference really does matter.

    The film is very crude.

    And as far as character development goes, the scene where Darnell challenges James to use the N word, he can’t do it. I’m not going to say that their shift into friendship was well done or anything like that, but it was there. It was simply gradual and didn’t have to be spelled out.

    It was a silly movie that did it’s job. If you laugh at anything in the trailer, you’ll probably enjoy the watch. My intelligent wife, who happens to be Mexican and works for the County Attorney’s office (not on the Dark Side, as she would put it), thought this film was hilarious. Her GPA is high and she’s no fool.

    She laughed a lot, and I laughed like an idiot, especially when Darnell’s wife wanted him to explain how he ended up in prison (which he didn’t) and he used Boys in the Hood as his own story. And dumb white James didn’t know what he was talking about…but this dumb white guy knew what he was talking about. Oh yeah.

    “Murder’s my favorite!”

    • P.S. The flick was a 6.5. It simply did it’s job for us, as advertised.

      Willis, you’re a gentleman and a scholar. Carl, you didn’t talk enough this time. Also, I miss Josh.

      Jay, you’re my favorite podcaster and I love you. Have I told you that lately?

      • This podcast is still excellent and always entertaining but I must admit I also miss Josh a bit. I love the dynamic of podcasts that feature both Josh and Jay. Their disagreements always seem to catalyse into really great discussion.

      • Wow, Levi… Thank you. I just always assume I’m everyone’s LEAST favorite, but you all kindly tolerate me because I produce the show… ha ha.

        Karl was too quiet. Brooding, almost.

        And just last night, I practically begged Josh to return to MPW … unfortunately, I did it at the end of a 4-hour recording session for HMP, so … not the best strategy…

        • @Jay – Haha… timing, man. Timing. Come on!

          I’m just glad to hear Josh is ok. A few of us have been worried by his 4 or 5 day hiatus from the comments.

  7. Hey guys…was kinda shocked when I saw the review for Southern Comfort…to tell you the truth I forgot about it since it was so long ago that I suggested it…but there it was…kudos to you to following up…this is why you guys are the best!!!

  8. Jason, why is my earlier comment awaiting moderation? Am I on some sort of WordPress watchlist?

    • Sorry, Cody. I approved it. If you include links, it makes me approve them first. I try to watch for that, so I’m very sorry for the delay, Sir. It’s posted now.
      J

  9. It’s time for more pathetically pedantic commentary from David:

    Jay! how on earth did you fail to mention “The Warriors” when running through other films that Walter Hill has made? That’s a huge oversight especially considering both “The Warriors” and “Southern Comfort” have very similar premises; ragtag gang of misfits hunted through hostile territory.

    Also I’m still not entirely sure what Andy’s basis for classifying movies as “unseemly” is. It’s likely that my confusion is down to my lack of proper education but I don’t see “unseemly” as being synonymous with “obscure”. I guess the two concepts could be related in as much as something might become obscure due to the lack of appeal generated by its unseemliness. But surely a film not being particularly well known (like “Southern Comfort”) isn’t automatically due to an apparent tastelessness or lack of propriety.

    • David,
      You’ve got us on both points. It was an epic failure to not mention “The Warriors.” Thanks for calling me out on that. I deserve the scorn…

      And you’re absolutely right: Andy has played awfully fast and loose with his classification of “unseemly.” I agree with you 100 percent.

      Thanks for keeping us honest.
      J

      • There’s no scorn here, Jay. Just jumped-up pedantry and too much caffeine.

        And just to clarify; I’m not actively criticising Andy’s segment (I actually love it and very much appreciate the effort he puts in to always get his homework done) I just always find myself scratching my head when it comes to the definition of the term “unseemly”.

        • Maybe it’s the notion of homework itself that is unseemly, rather than the topic/content.

          I don’t know. It’s a great segment, nonetheless.

        • A lot of the discussion of Andy’s segment suggests that most people think of “unseemly” as meaning either “grotesque” or “awful.” The actual definition of the word, however, is much milder and more open-ended: “not in keeping with established standards of taste or proper form.” Those are some fairly broad parameters, and I can’t think of any particular film Andy has done for his homework that doesn’t fit them, one way or another.

          • Not so much “grotesque” or “awful” but it’s a word that I only ever seem to have heard/read in the context of something kind of obscene or lewd or explicit. You are right that the definition could be perceived as being a broad set of parameters though, Cody.

          • I don’t even think about what to recommend to Andy, I just pick something that I’d like to champion that I think he’d like. Is that seemly of me? Or just unseemly? :/

  10. Jay, after going back to listen to episode 55, I have a big bone to pick with you about a little movie called “Triangle”. But if I’m to correct you in front of the interwebz on that most erroneous review, I’ll need to pick my words carefully. Be afraid, be very afraid.

    • I’m starting to think that they should rename this show “Movie Podcast Sometimes”.

        • Instead of making HMP a weekly podcast, he should’ve made MPW a bi-weekly podcast. Oh Jay!

Comments are closed.