Bryan Caron's Blog, page 8
February 24, 2019
Chaos Movie Awards 2019
The 91st Academy Awards air tonight, and if there’s one thing this crop of nominees doesn’t have over previous telecasts is a clear Favourite. While trying to stay away from controversy, they drop there their host faster than a Black Panther attacking its prey, and wind up with more questions than a Blackkklansman. Trying to Bohemian Rhapsody their way out, they come off like power-hungry Vices, treating their viewers like Roma. At least they didn’t go as far as creating their own Green Book of categories that may or may not be televised. For most viewers, this year’s telecast isn’t about whether A Star Is Born, it’s finding out how insane the telecast will end up.
In other words, with all of the madness that surrounded the Oscar telecast this year, it’s hard to know who will come out as winners, but, as usual, I’m going to give it a shot, along with giving out a few special categories I created myself to highlight those moments in film that otherwise got overlooked.
Best Picture (Nominees – Black Panther, Blackkklansman, Bohemian Rhapsody, The Favourite, Green Book, Roma, A Star Is Born, Vice)
[image error]The Favourite
Who Will Win: The Favourite
This is probably one of the closest races we’ll see at the Oscars this year, though there are a couple of films that seem to have the edge over the others. Black Panther was chosen to satisfy the masses; Bohemian Rhapsody, Green Book and A Star Is Born are there to fill in the gaps; and Vice and Blackkklansman have more to do with their directors than the actual films. Which leaves us with The Favourite and Roma. I believe it’ll come down to the wire, and though many pundits are saying Roma will take the top prize, I’m putting my money behind The Favourite to edge out a victory over the film no one saw.
Who Should Win: A Star Is Born
Wait. Hasn’t that film already won… something? And what about Black Panther. It was in my top ten list? Well, though Panther was entertaining, it didn’t quite have what it takes to be awarded the top honor, not in the way A Star Is Born, which was deftly handled by first-time director Bradley Cooper. Everything from the cinematography to the music and proving Lady Gaga is more than a bag of tricks, Cooper brought new life to a story that’s been told several times and infused it with plenty of heart and emotional gravitas worthy of a new generation.
Best Actor (Nominees – Christian Bale, Bradley Cooper, Willem Dafoe, Rami Malek, Viggo Mortenson)
[image error]Willem Dafoe in At Eternity’s Gate
Who Will and Should Win: Willem Dafoe
As per usual, there is a crop of terrific actors competing for the top acting prize this year. However, there’s only one in my mind that deserves the honor, and that’s Willem Dafoe. Christian Bale was terrific as Vice President Cheney, but it always felt as if he was more interested in the appearance than in getting to the heart of what actually made this man tick. Bradley Cooper and Viggo Mortenson were really good, but not quite good enough; and Rami Malek embodied Freddie Mercury with heart, but not enough soul. That leaves Dafoe, and though I never saw At Eternity’s Gate, based on his resume, I have no doubt that he painted one glorious performance.
Best Actress (Nominees – Yalitza Aparicio, Glenn Close, Olivia Colman, Lady Gaga, Melissa McCarthy)
Glenn Close in The WifeWho Will and Should Win: Glenn Close
I only saw two of the films from this crop of nominees, which limits my ability to truly know who’s deserving of the top prize. Of the two I did see, Lady Gaga is good, but not ready to earn this type of praise, and I’m not sure I get Olivia Colman (British humor, you know). I’ve seen Melissa McCarthy in other dramatic fare and thought her quite capable, but not sure how her performance this time around equates; and though it’s great that a young actress jumps into the race with her first performance, Yalitza Aparicio has plenty of time to build on that for the future. So, I’m going to say, much like Dafoe, this year Glenn Close finally gets her due.
Best Supporting Actor (Nominees – Mahershala Ali, Adam Driver, Sam Elliott, Richard E. Grant, Sam Rockwell)
[image error]Mahershala Ali in Green Book
Who Will and Should Win: Mahershala Ali
The field is wide open on this one. Sam Rockwell brought just enough humanization to his performance as former president George H.W. Bush, but he’s nowhere as good as he was in Three Billboards Outside Ebbing, Missouri (for which he won this prize last year). I’ve never been a big fan of Adam Driver, so not sure why he’s here, and Sam Elliott and Richard E. Grant seem like old standby’s. That leaves Mahershala Ali, who brought a tenderness to his role as a musician attempting to find peace within himself as he brought peace to a racist south.
Best Supporting Actress (Nominees – Amy Adams, Marina de Tavira, Regina King, Emma Stone, Rachel Weisz)
[image error]Regina King in If Beale Street Could Talk
Who Will Win: Regina King
I think I’ll have to defer to the pundits on this one. I’ve got nothing really bad to say about any of these choices. Rachel Weisz and Emma Stone may end up splitting the vote allowing someone else to claim the prize, while Amy Adams again felt more impersonator than true character. I never saw the other two, so Regina King gets the nod.
Who Should Win: Rachel Weisz
Of the performances I did see, Rachel Weisz was the best suited for the role she played. She brought a fiery, yet damaged nuance to her role in The Favourite, and compared to Stone (who went a little too over the top for my linking), Weisz found a way to balance the dark humor with the dramatic prose, lifting the film above the absurd nonsense that littered the film and grounding it enough to sit through.
Best Director (Nominees – Spike Lee, Powet Pawlikowski, Yorgos Lanthimos, Alfonso Cuarón, Adam McKay)
[image error]Alfonso Cuarón on the set of Roma
Who Will and Should Win: Alfonso Cuarón
To be honest, I didn’t care for either of the films I saw in this category. Adam McKay injected Vice with way too much of his own personal bias to put any respect into his work, and I couldn’t make heads or tales of Yorgos Lanthimos’s The Favourite. Powet Pawlikowski’s film, Cold War, is probably too small to see any traction, and Spike Lee… well… That leaves Alfonso Cuarón to take home the top prize for Roma, a film I’ve heard is beautiful to watch with its majestic cinematography, acting and story. Just watch out for the pace, which, if reports are correct, may just put you to sleep.
Best Animated Feature (Nominees – Incredibles 2, The Isle of Dogs, Mirai, Ralph Breaks the Internet, Spider-Man: Into the Spider-Verse)
[image error]Spider-Man: Into the Speider-Verse
Who Will Win: Spider-Man: Into the Spider-Verse
I can understand why Spider-Man: Into the Spider-Verse will win the top prize. It has some terrific animation, a solid script, some great voice work and wears its emotions on its sleeve. It felt extremely original, and didn’t try to cater to anyone’s preconceptions. All-in-all, a very good film.
Who Should Win: Incredibles 2
The main problem I had with Spider-Man was that it didn’t give us enough of the multi-verse, introducing us to a couple of versions of the character that were sorely wasted. Had they spent a little more time developing and integrating them into the plot, I would agree it deserved the top spot. That’s why I think Incredibles 2 should win. Yes, it took the first film’s plot and reversed roles, but it also introduced us to a brand new hero that was magnetic on screen, brought new elements to the film that were fun and exciting, and continued developing the characters into a team of superheroes that are worth watching again and again.
Avenger: Infinity WarBest Ensemble: Avengers: Infinity War
When Marvel came up with the idea to put together a series of films that would all inter-connect, eventually bringing together heroes from different films to form The Avengers, it may have seemed impossible, to say the least. However, every choice producer Kevin Feige has made has been on point, creating a slew of solo films that feel unique, but developing them in a way that keeps everything grounded in the same universe. Avengers: Infinity War is a testament to that development, as the prospect of bringing together several dozens of superheroes couldn’t have been easy. But directors Anthony and Joe Russo were more than up to the challenge of finding a way to make the film unique while not sidelining any of the big name actors that come along with it. The entire cast was game for whatever was thrown at them and it never felt like any one actor, no matter how important they think they are, was trying to overshadow anyone else. They were a team in the true sense of the word, no matter how many different corners of the universe they ended up.
[image error]Isabela Moner in Instant Family
Best Child Performance: Isabela Moner, Instant Family
Instant Family had some great things going for it, but the actor who held it altogether was most certainly Isabela Moner. She had just enough fire to fight for what she believed in, but carried just as much compassion for those she cared for the most. The battle between giving her siblings a better life and fighting for what she wanted most (which was to reunite with her biological mother) was represented in every nuance of her body language. her words and her performance.
[image error]
Best Subversion of Expectations: Deadpool 2
Film trailers these days seem to give a little too much away in order to incite you to get away from the small screens and head to the cinema. So it’s ironic that the one film that breaks all of the norms would do so once again with its very own trailer. Though it seemed to be a traditional preview, giving away plot details without giving away too many twists and surprises, the trailer seemed to focus on Deadpool forming a team of superheroes with strange abilities to take down his newest nemesis. But if you were expecting this to be the bulk of the film, you were dead wrong, as Deadpool 2 takes a page from its own playbook to rip your expectations to shreds.
[image error]Josh Brolin in Deadpool 2 and Avengers: Infinity War
Best Villain Maker: Josh Brolin, Avengers: Inifity War and Deadpool 2
Josh Brolin has been around the film industry all his life, taking what he learned by watching his father and transforming that into characters who are flawed but ultimately good, flawed but ultimately bad, and just downright flawed. So, it was great to see Brolin create not one, but two superhero villains we could love to hate and infuse them with just enough depth beyond your typical mustache-twirling psychopath that we actually care about them as well. With Thanos, he brought compassion to a man who is ready to wipe out half the universe with the snap of his finger, and with Cable, we see a flawed human being; not evil, but desperate to save his daughter. Both characters are inherently the same, as they both simply want to change things for the better, but ultimately do so in the wrong way. But it works because Brolin knows how to add the gray into black and white.
[image error]Won’t You Be My Neighbor?
Best Documentary: Won’t You Be My Neighbor?
I know this is an actual category at the Oscars, but I had to give a shout-out to Won’t You Be My Neighbor, which got snubbed by the academy this year. I don’t see a lot of documentaries, but this one sang praise to a man who we all grew up with, showing us a great deal about not only how creative he was, or how strongly he felt about society and how he was going to change the world for the better, but about how he never gave up on himself or the children that he taught to be good, kind, civil people. Free Solo may end up winning the Oscar, but Won’t You Be My Neighbor will win your hearts.
[image error]Jesse Plemmons in Game Night
Best Creeper: Jesse Plemons, Game Night
Based on the trailers, I wasn’t sure how well I was going to like Jessie Plemons’s character in Game Night. It felt very much like he would take the charcater too far, causing us to disconnect with the film. However, Plemons does a terrific job of walking that fine line between over-the-top corniness and creepy perfection. He ends up fitting right in with the overall aesthetic of the film, going just far enough to ground the character in reality but creep you out just the same. He was funny, went toe-to-toe with the heavyweights on screen, and stayed just quiet enough to keep from standing out, but standing out in the most brilliant of ways.
I Can Only ImagineBest Religious Feature: I Can Only Imagine
There are a handful of faith-based films that come out every year. Some are a little lax on talent; some can’t find the right story beats; and others are a bit too heavy-handed. Get all three wrong, and you’ve got a disaster on your hands; get all three right, and you have the likes of I Can Only Imagine, the story of how Mercy Me went from complete unknowns to superstardom with their massive hit song of the same name. All of the performances hit just the right note, the pacing and story flow elegantly together, and the message isn’t dropped on you like an anvil. Oh, and it’s got great music, too.
What do you think? Who will win and should win the Oscars this year? Do you have any movies or actors you’d like to give a shout out to for their excellence in 2018? Tell me in the comments below!
February 17, 2019
Movie Mayhem – Isn’t It Romantic
Much like Adam Devine’s character in Isn’t It Romantic, I’m a sucker for romantic comedies. From You’ve Got Mail to any early 2000 rom-com starring Matthew McConaughey, there’s something about the genre that I find delightfully fun and whimsical. As they mention in this new meta-update to the genre, which takes as much joy in making fun of films in the genre as it does creating one, the ideas that romantic comedies present may be highly idealized and horribly out of touch with reality — but that’s where the joy comes in, as we all can dream of having the perfect romance play out before our eyes.
I have never been a big fan of Rebel Wilson. She’s okay at times, but I never truly bought the sincerity of her brand of comedy. It’s okay to disagree; I’m sure there are plenty of you out there who absolutely adore her. I just find her a bit dull in most of what she does and her snarky, self-loathing humor gets tired over time. But this is exactly what makes Wilson the perfect person to play the part of Natalie, a lonely architect who doesn’t have the confidence to stand up for her own ideas, no matter how good they may be.
As a fan of romantic comedies as a kid, Natalie grows up with the cynicism of her mother in regards to how these types of films represent society. One inevitable scene in the film has Natalie go on a verbal rampage for why romantic comedies are so awful, setting up her expectations for when she eventually finds herself right in the middle of one after a mugging gone wrong. Waking up in a beautifully-dressed hospital and being attended to by a man who’s too hot to be a doctor, Natalie realizes something is wrong. When she finally puts all of the pieces together, she begins her quest to fulfill her rom-com fantasy mission of finding love with the her hunky dim-bulb of a boss (Liam Hemsworth).
As expected, the script, written by Erin Cardillo, Dana Fox and Katie Silberman, is full of overt references to different types of tropes that infiltrate the majority of romantic comedies. The apartment and wardrobe are way too extravagant for anyone to afford; there’s an overly stereotypical gay sidekick and an overabundance of well-lit cinematography that makes everything seem airy and light; the set design looks like it came right out of Pleasentville; and the most common of the bunch: a best friend who’s secretly smitten for the lead, but forgoes their own desires to help them find love with the hot eye candy they desire.
It’s how they handle these tropes that make the film work on a higher level than just a knock-off satire. Wilson and Devine, bringing back the same nerdy chemistry they originally had in the Pitch Perfect series, are incredibly likeable together and, for the most part, hold back just enough to keep their relationship relatable without being annoying. As I mentioned, both Wilson and Devine’s style of comedy can be very infuriating at times, but they work well inside this particular concept where that style of boisterous intensity makes sense. Brandon Scott Jones does a really good job of pulling from classic eighties films to build his overly flamboyant character, and Priyanka Chopra makes the most of being a rich “Yoga Ambassador” who falls in love with Devine’s character after he saves her from choking.
One of the bigger surprises comes in the form of Hemsworth, who is quite funny as the clueless boss who becomes quite smitten with Natalie after their initial meet-cute when he almost hits her with his car. Like his older brother, Hemsworth has an unusual knack for creating a believable goof without going so far as to become a cartoon of himself. He fits right in with the other comedic talents in the film and doesn’t miss a step in either verbal or physical comedic moments, occasionally stealing the scenes, even when he’s simply in the background kicking a plant for fun.
The strength of the characters and how the actors play them is ultimately what helps the film succeed, despite some of the plot points that aren’t as developed as they should be. One of Natalie’s gripes about these types of films is that when there are two women in a workplace, they have to be mortal enemies. It’s a great concept and Natalie’s assistant (Betty Gilpin) in the real world becomes that enemy in the alt-verse, but the payoff falls on deaf ears as it’s never fully developed beyond that initial setup.
The film is only an hour and a half, which makes it shorter than the majority of the romantic comedies it’s parodying. I don’t normally say this, but the film could have used an extra ten to fifteen minutes, allowing it to add a few more layers to some of the ideas they present (one of which could have been to give Natalie’s assistant more to do and become integral to what happens later in the film), as well as giving us a tad bit more context at the beginning of the film before Natalie enters her rom-com reality.
Usually when there’s multiple writers on a project, the overall product suffers because things begin to get too jumbled, but with this film, the ideas translate well enough to hold your interest and the actors keep things moving at a good pace, making sure to keep everyone smiling throughout. If you’ve been craving a good romantic comedy, and are in need of a good date-night film, give this one a shot, as there’s no doubt you’ll leave the theater with just one thought — Isn’t It Romantic!
My Grade: A-
Bonus Reviews:
Happy Death Day was quite a surprise when it came out in 2017, and though I wasn’t screaming for a sequel, Happy Death 2U rises to the occasion by matching its predecessor’s quirky death for gloriously insane death (despite there being one story thread that gets dropped without any explanation). A-
Even though the third act settles into nothing more than a setup for what is more than likely a planned trilogy, Alita: Battle Angel makes up for the lack of closure with an exciting, emotional ride that envelops you in a well-constructed world five hundred years in the future. A
Next week, new movies include How To Train Your Dragon: The Hidden World and Fighting With My Family. If you would like to see a review for one of these, or any other film out next week, please respond in the comments below.
February 10, 2019
Movie Mayhem – Cold Pursuit
Way back in 2008, Liam Neeson did what very few actors over the age of fifty are capable of doing — after crafting a healthy career in dramatic leading roles, Neeson became a legitimate action star with a particular set of skills. He had been steadily moving in that direction for a few years prior (with roles in Star Wars: Episode I: The Phantom Menace and Batman Begins), but it wasn’t until Bryan Mills first sought vengeance on those who kidnapped his daughter that he was able to move away from the “stoic mentor” and parlay his path into a tremendous new audience that wholly embraced him as an action icon. The only question was, how long would it last before Neeson (and audiences) got burned out? With Cold Pursuit opening this weekend, we finally have our answer, as I don’t know if I have ever before seen a movie so bored with its star, its premise, or itself.
Neeson stars as Nels Coxman, a humble snowplow man, husband and father who, when we first meet him, begrudgingly accepts an award for Citizen of the Year in his small town of Kehoe, Colorado. Soon after, he learns his son has died of a heroine overdose. Unconvinced that his son was a druggy, Nels learns from one of his son’s friends that he got caught up in something he knew nothing about. Now, in typical Neeson fashion, it’s time for Nels to find his own “hidden set of skills” and hunt down the drug runners who killed him.
Let’s start with the good. Director Hans Petter Moland chooses a different type of style with this film, as he does what he can to make the film super realistic. And when I say realistic, I mean, there are scenes and encounters that feel as if you’re watching a homemade video; not because of the way it was shot (though at times the cinematography can be a bit dark and amateurish), but because of the awkward performances and the how Moland portrays the action sequences.
But there’s a reason most films subvert realism — make it too real and it can quickly become tedious. It doesn’t help that Moland doesn’t seem to know how to properly build character and a cohesive story that not only makes sense, but stands out among everything else that has come before it. I’m not sure if it’s because Neeson has done the same thing several times now already, or because Moland tries to do too many different things to look “smart”, but Neeson appears incredibly bored and tired through most of the film.
It doesn’t help that the film doesn’t ever connect in the way it hopes, mostly because there’s no reason behind anything. There’s a writers adage that says that if a scene doesn’t either move the plot forward or develop the characters in some meaningful way, than it should be cut from the narrative. If that were the case here, the movie would be about thirty minutes.
There are very few actions taken by any character that have any purpose within the context of the movie. At one point, Nels is ready to commit suicide, but nothing before this tells us anything about why he would go to that extreme over the loss of his son, especially when his wife (Laura Dern) is there to share in his pain. Speaking of his wife, she begins the film as a typical wife and mother, but begins to spiral after her son’s death, unable to comprehend how she missed such an important aspect of her son’s life.
Eventually, after Nels begins his murder spree, spending the majority of his free time working his way up the chain in the drug organization, she leaves with no explanation or reason. And from that point on, she’s basically forgotton, as Nels doesn’t seem to care much that she did. He just continues on with his life as if she had never been there in the first place. She’s a ghost (wait… was she a ghost, like literally?) and it’s just one of the many odd developments that Moland lets play out. With all of this, their son seemed to be an extremely important part of this couples life and yet we never see that connection at any point int he film.
I believe most of this disconnect stems from Moland’s need to be quirky and subvert our expectations. It felt very much as if he was trying to create the same type of dark comedic vibe and experience to match the likes of something similar to Fargo, but it only comes across as a weak copycat who doesn’t know how to create those rich moments; the scenes that should be funny come off as desperate because they come so far out of left field. This includes a name card whenever someone is killed. What was the point of all of it again? (I will admit, there are a couple of genuinely funny moments, but they are few and far between.)
What’s even worse, instead of relying on his main character to drive the narrative, Moland spends an awful amount of time on other things that have no purpose to the narrative whatsoever, including the addition of a turf war between the main drug organization and an Indian tribe. Yeah, it plays out in the end to help our supposed hero, but at the same time, it takes away any satisfaction or finality we may have had had the tribe angle never been introduced in the first place. So, what was the point of having them, exactly?
Yet another question comes in the form of how Nels even gets his “particular set of skills.” Is it from a crime novel, as he portends? Or maybe it’s from his brother, which I never made any connection to until Moland uses him as a red herring of sorts to prolong the film. We’re also introduced to a pair of cops (John Doman and Emmy Rossum) that have absolutely nothing to do except bicker at one another and tell us what we already know. If you were to remove any of these characters, it wouldn’t change the movie one bit. So, what was the point?
As you can see, that is the question we all have to ask ourselves about Cold Pursuit. What was the point? I’m not sure anyone working on the film actually knows, since nothing is ever truly resolved, the character interactions make hardly any sense, and by the end, much like real life, it just ends with no rhyme or reason. Is that what Moland meant to say in his own eccentric way? Will anyone care enough to find out?
My Grade: C-
Bonus Reviews:
Though it borrows a little too much of the inspired elements that made the original so fresh and, in a way, revolutionary, The Lego Movie 2: The Second Part is just as fun and entertaining as its predecessor, giving you want you want while adding just enough to make it worth every penny spent. A
The Prodigy thinks its incredibly clever, and I did like a lot of the story elements it sets up, but for some reason, it never fully develops beyond its initial premise, leading us down a mostly predictable path of worn-out horror tropes. B
Next week, new movies include Alita: Battle Angel, Happy Death Day 2U and Isn’t It Romantic. If you would like to see a review for one of these, or any other film out next week, please respond in the comments below.
February 3, 2019
Movie Mayhem – Miss Bala (2019)
Some movies are great; they captivate your mind, heart and soul. Something about them viscerally connects with you; all of the elements fall into place so perfectly, it’s hard to criticize them for anything. Other movies are terrible; nothing about them is genuine. They’re sloppily made with poor direction and acting, or have a poorly executed story and pace, making them simply boring with nothing much to say. Still others, like the new cartel actioner, Miss Bala, fall somewhere in between; not special enough to sing its praises, but not bad enough to complain about.
Gina Rodriguez takes us on a journey of self-discovery as Gloria, a make-up artist who heads to Tijuana to help her best friend, Suzu (Christina Rodlo), compete in the Miss Baja California beauty contest only to get embroiled in a war between a cartel gang and a corrupt police commissioner. There are many things that are both good and bad about that sentence.
First is the Miss Baja California contest itself, something I instantly connected to the title of the film; so much so that, even though I understand that “bala” is Spanish for bullet, I had to wonder if the film was supposed to be called Miss Baja (which would still have made a lot of sense in the context of the film) but someone in the marketing department accidentally spelled Baja with an ‘L’, and by the time the higher-ups figured out the mistake, it was too late.
The entire beauty contest is used as the linchpin of the narrative, embedded perfectly into all of the different things that happen within the film. However, with it being such a big piece to the puzzle, director Catherine Hardwicke spends way less time with it than she should. It ultimately feels like it’s being used for convenience as opposed to being an integral part of the film. Without it, a lot of what happens would quickly fall apart, but it comes off as a red-headed step-child, forced into the background and asked to join the party only when it conveniences the plot.
Second is Gloria’s profession. I like that writer Gareth Dunnet-Alcocer used both the make-up aspect and the beauty contest to create the inciting incident that jump starts the narrative (the latter being pulled from the original film of the same name from which this based). However, because the contest plays such a small part in the film, it feels weird to give Gloria this skill only to immediately abandon that aspect of her character before the first act is out. I’d think that Dunnet-Alcocer could have found a much better, or more compatible, reason for why Gloria heads to Tijuana that would eventually play deeper into the film, and the character, itself.
Finally, we have the war between the cartel and the police chief (Damián Alcázar). On the surface, it makes sense. But as the movie digs deeper into its narrative, I never fully understood why this particular cartel wanted to destroy his administration. I believe there was an explanation in there somewhere, something about the Chief taking away all of the cartels business, but because it’s presented in such a disconnected manner, it’s hard to tell if that’s the case, or if it’s because I’m making stuff up to fill in the holes.
What makes this war all the worse is a failed attempt to shoehorn in a DEA sting, a side story that doesn’t go much of anywhere and doesn’t have a whole lot to do with the story itself. Unlike the beauty contest, if you were to remove this storyline, not a whole lot changes except for a few predictable scenes and the removal of characters that would have been better served in a different capacity (which then would have allowed the characters to be more fully developed).
What ties it all together, and makes all of it work, is Rodriguez. There’s a movie trope many cinephiles know about called a Mary Sue. For those who don’t know, a Mary Sue is a female character that automatically knows how to do everything without even a minute of training; a character that is too good to be true, making them feel unrealistic. Gloria is the exact opposite of a Mary Sue. Due to her upbringing and her profession, Gloira is the epitome of a fish-out-of-water when the cartel leader (Mikhail Plata) uses her as a pawn in his war against the fascist government figures and to transport drugs across the border in exchange for weapons.
Rodriguez does an incredible job at transforming from a meek, average woman, into someone with the confidence and the balls to do what she has to in order to find and rescue Suzu, who went missing at a party that the cartel members raid. Every moment she’s on screen is believable, and every action taken seems perfectly planned and executed. With a bit of tweaking to the script, her character might have been more fully developed, but Rodriguez uses what she’s given to create a fully-formed character that you can root for and believe in.
If Dunnet-Alcocer and Hardwicke had taken more time with the script to fashion a stronger story, the film might have lived up to the performances that hold the film together; however, if it wasn’t for Rodriguez, the film might have fallen prey to a weak script with no imagination or anything to make it stand out among the crowd. In the end, with everything mixed together, the film is the epitome of the word meh: a decent action drama that will be quickly forgotten.
My Grade: B
Next week, new movies include Cold Pursuit, The Lego Movie 2: The Second Part, What Men Want and The Prodigy. If you would like to see a review for one of these, or any other film out next week, please respond in the comments below.
January 27, 2019
Movie Mayhem – The Kid Who Would Be King
The story is as old as time: someone ordinary, going through the motions of a mundane life, suddenly discovers he’s extraordinary and is the only person who can stop an impending evil from destroying the world. One reason this scenario is timeless is because it’s a fantasy everyone shares on some level. At one point or another, we all hope one day we’ll find our true purpose in this world, so the idea resonates on a subconscious level. The Kid Who Would Be King clearly knows this, going out of their way to mention other books and films that have done this very thing — Star Wars and Harry Potter, to name just a couple — and mixes the idea with the legend of King Arthur, a young orphan who became king when he pulled a sword from a stone.
In this modern update, the kid in question is Alex (Louis Ashbourne Serkis). On the surface he’s an average, unremarkable kid, but deep down, he has a heart as strong and brave as a lion. He has no fear when standing up to the older/bigger kids who bully him and his one and only friend, Bedders (Dean Chaumoo), and takes comfort in a mother (Denise Gough) who only wants what’s best for him. After Alex is chased into a construction site by said bullies, Lance (Tom Taylor) and Kaye (Rhianna Dorris), he discovers a sword wedged into a large piece of concrete stone. Curious, he attempts to pull it out… and succeeds.
With a little help from Bedders, the two kids have fun imagining that the sword is the one from Arthurian legend. Neither take it seriously, though, until a new kid, Mertin (Angus Imrie), posing as a new student in the kids’ school, stalks Alex throughout the day. This coupled by an attack by a fire demon that same night leads Alex to begin to believe that he has in fact acquired the real Excalibur and that he must fight the evil that will be unleashed upon a total eclipse of the sun.
His quest? Track down the entry into the underworld and defeat Arthur’s half-sister Morgana (Rebecca Ferguson) before the eclipse, when she will have enough power to rise from the depths and take the sword for herself. He’ll need help, though, so he knights Bedders, Lance and Kaye, all of whom must put their differences aside in order to ban together and defeat the darkness.
The Kid Who Would Be King is a slightly mixed bag, combining some very good elements with a sense of kid-friendly goofiness that sometimes feel out-of-place within the world. There’s a fine line between making a kids movie that includes plenty of playfulness but still feels rich and authentic, and making one that only five-year-olds could love. This film occasionally diverts into territories of the latter, and knows it, because whenever it does, director Joe Cornish quickly course-corrects back to the former. This is what allows the film to hold your interest with all the fun it’s having, but keeps the film from becoming something as strong as, say, The Goonies.
Mertin is a great example of this dichotomy. The character is actually the younger representation of the wizard Merlin (Patrick Stewart), who disguises himself as a young kid to get close to Alex. As played by Imrie, the character is light and fun, and there’s no question that anyone would want to take a journey with him into new realms and quests. However, there are moments throughout where he becomes a slight joke of himself, straying too far from a relatable character into cartoon territory.
But, because of Serkis and Chaumoo, who carry the film with a fun, grounded chemistry, you’re able to accept those more exaggerated elements as part of the world being created — something Cornish does quite well. This is especially true in the case of the mythology and the rules he sets up. In one instance, it’s revealed that when the fire demons enter our world, everyone except for the one with the sword and his knights disappear. This idea is terrifically executed in various ways, showing us how strong the film could have been had Cornish kept the film from straying as far into immature circumstances as he sometimes does.
Cornish also falls a little short on the weight of the fight sequences. He has strong ideas that play out well, but then can’t seem to fully deliver at the end of each one. Whether it ends too abruptly, or is completed with very little fanfare, he more often than not gears you up for excitement only to slam on the brakes without warning (or at the very least, doesn’t go to the lengths that he originally sets up). In other words, what’s presented is well-done, but there isn’t any emotional journey throughout to allow us to rise and fall naturally. When they action is over, it doesn’t feel like it should be over, as if he wasn’t sure what to do, but they have to end somewhere so they can move onto the next piece of the quest.
(The exception to this is the final battle sequence, which does a good job of wrapping up almost all of the story beats — I say almost, because there are a couple of minor developments that occur during the setup for the battle that don’t get their due in the aftermath.)
No way is The Kid Who Would Be King on the same level as Harry Potter or Star Wars. However, as a kids movie, it does what it sets out to do and the journey is one that holds your interest enough to get past the silliness and enjoy the view of a kid becoming something greater than himself. And in that, the lessons learned are ones all kids should aspire to.
My Grade: B+
Bonus Review:
Matthew McConaughey does a fabulous job portraying a strung-out fisherman hell-bent on catching a giant Tuna, however, when Anne Hathaway and Jason Clarke enter the picture as a wife who wants her husband killed, the crazy revelations that follow often come far too early for their own good, making what could have been a highly outrageous bout of insanity become a slightly deflated experiment. B
Next week, new movies include Miss Bala. If you would like to see a review for this, or any other film out next week, please respond in the comments below.
January 13, 2019
Movie Mayhem – The Upside
When a comedian starts out in the industry, their main goal is to make people laugh. But, just as any other profession, that can only last so long before they start to want more. Doing the same thing over and over can become labored; the soul needs more than simple repetition. This is one reason a lot of comedians at some point in their careers slowly begin to work their way into dramatic roles. Some fail to find a way to successfully transition (Will Farrell comes to mind), while others have incredibly long careers because of it (see: Tom Hanks, Robin Williams and most recently, Steve Carell, to name a few). It doesn’t mean they’ve lost touch with their comedic roots, it’s simply their way of widening their audience, and on a personal level, growing into a better performer. In The Upside, Kevin Hart becomes the newest comedian to step foot across the aisle into drama, and he’s given the perfect mentor to seamlessly make that transition.
Hart plays Dell Scott, an ex-convict looking to land a steady job after getting out of prison. When he mistakes an interview for a caretaker position as a janitorial job, he finds himself in the penthouse of Phillip Lacasse (Bryan Cranston), a beleaguered author who’s lost all joy in life due to a paragliding accident that has left him a quadriplegic. Unlike all of the other candidates vying for the position, Phillip likes Dell because of his candid, outspoken nature and the fact that he’s not going out of his way to impress him. He just needs a signature that says he tried out the job and it didn’t work out.
Phillip hires Dell on the spot to the chagrin of Yvonne Pendleton, a role Nicole Kidman was born to play, but one that’s also a bit of an enigma, as I’m not exactly sure what her role or title actually is. I believe they mention it in the film, but it’s pushed aside in favor of the more important bromance aspect of the film. She dictates his letters, keeps the house running, makes sure his employees are doing their jobs; essentially, she’s the perfect caretaker who doesn’t actually physically take care of the person she’s caring for. That’s where Dell comes in.
The story as a whole is well-written and all of the performances create a sweet, caring and loving atmosphere that eases you into a relaxing, comfortable state of mind. The flow and the pace of the script are carefully crafted, and director Neil Burger does a fine job of mixing Hart’s comedic talents with the dramatic gravitas of Cranston, creating a respectful, symbiotic relationship that may carry a lot of conflict, but fuses the underlying essence of a man who needs to reignite his life after losing everything he’s held dear, including his wife, with that of a man looking to find a relationship with his estranged son (Jahi Di’Allo Winston).
What happens, though, is that we become so settled into the story that by the time we reach the climax of the film, everything feels incredibly rushed and unprepared. It’s almost as if writer Jon Hartmere didn’t really know where to take the film. He was going along at a good clip, then noticed he was getting close to the 120 minute mark and had to do something to give the film a happy ending. Thus, all we’re left with after building up such a strong relationship are quick hints at where their lives are and where they may be in the future without letting us fully appreciate each man’s growth.
Where the film does a terrific job, as mentioned, is the pairing of Hart and Cranston. Cranston, a bit of a comedian himself with prominent roles on Seinfeld and Malcolm in the Middle, has made a career as a powerhouse dramatic actor. His presence alone helps elevate Hart’s performance beyond the simple shtick we’ve seen him do a million times before. The dichotomy between the two men is in the strength of their resolve and how they relate to one another, helping the movie rise above the sometimes lewd comedy moments, made funnier by their placement in the film and the strength of the two actors’ performances.
Adding in Kidman helps bridge the gap and form the bond that the two make. She does feel like a third wheel at times, however, she’s there to both support and keep in check these two men who have varying degrees of ideology. She loves and cares for Phillip in a way that neither can see and hates that Dell may be the lynchpin to both uplift and destroy the man she cares so deeply about. On the one hand, she knows Dell is the right person to help Phillip regain his spirit for life and adventure, and on the other she fears he may also open the door to a relationship she isn’t ready or willing to walk through.
I can’t be completely sure if Kevin Hart will be able to transition from comedy to drama in the same way Carell or Hanks have been able to do, however, as long as he continues to appear in films with actors like Cranston (and avoids any further controversy in his personal life that may turn some viewers away), Hart should be able to find a steady workflow much like Williams had done, balancing comedic roles with dramatic ones to give him a long, fruitful career.
My Grade: A-
Bonus Reviews:
I may not agree with much of Ruth Bader Ginsberg’s policies, but I do generally agree on her opinions On the Basis of Sex, and with Felicity Jones and Armie Hammer driving the narative, the film captures a moment of time with a sensitive hand and heartfelt spirit. A
Though the premise for Replicas is good, some of the execution behind the story of a man on the verge of creating the perfect clone using the death of his family to put the final pieces in place causes the film to become a little flat and forced, exposing the less-than-stellar acting and lack of conviction. B
Next week, new movies include Glass. If you would like to see a review of this, or any other film out next week, please respond in the comments below.
January 6, 2019
Movie Mayhem – The Best and Worst of 2018
As with any other year, 2018 saw a slew of both good and bad films, however, some films that may appear on other critics’s lists may not appear here, either because I didn’t like it as much as them, I didn’t get a chance to see it, or it was a Netflix exclusive, as I can be more selective with my choices. That doesn’t mean I didn’t see plenty of mediocre films that deserve to be part of the worst, however, the scales were a little imbalanced this year. I saw 125 movies, 61 of which scored an A- or higher (which is pretty much in line with past years), while only 10 scored a C+ or below.
As I point out every year, this list is compiled of only movies I saw from January 1 to December 31 (with the exception of Mary Poppins Returns, which I saw in the first week of 2019, but prior to compiling this list). With that said, here are my picks for the best and worst of 2018!
Top 10 Best
Bonus Choice (#11) — Hunter Killer
[image error]Michael Gor and Gerard Butler
Gerard Butler has an uneven record when it comes to the quality of his films. He doesn’t necessarily change all that much, keeping macho bravado alive while easing nicely into intellectual depth and suave charm. When he stars in a bad film, it’s more than likely the fault of the director unable to keep his overt scenery chewing in check, or a script that feels like it was written by a ten-year old. This year saw two films that highlighted Butler’s masculinity: Den of Thieves, where his machismo was on full display, and Hunter Killer, which allowed Butler to show off a gritty exterior but remain subdued, allowing director Donovan Marsh to expertly navigate the film through the murky waters of drama and tension. Everyone involved was on point, but Butler was the core that helped keep the peril, and thus the heart-pounding tension, alive.
#10 — Mary Poppins Returns
[image error]Joel Dawson, Emily Blunt, Pixie Davies and Nathanael Saleh
Mary Poppins (Emily Blunt) returned and was able to fly her way into my top ten list with her no-nonsense magical touch. Blunt couldn’t quite match the same subtle transitions from hard-nosed, no-nonsense nanny to sweet, charming fun-loving whimsy that Julie Andrews delivered to the iconic character, and the songs don’t feel as natural or majestic as the likes of Supercalifragilisticexpialidocious, but they both came really close, giving the film the spark it needed to draw you in and keep you interested. What makes Mary Poppins Returns truly sing are Ben Whishaw and Emily Mortimer as Michael and Jane Banks, the children from the original film now all grown. As Michael tries to find a way to save his house from the evil bankers, Mary Poppins drops in to supply her unique brand of support by watching over his three children (Nathanael Salah, Joel Dawson, and Pixie Davies), a brood of smart, likable kids that give the film its true voice.
#9 — Bumblebee
[image error]Hailee Steinfeld and Bumblebee
Unlike a lot of people, I’ve liked all of the Transformers films. Much like Star Wars (continue reading), I can overlook the flaws and enjoy the film for what it is — a mind-numbing crash-course in entertaining chaos. Which is also what makes Bumblebee such a refreshing change. Not only does it continue the tradition of large metal robots fighting one another in completely nonsensical situations, but Bumblebee is probably the first Transformers movie that allows itself to have some emotional depth. Hailee Steinfeld does a terrific job as the eighteen-year-old catalyst to showcase the origin story of Bee (before he became a Camero and hunted down Sam Witwicky) and how the Autobots first arrived on Earth.
#8 — Instant Family
[image error]Mark Wahlberg, Rose Byrne, Isabela Moner, Julianna Gamiz and Gustavo Quiroz
Mark Walhberg and Rose Byrne are at their best as a couple who want to enhance their lives by adopting a child. The child they connect with, Lizzy (Isabela Moner), though, comes with a brother (Gustavo Quiroz) and sister (Julianna Gamiz), so the couple have to navigate the rigors of being parents with more than they bargained for. Because the film is partially based on director Sean Anders’s own experience with foster care, the movie works as a sweet family drama that highlights what it takes to foster and adopt a child. Nothing about raising a child is all candy and roses, and that’s shown in how the couple stress over whether they’re doing the right thing. Much like previous films on this list, it also hinges on one performance in particular — Moner, who conveys a natural conflict of emotion between body language and what she says and does. She’s a teenager who wants desperately to be with her biological mother, but needs to provide her siblings with the best life she can. All of it combines to make a film that feels true to itself.
#7 — Deadpool 2
[image error]Deadpool (with someone in the background)
Two years ago, Deadpool landed in the number 5 position on my Best and Worst List. Now he’s back with more swagger, more foul-mouthed antics and more fourth wall-breaking quips. This time, though, he’s bringing along a few extra toys to play with, including Zazie Beetz as Domino, a woman whose superpower is luck, and Josh Brolin as Cable, a man from the future whose mission to kill a young boy (Julian Dennison) is predicated on losing his daughter to that very boy. Anytime you introduce time travel into a film, it can be problematic, but Deadpool 2 gives this aspect enough importance to have fun with it, but not so much that it impairs the overall narrative. The best thing about the film, though, is its ability to subvert all expectations, something a lot of filmmakers have a hard time doing in this age of instant gratification and movie trailers that show way too much in their trailers.
#6 — Game Night
[image error]Jason Bateman and Rachel McAdams
Speaking of trailers revealing too much, comedies have a tendency to give away all of their best jokes in their previews. Luckily, Game Night found a way to provide a lot of great moments in the trailer to peek your interest, but then add in a secondary level of action, dramatic tension and comedic pairings that heightened the jokes and sequences that originally hooked you. There is a lot to like in the film, especially Jason Bateman and Rachel McAdams, who pair together perfectly, lending the film a solid foundation that allows everyone else involved (especially Jesse Plemons as a super creepy neighbor) leeway to heighten their personalities without pushing the film off the rails. Add in a solid premise and some very well-crafted action sequences, and you got yourself one incredibly fun night at the movies.
#5 — Ready Player One
[image error]Tye Sheridan and Olivia Cooke
Ready Player One is one of those films that many will love for the nostalgia-heavy references, and others will hate for the same reason. It’s pretty obvious which way I fall, even though I am not a huge fan of pushing nostalgia for nostalgia sake. Having Steven Spielberg at the helm adds some extra depth as it traverses through a plethora of mostly eighties pop-culture, providing a reason for the bounty of references. The script does have its flaws (I was just as confused about why Olivia Cooke’s birthmark was so terribly disgusting, as it made her look rather cute, to say the least), but because of the richness of the Oasis and Spielberg’s flair for charming whimsicality, Ready Player One is able to do what it sets out to do — capture the imagination and transport you back to being a kid.
#4 — Black Panther
[image error]Danai Gurira, Chadwick Boseman and Lupita Nyong’o
This was inevitable. Aside from Black Panther being the highest grossing film domestically, it was also a really good film. Did I buy into all the hype the film received as the best movie in the world, ever? No. As you can see, in my opinion, there are three films this year I consider to be better. However, what director Ryan Cooglar was able to accomplish with creating a new technologically-advanced world while adding a political layer that doesn’t overpower the film was a masterful feat. In any other year, this film may have made it higher on the list, yet there were just a few other super heroes (including T’Challa (Chadwick Boseman) himself) that did just enough to give Black Panther a run for supreme authority.
#3 — Incredibles 2
[image error]The Parr Family
One of those superheroes is actually a family. Many might say that Incredibles 2 was all too familiar, as it nearly recycled the plot of the first film with a simple gender swap — instead of Bob/Mr. Incredible (voiced by Craig T. Nelson) hiding his off-the-books work as a superhero, this time, it’s Helen/Elastigirl (Holly Hunter). They wouldn’t be wrong, but one reason I felt this movie deserves its place on this list is Jack-Jack. As Elastigirl heads out to fight crime, Bob must stay home and care for the kids, and along with trying to contend with the emotions of a teenage girl and new math, Jack-Jack is his biggest hurdle after learning of his plethora of powers. The movie is light and fun and director Brad Bird splits up the “team” very successfully to speak to the greater narrative. Through some well-done action sequences and another great round of talented voices, Incredibles 2 gives us a taste of a new character that may be just what the franchise needs to give it vigor should it decide to add a chapter 3 that goes beyond shooting lasers from a babies eyes!
#2 — Avengers: Infinity War
[image error]Tom Holland, Robert Downey, Jr., Dave Bautista, Chris Pratt and Pom Klementieff
We’re seeing double with this entry. Chadwick Boseman makes it into the top 5 twice as the same character, while Josh Brolin appears as a villain in two top 10 films, the second of which is Thanos, who wants to unleash a universe-wide genocide with the snap of his fingers. Both Thanos and Cable (see Deadpool 2, above) have their reasons for being evil, but there are much higher stakes in regards to Thanos, and as the (almost) entire Marvel Universe comes to together to stop him, we get some great pairings that wouldn’t otherwise be possible or necessary. We all knew pairing Tony Stark (Robert Downey Jr.) with the Guardians of the Galaxy would be cause for some great comedic moments, but it also gives Spider-Man (Tom Holland) and Dr. Strange (Benadict Cumberbatch) the opportunity to build on their personalities to provide one of the stronger team-ups of the year. On the ground, Captain America (Chris Evans) and his band of rebels join forces with T’Challa (Boseman) in Wakanda to protect the final stone from Thanos’s clutches. The film balances its comedic moments, action sequences and dramatic flair with great care, and lends itself to a finale that beautifully sets up what will no doubt be the ultimate of cinematic experiences this upcoming April when Avengers: Endgame arrives.
[image error]Alden Ehrenreich and Joonas Suotamo
Another year, another Star Wars making it to #1. Of course I’m biased — Star Wars will forever be ingrained in my blood, and I don’t think I will ever be able to criticize the films in a way that would keep me from loving them. I understand why a lot of people choose to focus on their flaws; in fact, I can pick out plenty of flaws in all of the movies. However, there’s a feeling that the films produce hidden under everything else, and Solo is no exception. Many argue that they didn’t need to see the origin of how Han (Alden Ehrenreich) and Chewbacca (Joonas Suotamo) met, or how Han pulled off the Kessel Run in less than 12 parsecs. But, unlike those critics, I found these moments to be entertaining, especially the Kessel Run. Ron Howard had to pick up the pieces after Phil Lord and Chris Miller apparently bungled the essence of the series, and I believe he did a fine job giving us something we could all enjoy. (I will say, if there was one thing that was completely unnecessary, it was the origin of Han’s last name. If Han had given it to himself, great, but to have it provided to him by the Imperial officer just seemed a little too asinine and off-putting.)
Top 5 Worst
#5 — Assassination Nation
[image error]Odessa Young
Within the first ten minutes of Assassination Nation, I was about ready to walk out of the theater. The style, the acting, the script — they all felt dirty, unrealistic and sadistic. I held true, though, and slogged my way to the end. Though the acting and the ideas started to become tolerable, and some of what director Sam Levinson was trying to say made sense and felt authentic, no one in the film is likable, coming off as conceited trash that deserve what’s coming to them. In the end, the movie could never get past that first impression, reverting to the lowest-common denominator of violence and political intrigue that didn’t add up to much except sickening exploitation.
#4 — Hotel Artemis
[image error]Jeff Goldblum, Zachary Quinto and Jodie Foster
With all of the terrific actors that populate Hotel Artemis, you’d expect a much better film than we actually got. Jodie Foster does nothing but attempt to provide an acting showcase, and Jeff Goldblum, though strong, is unable to convey any sort of character whatsoever. Even Charlie Day does his best impression of Charlie Day and fails. Because the characters are so bland, there’s nothing to connect to as you traverse a simplistic plot overlaying a future that has no setup whatsoever. It’s just a bunch of characters meandering about in a film with no depth and no reason to care. You’re better off seeing Bad Times at the El Royale, a much better film with a cast that actually gives a crap.
#3 — Hotel Transylvania 3: Summer Vacation
[image error]Drac and Mavis
I can’t say I was a big fan of the first two Hotel Transylvania films, but at least those films had some substance to them. Hotel Transylvania 3: Summer Vacation on the other hand, feels more like Grown-Ups 2 — a chance for Adam Sandler to get together with his famous friends and play for a couple of months with nothing of importance to show for it. The film tries to set up a plot involving Van Helsing (voiced by Jim Gaffigan) and the murder of Drac (Sandler) and his monster friends, but there’s so much fluff and unnecessary scenes surrounding the main story that go absolutely nowhere. Take for example the story of Wayne (Steve Buscemi) and his wife (Molly Shannon) dropping their kids off at daycare so they can spend time on the cruise alone. It’s a z-story that has no purpose; it’s just another thing to amuse the kids and extend the run-time because the rest of the story doesn’t know where to go beyond what could have been a half-hour jaunt on Nickelodeon. In other words, it would have been better to leave the bulk of the characters at home instead of trying to stuff them all into this film and take up time and space that would have better served the core story.
#2 — Hostiles
[image error]Christian Bale
There’s no denying Christian Bale is a terrific actor; he makes every performance count and always gives 110%, no matter the weaknesses that surround him during production. The problem is, if those weaknesses are too great, no matter of performance will help. That’s the case with Hostiles, which seems to drag on in a slow, steady pace that never allows the film to provide any weight. Despite some terrific performances by all involved, the connections between characters are so bland and disconnected, that it causes the film to feel even more morose than it actually is, leaving behind nothing more than a wasteland of boredom.
#1 — The First Purge
[image error]Lex Scott Davis and Joivan Wade
I wasn’t the biggest fan of the original The Purge, but at least the film had some semblance of personality, purpose and intrigue. Not The First Purge, which finds itself retreading the same type of bland treachery as the previous two sequels but without a cast of characters or a plot to add any personality. On top of it all, the film spends so much time trying to prove a political point-of-view, making the heroes and villains literally black and white (respectively), what usually masks itself as a voice of reason devolves into nothing more than an hour-and-a-half of biased propaganda.
What do you think? Did I exclude any? Did I add something that never should have made the list? Give me your top ten lists in the comments below.
December 30, 2018
Movie Mayhem – Vice
Vice — 2018; Directed by Adam McKay; Starring Christian Bale, Amy Adams, Steve Carell, Sam Rockwell, Jesse Plemons, Alison Pill and Lily Rabe
There’s a mid-credits scene in Vice that writer/director Adam McKay deliberately uses to get out in front of those who will say his new politically polarizing film is nothing but biased propaganda. In the scene, a member of a focus group questions the film for being biased, in which another member retorts that it’s based on facts. This eventually leads the ignorant redneck to start a fist-fight. The scene represents everything that’s wrong with American politics today, and by placing it in the film at all validates the fact that McKay is well-aware of his own personal bias — and doesn’t care. A quarter of the audience will love the film for putting a knife into former Vice President Dick Cheney (Christian Bale), another quarter will hate it for the same reason. It’s the middle half, of which I believe I am a part, that will feel as though, even if the film is based on fact, nothing portrayed can be believed because it’s been tainted by McKay’s obvious preconceptions.
The entire cast in Vice is terrific, especially a nearly unrecognizable Bale, who hits every nuance of the former Vice President, from the cadence in his voice to his awkward mannerisms. Sam Rockwell delivers yet another fine performance as President George W. Bush, portraying him as a real person as opposed to the dim-bulb caricature most people have come to know. Yes, McKay makes sure to point out that Bush is a little slow on the uptake in most matters of state, but he refrains from making fun of it; he simply uses it as a doorway into how Cheney could get away with so much as VP.
I don’t know enough about the behind-the-scenes goings-on of the Bush/Cheney presidency to know how close to the truth the film comes, but in no way am I defending either party for what happened during this Presidency, nor for the corruption that has infiltrated government over the last forty years. What makes Vice seem so dishonest is in how far left-wing it feels. For the most part, McKay paints all Republicans, no matter how far right or center they may be, as corrupt, racist, homophobic, liars who want to see the country destroyed for their own personal gain, and all Democrats as incorruptible saints, saving the world from these nasty, evil, corporate thugs. As much as I couldn’t care less about Cheney and what this movie claims he did (stuff I have no doubt is true), this divisive thinking just isn’t the case.
Democrats can be as corruptible, racist, homophobic liars as Republicans, but McKay steers clear of that idea in order to paint the nastiest portrait he can of someone he clearly despises. One scene depicts Liz Cheney’s (Lily Rabe) run for a congressional seat. In order to ease the minds of her constituents and win the election, she goes on record as being against gay marriage, despite supporting her lesbian sister’s (Alison Pill) marriage. The point is to show that Dick Cheney will go to any lengths to keep his family in power, but by involving his daughter, it makes it feel Republicans are the only ones who will lie to get elected, which simply isn’t true. Every politician tells the people what they want to hear for no other reason than to win; it’s not just relegated to one party or another, no matter how much McKay may wish it were.
Fact: Dick Cheney was hungry for power, but didn’t want all of the checks and balances that come with the Presidency to get in his way. By becoming Vice President and, for lack of a better word, duping President Bush into allowing him to oversee the “mundane” offices like energy, the FDA and the military, Cheney was able to secure a foothold in areas he should never have had control over and utilize it for his own benefit, including the rise in stock his former company, Halliburton, saw when he was able to help manipulate war strategy after 9/11.
There’s a good, strong movie in that description, however, the story is so diluted by anger and bias, it’s hard to truly capture the reality of it. Most of this is skipped over or only mentioned briefly so that McKay can use his platform to attack and undermine the likes of Roger Ailes (Kyle S. More) and Supreme Court Justice Antonin Scalia (Matthew Jacobs). Did they have something to do with Cheney’s rise to power? Maybe, but instead of looking at these events objectively, we’re saddled with a one-sided attack, as if the rise of Fox News and Justice Scalia’s seat on the Supreme Court were the only reasons President Bush won the election. But what about the other side? There had to be more to this story on the opposing side that helped in this win as well, things that are completely overlooked to focus on hatred that has fueled politics for the betterment of twenty years.
Do I believe Cheney was a good person? No, but I don’t know him outside of how the media portrays him. There is a lot of things that President Bush and Vice President Cheney did that I am not a fan of, including No Child Left Behind. But, everything they did that aimed to hurt the American people and line the pockets of the politicians can be undone at any time. Have they? Some things have and some things haven’t, but both parties have had a chance and did nothing, which means, as far as I’m concerned, all politicians are as guilty as those who first enacted them.
Beyond all of that, the film has a messy style that can’t seem to find a consistent footing. It begins with editing that seems all over the place. McKay then adds a lot of the same tricks he used in his last political film, The Big Short, a movie I found very compelling and inciteful, mostly because it didn’t focus on or have a strong preconception toward anyone in particular. It simply laid out the facts and gave us a (almost) complete picture of what happened during the housing crisis that led to the stock market crash in 2007. A lot of greedy men found a way to work the system and reap the rewards of hurting the average American.
I like the style (in fact, I utilize a lot of the same techniques in my upcoming novel), including a fun moment when Bale and Amy Adams (as Cheney’s loving, supportive wife, Lynne) break into Shakespearean soliloquies because there’s no way to know what they actually said in a pivotal discussion. However, most of the meta cleverness doesn’t work as well in Vice, as they feel like stale tricks rather than supportive assets. In The Big Short, they were utilized to enhance the brazen audacity of what those people did. In Vice, the events are used in a more vitriolic way, making fun of and lambasting one individual in particular, thus making it feel dirty, misleading or downright deceitful.
Yes, former Vice President Dick Cheney may have led his life by selfish reasons, ones we may never truly understand, and Bale does a fantastic job of trying to create a full picture of this man. But it’s all tainted by the anger and contempt of the man behind the camera, so there’s no clear line as to where truth ends and bias begins. By feeding the hate rather than trying to understand it, the topic and the performances are swallowed by opinion and judgment. Until McKay paints a similar portrait of someone like Hillary Clinton, it’ll be hard to see him, or this film, as anything but a hypocritical liberal without the ability of logical, unbiased reasoning.
My Grade: C
Bonus Reviews:
Jennifer Lopez and director Peter Segal don’t try to deliver anything new in Second Act, a film that feels so familiar, it’s hard to find a connection to everything that is good about it, such as Lopez’s chemistry with Leah Remini and the sweet nature of the relationships that carry the film to the finish line. B+
Unlike a lot of people, I liked the majority of the Transformers films, succumbing to the childish antics that overwhelmed the back half of the franchise, however, it’s easy to feel a bit of nostalgia for Bumblebee, a film that not only takes us back to what made the first film a terrific action flick, but raising the bar on what everything that followed could have been had they grounded themselves a little more and let the premise do the talking. A
——————————————
Next week, new movies include Escape Room. If you would like to see a review of this, or any other film out next week, please respond in the comments below.
December 23, 2018
Movie Mayhem – Welcome to Marwen
Welcome to Marwen — Directed by Robert Zemeckis; Starring Steve Carell, Leslie Mann, Merritt Weaver, Gwendoline Christie, Stefaniw von Pfetten, Janelle Monáe, and Eiza González
I always tend to enjoy films that play with the imagination as a means of dissecting abstract emotions. Whether it’s a guy breaking from his mundane life to achieve an adventure beyond his wildest dreams, or kids creating their own fantastical world to cope with the suffering of those they love, these films give us permission to escape into ourselves in order to work through depression, fear and loneliness, and secure a strong, healthy pathway to heal. Welcome to Marwen, the true story of man fighting to overcome the demons that haunt him through the stories he creates with a set of dolls, portrays its hero in a serious way without taking away from inventiveness of the human mind.
Steve Carell stars as Mark Hogancamp, a magnificent artist of World War II comics who’s brutally attacked to within an inch of his life by a group of guys who find his fetish with high-heeled shoes a bit too gay for their liking. The injuries leave Mark without any prior memories of his life and the inability to write his name, much less draw. As he puts it, “they kicked his memories from his head.” In order to cope, Mark creates a magnificent world set in a small German town during World War II, where he tells a very intricate story through a series of photographs of dolls from the local hobby shop.
The main character in this fantasy is Cap’n Hogie, who represents Mark. The other characters are a team of badass women that represent those who have helped Mark through his recovery. This includes his physical therapist (Janelle Monáe), his nursemaid (Gwendoline Christie) and the owner of the hobby shop (Merritt Wever). Sitting in the eves and watching the characters fight the Nazis is Deja Thoris (Diane Kruger), a Belgian witch that holds an infatuation with Hogie that forces her to vanquish anyone who gets even the slightest bit close to him.
On the eve of sentencing the men who attacked Mark, Nicol (Leslie Mann), a beautiful, loving redhead, moves into the house next door. Mark is instantly smitten with her, prompting him to add her to his fantasy world, despite having no influence on his recovery thus far.
There’s no hiding the fact that the fantasy world of Marwen is a reflection of Mark’s psyche. The women represent the wall he’s built up shielding him from harm and outside influence; Deja is that unknown force keeping Mark secluded and unable to find strength to break free from his nightmare; and the Nazis represent Mark’s attackers, men who have seemingly taken not only the memories of his past, but have put a stranglehold on his ability to move past the incident, represented perfectly by the Nazi’s power to resurrect themselves no matter how many bullets his protectors blast into them.
Then there’s Nicol. As Mark and Nicol’s relationship builds into a loving friendship, Hogie and Nicol fall deeply in love with one another — a love that Deja is unable to stop. Their love in Marwen signifies the hope Mark needs for a better future, allowing him to systematically break from his shell and push himself to do things that he might not have done otherwise.
These fantasy sequences are well-done and the link to the main story threads are perfectly orchestrated. Having Mark’s stories take place in the past not only set up an enemy that he can control, but it represents his attempts at finding the past he once lost through those who help him in the present. It’s a meaningful connection that seems to be triggered most when he is called upon to testify at the sentencing hearing. The simple thought of having to face his accusers scares Mark to his core, and Marwen is where he knows he will be able to fight that fear.
For some, it may take awhile to digest the importance of the film and understand what director Robert Zemeckis is trying to do. I wasn’t sure how I felt about the movie until I started to write this review, and dug deeper into the connections between fantasy and reality.
At first glance, side stories and characters seem to fall short in finding any meaningful connection to the overall story. There’s Nicol’s ex-boyfriend (Neil Jackson), who shows up a couple of times to no real effect; there’s the women in Mark’s life, who aside from one scene, are never explored outside of the fantasy world; and then there’s Wendy (Stefanie von Pfetten), the woman who initially found Mark after the beating and then disappeared from his life without a second thought. Yeah, we don’t necessarily need to know these characters beyond the essence of the impact they had on Mark, but with a lack of development, we aren’t able to connect with them in the way Zemeckis may have intended.
Upon further analysis, though, this forced distance is actually what gives the film its power. Whether it’s a love that’s been lost or a force that might interfere in a connection you never thought you’d have again, it’s how Zemeckis conveys what otherwise can’t be visually translated. It’s super subtle, yet when you’re able to put the pieces together and pull the threads in the right direction, it turns into a very moving and emotional testament to those who have gone through similar struggles.
If there is one flaw in the strokes Zemeckis uses to paint his portrait it’s playing a little too close to the line bordering on pandering vs. nurturing. It’s apparent that everyone in Mark’s life truly cares for him and want him to get better, yet at times it feels as if they are pretending to care about him to his face, but laugh at his eccentricities when his back is turned. I know this couldn’t be farther from truth, but that impression does creep into the film at times, making it feel a bit odd and unsure of itself.
It can be hard to overcome a tragedy, and a lot of people are afraid to face their fears. What’s even harder is the ability to represent that on screen without simply telling the audience what someone is feeling. Welcome to Marwen does an excellent job of helping us understand what someone that has been through a tragedy like this might be going through while giving us the ability to help them through it without forcing them to do more than they are capable. Sometimes it just takes a little friendship, a little space and a little love to help someone find hope for a remarkable future.
My Grade: A
Bonus Reviews:
The Favourite is chock full of great performances, conniving betrayals, and quirky subtleties, but for the life of me, I could never seem to wrap my head around the oddities of the characters that infuse the film with a sense of whimsical sadism. B-
Despite the amount of questions and suspension of disbelief that’s needed to swim through Aquaman, James Wan utilizes his Furious brand of high-octane CG-spectacle and Jason Momoa’s quirky sense of humor to good effect, lifting a rather bland story (and the annoying set-up for Aquaman 2) to something entertaining enough to justify. B+
——————————————
Next week, new movies include Holmes and Watson and Vice. If you would like to see a review for one of these, or any other film out next week, please respond in the comments below.
December 16, 2018
Movie Mayhem – Mortal Engines
Mortal Engines — 2018; Directed by Christian Rivers; Starring Hera Hilmar, Robert Sheehan, Jihae, Stephen Lang and Hugo Weaving
In Return of the Jedi, as the Rebel Alliance attacks the second Death Star, Lando Calrissian pilots the Millennium Falcon into the core to set off a few ion charges and start a chain reaction that will ultimately destroy it. As he does so, Luke Skywalker is on board the Death Star helping Anakin Skywalker find redemption. As the explosions start burning away at the core, both characters — as well as that infamous ship — are in danger. By the time the Falcon blasts from within the fire to come out (relatively) unscathed, we’re all cheering in excitement because we want to see these heroes we’ve grown to love survive. There’s a similar sequence in the new post-apocalyptic adventure, Mortal Engines, that falls extremely flat, mostly because unlike the sequence in Jedi, we aren’t invested in any of the characters enough to have that same breathless urgency.
About a thousand years after the human race is all but destroyed by some type of quantum weapon (Ant-Man and the Wasp would be so proud), the survivors have built massive mobile cities that travel the land. One of the top dog cities is London, which spends its days devouring smaller cities for fuel, scrap and historical artifacts. The leader of London (or at least the one who appears to be in charge) is Thaddeus Valentine (Hugo Weaving), a seemingly virtuous gentleman who may have nefarious purposes boiling under the surface.
On board the city’s most recent prey is Hester Shaw (Hera Hilmar), a young girl seeking revenge against the man who supposedly murdered her mother several years before. She gets close to doing so when she spots Thaddeus trolling the scrapping facilities on London, but is ultimately foiled by Tom Natsworthy (Robert Sheehan), a meek historian who wants nothing more than to protect old relics like cell phones and toasters. After an interesting chase sequence, both end up thrown off London and must team up to find their way back for their own individual purposes.
There’s nothing wrong with any of the performances and the story flows well enough to keep you interested, but there is so much of the film that falls extraordinarily flat, mostly due to the lack of development in the characters. It seems the trio of writers (Fran Walsh, Philappa Boyens and Peter Jackson) and director Christian Rivers spend so much time building this interesting new world that they forgot to provide the characters with any substantial depth. Most of them simply go about the actions the script tells them to without putting any true heart into the mission, thus making the whole thing feel rather bland.
Take for instance the characters tasked with tracking Hester during her quest. Shrike (Stephen Lang) is a “resurrected” who raised Hester after finding her near death, and Anna Fang (Jihae) is one of the leaders of a resistance attempting to protect the one civilization that has set down roots in a valley hidden behind a massive wall. The motivations for both characters wanting to find Hester make sense within the context of the story, but both are so under-developed, it makes them somewhat underwhelming in their emotional impact throughout the film.
Most egregious, though, is the relationship between Hester and Tom. I never bought that they would ever find feelings enough to support what the script was trying to peddle on us. I can respect that Rivers kept it from going as far as it could have, but some of the important plot developments rely on a “love” between these characters that is basically non-existent, especially since they set up another possible relationship between Tom and Thaddeus’s daughter, Katherine (Leila George), that ends abruptly when Hester comes into the picture.
Aside from these two, there are several characters that seem to be there more for plot convenience than anything else, as they are never developed beyond a static portrait, even as they are positioned early on as being important. We only meet the band of “rebels” nearly two-thirds of the way through the movie, so by the time we reach the climax, we couldn’t care less about what happens to them since we barely know them. Then there’s Weaving, who goes through the motions of his Mr. Smith menace instead of digging his heels in and giving us someone to love to hate. A little scenery chewing may have gone a long way in building up some magnetism surrounding his plans. Rivers holds him back, however, and it turns into a disservice to the film as a whole.
Where the film does excel is in the effects and, as I mentioned before, the world building. Peter Jackson is fantastic at building worlds that breathe life, so there really wasn’t any doubt that this film would be any different. The filmmakers do a terrific job creating an honest atmosphere of what the world would be like in the 3000s, and how history can repeat itself if you’re not careful to heed its warning. This helps in creating battle sequences that work well, even if they feel unbearably familiar (see my opening paragraph).
When I first saw the trailer for Mortal Engines, I thought it would either be horribly good or horribly bad, in that, either it was going to be so bad, it’s good, or it was just going to be terrible with no redeeming qualities. After seeing the film, I can say it isn’t bad, but it’s not terribly good; it sits somewhere in the middle, stuck in the mud trying to produce a sense of life, urgency and charisma, but is unable to pull itself out of the doldrums of familiarity and triteness.
My Grade: B
Bonus Review:
Plot conveniences aside, Spider-Man: Into the Spider-Verse finds an intelligent and visually interesting way to tell a compelling story, providing us a comic-specific style while mixing in genre animation styles specific to each individual Spider-Men (and Women) who are pulled into a New York where a kid named Miles Morales is in need of training to become the next great Spider-Man. A-
——————————————
Next week, new movies include Aquaman, Bumblebee, Mary Poppins Returns, Second Act and Welcome to Marwen. If you would like to see a review for one of these, or any other film out next week, please respond in the comments below.
