Wolf Man

     I probably sound like a broken record by now for always saying something along the lines of; “I’m not a big fan of horror” every time I discuss a horror film, but the type of horror films I like best are the monster movies. I grew up watching the classic Universal Monsters and one of my favorites is The Wolf Man. Lawrence Talbot, bitten by a werewolf now doomed to live by nights of a full moon as a werewolf himself. I always felt sympathy for him and his quest to end his affliction. Now, writer/director Leigh Whannell, who in 2020 made a re-imagining of The Invisible Man that was quite good and effective, has put his spin on the werewolf genre with his Wolf Man.

     In this version we are told of a possible existence of an animal transmitted virus that turns men into beasts. Blake (Christopher Abbott) grew up in the forests of the American northwest in a remote farm with his single father. A strict military man. Now an adult Blake lives in the city with his wife Charlotte (Julia Garner) and young daughter Ginger (Matilda Firth). When he receives word that his father, who has been missing for years, has officially been declared dead, Blake takes his family with him to his childhood home to get the property in order. Once there they have a nasty accident in their rental truck. Escaping from the crash Blake is scratched by a creature. They reach the house only to learn that Blake has been infected by something that is slowly, over the course of the night, changing him into something else. Now they have to contend with his deteriorating state and the creature trying to get into the house.

     Wolf Man is a fairly effective horror film, with some decent suspense sequences and a few nice jump scares. It’s treatment of the werewolf legend is an interesting take on the concept too. The creature itself isn’t as different from what we’ve seen before to be off-putting to werewolf purists either. The concept of this movie is actually a pretty good idea. What keeps it from really working, I think, is it’s being turned into a “house in the woods” movie. The slow transformation brings to mind Jeff Goldblum’s Brundlefly in David Cronenberg’s classic 1986 film The Fly, but the transformation isn’t the focus really. It is just happening while they contend with the monster outside. There is a very predictable reveal toward the end that you knew was going to happen shortly after the prologue played out.

     Along with the creature design there were some things that worked well in the film. Throughout the story Blake and his daughter have a little “thing” they do with each other, that you know is going to have a major call back, but when it happens at the end it actually hits emotionally as intended. In spite of it being telegraphed all along. The three principles- Abbott, Garner, and Firth play well together, so I bought into the family dynamic and that’s why the emotional beat at the end still works. The transformation sequences are technically good, but nothing we haven’t seen before in movies like The Fly and other werewolf films over the years. I did like the device of… I’ll call it “wolf vision”, where we are seeing the world as the infected Blake sees it. It’s hazy, the colors are off, and he can’t understand the words being spoken to him. In reality he is also speaking nonsense when he tries communicating. I found it to be effective. We understand Blake’s emotional state a little better knowing what he is experiencing. The cinematography is beautiful too. From the way they shot the house interior to the gorgeous mountain vistas of New Zealand, which stand in for the American Northwest.

     While I think the concept was pretty good, I do think it suffered from being turned into a “cabin in the woods” movie. The performances are good and help keep the emotional element alive. I just keep coming back to the fact there seemed to be something missing. At least for me. Maybe it’s the fact that the story didn’t really open up much beyond being chased by a monster. I’m not sure. There is good stuff in there, but it’s not an entirely satisfying watch. I’ve heard others say they thought the transformation sequences were too gross and over the top. I didn’t find them to be anything overly stomach turning. The Brundlefly stuff made in the mid ‘80’s was a lot grosser than anything here. This version of the Wolf Man didn’t turn me off to werewolf movies, but the door is still open for someone to deliver a really great modern version.

A Complete Unknown

    Not being a big Bob Dylan fan but knowing a little about his story and a passing familiarity with his song catalog (I mean, songs like The Times They are a-Changin’, Mr. Tambourine Man, and Like a Rolling Stone are so entrenched in American culture that you can’t not be aware of them) I wasn’t sure if I would even be into this film. It turns out that, even without the in depth knowledge that so many other people have, I came out having really enjoyed it.

    A Complete Unknown covers Bob Dylan’s (Timothee Chalamet) arrival in New York City through his controversial “plugging in” at the Newport Folk Festival. Basically the entirety of the 1960’s. We follow him from meeting his mentor, Pete Seeger (Edward Norton), his relationship with Joan Baez (Monica Barbaro), his rise from the tiny Greenwich Village folk clubs to pop stardom, and then “going electric”. To the dismay of many in the folk music community who felt he’d personally betrayed them.

    Director James Mangold, who’s previous music bio-pic Walk the Line (about Johnny and June Carter-Cash) was an awards darling and damn good movie, returned to the genre to tell this story of Bob Dylan. His knowledge of Johnny Cash came in handy because he played a part in Dylan’s life too. The film slides along in chronological order, jumping a few years here and there to hit the highs and lows of that period of Bob Dylan’s life. He uses Dylan’s visits to Folk pioneer Woody Guthrie (Scoot McNairy) in his hospital room, suffering the ravages of Huntington’s Disease, as connective tissue for the narrative to hang on. How much of this is true and how much is fiction doesn’t really matter, it’s this angle that helps ground the film. Dylan is not always the good guy in his story, (Which is true of pretty much everyone’s life) but you can’t argue with his artistic output. The music is the other thing that holds the story together. His romantic relationships take a back seat to his music. He is even tossed out of Joan Baez’ hotel room for writing music over just being with her. His music took precedent over everything else in his life during this time.

    Timothee Chalamet is great as Dylan. He isn’t doing an impression so much as using a bit of the timber and speech pattern of the man, along with the hair-do, to capture the essence of the musician. His performances of the songs are as convincing as his portrayal of the man. It didn’t take long for me to just accept that this was Bob Dylan I was watching on screen. The same goes for Edward Norton as Pete Seeger. He disappears into this character. I’ve seen Norton in a lot of films over the years and had never seen him lose himself and become someone else like he does here. He only passingly looks like himself and his voice and way of speaking is much more like Seeger than Norton. While I thought Chalamet’s performance was terrific, it’s Edward Norton who impressed me most. Monica Barbaro as Joan Baez was impressive too. Watching the film I wasn’t sure if she was doing her own singing or not, so I had to look it up after, and she did do her own singing and guitar playing. I really only knew her from Top Gun: Maverick and the Arnold Schwarzenegger Netflix show FUBAR prior to this. A lot of the emotional wait of the film falls on Elle Fanning’s shoulders. She plays Bob Dylan’s first love after moving to New York. I believe I had read that her character, Sylvia, was a composite of a couple of woman from Dylan’s life. She’s the one he keeps going back to when fame takes a toll on him. She supported and loved him before anyone knew who he was. She’s his north star, but she knows that it’s just not fair to her to be there when it’s “convenient” and Fanning shows the pain of that realization very well. Chalamet and Norton are in the mix in awards season, I hope Elle Fanning can get some recognition for her work too.

    I thought the recreation of 1960’s Greenwich Village looked pretty good, I was never shocked out of the film by incongruities in period. The art direction and costumes added to the illusion. This is far from the first period film James Mangold has made. In addition to the aforementioned Walk the Line, he has directed Indiana Jones and the Dial of Destiny, Ford v. Ferrari, and 3:10 to Yuma. So he has an eye for portraying different eras. If you’re a big Bob Dylan fan or, like me, only have a passing awareness you’ll find yourself caught up in this story. Along with the fine performances and technical aspects of the film, it’s the music that is the real star. Even the songs I wasn’t very familiar with brought life to the story. Come for the story and bask in the music.

Nosferatu (2024)

     In the early days of cinema German director F.W. Murnau wanted to make a film of Bram Stoker’s Dracula, but didn’t want to pay for the rights. So, he changed all the names of the characters and made it anyway. 1922’s now classic example of German expressionism, Nosferatu: A Symphony of Horror, was released and when Bram Stoker’s widow caught wind of it, she was steamed. She sued, and won, and all copies of the film were ordered destroyed. Luckily for the world a few prints were squirreled away around Europe and over the years a virtually complete version is now available for all to view and enjoy. In 1979 German director Werner Herzog remade the film as Nosferatu the Vampire, starring Klaus Kinski made up to look very much like the character in the original film. Now, American writer/director Robert Eggers (The Witch, The Lighthouse, The Northman) has produced his own version. His is very true to the original, and therefore pretty true to the story of Dracula, with a few twists of his own to make it even more interesting for a modern audience.
    As I said Nosferatu is basically another telling of the Dracula story we’ve seen dozens of times since the 1920’s. A young, newlywed, real estate employee (Nicholas Hoult) is dispatched to Transylvania to get the paperwork completed for the sale of a home for an elderly count. In this case, Count Orlok (Bill Skarsgard). While there he learns of the evil beings plan to be with the young man’s beautiful bride (Lily-Rose Depp) when he reaches his new home. The Count travels by boat, which arrives abandoned and full of rats, and then sets about winning his prize. Meanwhile the young man also arrives back in town and with an eccentric doctor (Willem Dafoe), who knows of the “Nosferatu” and how to stop it, set out to destroy the Count.
    I find it a little strange that someone would want to “remake” a film that is really a rip-off of Dracula, but when I thought on it a bit more, I believe it’s because Murnau’s film was so originally striking visually and in its content that it exists, sort of, parallel with Stoker’s story. They really do tell the same tale, beat for beat, but still have their own individual identities. Robert Eggers, who’s films have been a little hit and miss with me (The Witch probably being the one I preferred), honors the 1922 film while bringing his style and sensibility to the piece. First, he put together a cast that could handle some difficult dialogue and stage direction. Much of what poor Lily-Rose Depp has to do could come off as laughable, but she makes it all very real and sometimes painful, in an empathetic way. She is the surprise performance in the movie. Honestly, I had only seen her in Kevin Smith’s Yoda Hosers before this, and boy have her acting skills improved. The always good Nicholas Hoult, finally able to use his own English accent for once, as Depp’s devoted husband holds his own with some big performances by Willem Dafoe and Bill Skarsgard. Emma Corrin (The Crown, Deadpool & Wolverine) and Aaron Taylor-Johnson play the best friends of Hoult and Depp’s characters. They have thankless roles. Not a lot to do but are important to setting up the third act. I think Corrin handles herself a little better than Taylor-Johnson, who seemed a little less comfortable with the period dialogue.
    Eggers delivers an eerily beautiful world for these characters to inhabit with amazing art direction and something I’ve never commented on before-- color-timing. There are times when the film is black & white, sometimes color and at times lit purely by candlelight, but most of the time the film exists in an almost sepia tone, but with a bit more color. It’s a little hard to describe but it works great. The design of the Count Orlok character is, mostly, a departure from the traditional Max Schreck version. The long, bony fingers with long nails remain but this Orlok sports a mustache and skin that already appears to be decaying. He wears a big fur lined coat which makes him more physically imposing. You don’t really get a look at his gaunt frame until the end of the film. At first, I was a little disappointed that he didn’t have the two little middle teeth fangs of the other two versions, but I got over it. In partnership with the gravely, thickly accented voice created by Bill Skarsgard, the creature makeup and costume create a very creepy and dangerous character.
    I could go on about the performances and technical aspects of the film, but that would just be a hat on a hat. Nosferatu is a hauntingly beautiful film that wears it’s influences proudly while still being something different. You can see the German expressionism, the European pacing, and even the classic Universal Monster films are in there. Personally, I was happy to see a Robert Eggers movie with a fairly easy to follow narrative. I’ll admit that with his other films I would find myself saying “what the wha??” quite often. Here he has taken this very well-known tale and put his fingerprints on it while delivering an emotionally effective and enjoyable experience at the cinema.

Wicked pt 1

     The long-awaited film version of the hit Broadway musical “Wicked” is a beautiful looking film full of insanely talented people and overseen by a very talented director, Jon M. Chu (who directed my favorite movie of 2021- In the Heights).  When the film works it really works, but there are times where it slows down and seems to just mark time.  For those of you who weren’t Band Nerds in high school, that is when the band marches in place as the percussion plays until it’s time to move again.  Cynthia Erivo and Arina Grande head the cast as Elphaba and Galinda and their talent, chemistry, and charisma keep the film afloat when it begins to wobble.

     Again, based on the hit stage musical, Wicked tells the origin story of the two witches we know from the story “The Wizard of Oz”.  The future Wicked Witch of the West, Elphaba, and future Good Witch of the North, Glinda (the name change is explained in the story) begin as rivals but soon form a friendship until a confrontation with the Wizard of Oz (Jeff Goldblum) tears them apart. 

     All the ingredients are there for a great musical film, and don’t get me wrong this is a good movie, but it is just too long.  There were scenes added to help “flush out characters” but I believe most of them were probably not necessary.  I have only seen the stage musical once, and that was about 6 years ago, so my memory of the show is pretty hazy.  I do know that the entire show was barely over 3hrs, including intermission.  The film is only Wicked part 1and runs about 2hrs 40mins.  I understand the studio, Universal, wanting to milk this property for all it’s worth, and breaking films into two parts has worked in the past.  Though I’d argue that all of them have ended up with too much padding, and that’s the case here.  All the moments from the play work like gangbusters in this film, but then it will go for pretty long periods of time without a song, and you really notice it.  In my opinion, the tighter your script the better the final product.

    What did I like about the film?  Well, there is a lot, beginning with the cast.  I’ve never been a big fan of Ariana Grande, though I never disliked her.  My kids grew up watching her on TV (Victorious) and listening to her pop songs so she was in my orbit.  Not being a close follower of the London or New York stage scene, my first exposure to Cynthia Erivo was in the film Bad Times at the El Royale, where she sang a lot of Motown songs.  She impressed me in the film which led me to discover that she was already a musical theater star, having come to prominence in the stage musical version of The Color Purple.  Both of these ladies own this movie.  There isn’t a false note from either of them.  They are great.  I knew about Erivo’s powerful voice and knew Ariana Grande could sing, I just wasn’t aware of just how vast her vocal talents were.  Both happen to be very good actors too!  The rest of the cast is made up of recognizable faces from the world of films and theater.  Jeff Goldblum is the at his most “Goldblumiest” as The Wizard of Oz, Michelle Yeoh turns in another terrific performance here as a teacher at the school, Jonathan Bailey comes from the stage but is currently probably best known for his role in the TV show Bridgerton.  Ethan Slater (Broadway’s Sponge Bob), SNL’s Bowen Yang, Marissa Bode, and as the voice of a Goat professor- Peter Dinklage round out the main supporting players.  All are very good.  Though I think it’s Dinklage’s character that makes up a chunk of the added material.  Not his fault!     

   On the technical side this film hits all the marks too.  Most of the sets are practical, with CG used to extend them into the horizon.  They are enormous, amazingly detailed sets that place you right there at the school, Munchkinland, and then the Emerald City.  Production designer Nathan Crowley (The Greatest Showman and Wonka) and Art Director Gavin Fitch (Ready Player One and Wonka), and their teams, have crafted gorgeous places for the players to inhabit, that sell the world of the film to the audience, without question.  The costumes by Paul Tazewell (Hamilton & West Side Story) remind me of actually functional clothes Dr. Seuss might have come up with.  The CG work extending the sets and bringing the animal characters to life is seamless.  It’s easy for CG to pull you right out of a movie.  Those terrible Elephants in The Greatest Showman for example.  That is not an issue here.  Wicked is beautiful.  The choreography, by Christopher Scott (In the Heights) does a super job of using those huge sets.  There is so much happening in the big, large-scale scenes that you just can’t take it all in, and in the smaller numbers, like “Popular” which features just Elphaba and Glinda, are probably even more successful.  I love how he takes advantage of everything in the space- furniture, props, pieces of the set, incorporating it all into the number. 

    I know it hasn’t been advertised as such, but this film is only the first half of the story.  The big song that brings the play into intermission closes the movie.  Part 2 is set for release about this same time in 2025, so we have a full year before the conclusion reaches cinemas.  Plenty of time for the big fans to watch it again and again once it’s released on home video and streaming.  Personally, I won’t revisit it until closer to part 2’s release.  As I said before, it feels long.  At least to me.  Hopefully the second half has less filler, but I have a feeling it will.  Probably enough to fill the gap between the end of the play and the beginning of The Wizard of Oz.  Anyway, Wicked is worth seeing for the musical performances alone.  My personal favorite is “Popular”.  I think it’s better staged and performed than even “Defying Gravity” which is the “bring the house down” song of the piece.  Wicked is well worth seeing on a very big screen.  It won’t be the same experience on your TV set.  If you have the patience and want to see the spectacle in all its glory, see Wicked in a theater on a big screen.

Here

    Director Robert Zemeckis and actor Tom Hanks reunite with Forest Gump co-star Robin Wright for a very interesting experiment in film making. Based on the graphic novel by Richard McGuire “Here” shows us the life of a particular spot, a piece of real estate, from the dawn of time to today. We follow those who have occupied that spot from a pair of young native American lovers to a modern African American family. Most of our time is spent following the life of Tom Hanks’ Richard and Robin Wright’s Margaret as they occupied the space.
     I refer to Here as an interesting experiment because we experience the story from one particular view. The camera is locked off and the whole thing takes place in one, proscenium-like, frame. Only, like the graphic novel, cutouts of the frame will show the exact same spot in a different time. The main stories we follow take us from the pre-European era of the native Americans, Colonial times (the house across the street belonged to the brother of Benjamin Franklin), the early 1920’s, 30’s, 40’s through the early 2000’s, and then today. Most of our time is spent with Hank’s Richard’s family. When his mother (Yellowstone’s Kelly Reilly) and father (Avengers’ Paul Bettany) buy the house through those 2 generations. For the first, probably, half-hour or so it seems a bit odd that you don’t follow any of the action as it moves out of frame, but after a while you just key into it and forget the gimmick. There is always something happening in the frame. Could be outside the bay window of the room or a cut-out introducing another moment in the location’s history. What seems like it’s going to be a stagnant, boring one frame film takes on its own life and we are silent observers.
    Robert Zemeckis is known for utilizing the latest technology. From Who Framed Roger Rabbit to Back to the Future to Forest Gump, to his fully motion-capture animated films like Beowulf. Now a lot has and will be said about his choice to go “all in” on de-aging Tom Hanks and Robin Wright for the different ages they had to play- from 17-80. For the most part it looks pretty good. Zemeckis even tempts fate with a few close-ups. Including one where Robin Wright’s character morph/ages from her 30’s to 50. For me, the affect was pretty successful. Robin Wright at 57 still looks pretty good, so the most obvious changes were on Tom Hanks. We’ve all seen him in his early ‘20’s through today so it’s pretty easy for our brains to except those versions of him. I quit trying to look for issues and just fell into the film. There is a weird CG moment where a toddler bet bounced off a couch onto the floor that looks a little “off’ but it’s a funny moment that actually made me feel better that it wasn’t an actual small child. When age make-up is used to make our characters look older is where the success rate isn’t quite as good. Personally, I don’t think aged Paul Bettany looked old enough, but that’s nit-picking. Kelly Reilly’s character, in later life, suffers a stroke in the story and they must have used a combo of age make-up and CG for that look. It looked very good by the way. All the other CG that went into creating pre-historic times, and the eras that followed all looked great. There is a hummingbird, that serves a similar purpose as the feather in Forest Gump, that is pretty obviously CG, but I wasn’t bothered. There is a deer at one point that could have used a little more attention though.
    As I was watching the film it began to dawn on me that Tom Hanks and Robin Wright were possibly the only American actors in the movie. Bettany and Reilly are English and though I didn’t know their names off the top of my head at the time I recognized Michelle Dockery from Downton Abbey, Ophelia Lovibond from Elementary and Minx, Nicholas Pinnock from The Book of Clarence, and Nikki Amuka-Bird from Knock at the Cabin...all English actors. So, I figured the movie must have been shot in England, and darned if I wasn’t right. Pinewood Studios.
    Here is going to play differently depending on the viewer's age. If I had seen this in my 20’s I wouldn’t have connected as emotionally as I do as a man in his 50’s who has experienced a good bit of life. So, it’s not going to hit the same way for younger viewers. Which is interesting because most modern films target that younger audience. They have the disposable income and will see things more than once if they like it. It’s unlikely that Zemeckis and Sony have a hit on their hands here, with Here, but it doesn’t make it any less of an artistically successful movie. I liked it and was glad I was able to see it on a big screen. Like any movie it plays better on a big screen, but this particular experience, though you may not think so, does benefit from being a theatrical experience. If you’ve lived some life and want to feel some feels, Here is one to check out.  

Megalopolis

     Writer/Producer/Director Francis Ford Coppola has said that he has had the concept of Megalopolis banging around in his head since the early 1980’s. Laurence Fishburne, who appeared in Coppola’s Apocalypse Now, said they talked about it during production of that film...and that was the late ‘70’s. Over the decades Coppola held script readings, shot some second unit material, and nearly began production a couple of times before having to abandon it. Not unlike Terry Gilliam’s journey with The Man Who Killed Don Quixote, which also ended up starring Adam Driver. Unable to find studio financing Mr. Coppola paid for the entire film himself. Said to have been upwards of $120 million. Also, not unlike Gilliam’s film, Megalopolis just doesn’t seem to have been totally worth all the heartbreak and agony that went into making it.
     In a sort of, alternate version of America where the Roman Empire succeeded, in the city of New Rome (New York in our reality) Adam Driver plays genius architect Cesar Catilina. Who discovered the formula for a new material he calls Megalon (not to be confused with Kaiju of the same name who fought Godzilla). This stuff can be used to make buildings, garments, and who knows what else. Anyway, he has a plan to create a new New Rome using this building material for the betterment of all. Oh, and he can stop time. Really. The corrupt-ish Mayor of New Rome (Giancarlo Esposito) trusts “concrete and steel” to build stuff, including a new casino that he thinks should revitalize the city. The mayor’s “wild child” daughter Julia (Game of Thrones’ Nathalie Emmanuel) is very curious about her father’s adversary and ends up falling in love with him. There is also Cesar’s lover and salacious TV new reporter Wow Platinum (Aubrey Plaza), the Banking Magnate Hamilton Crassus III (Jon Voight) who she seduces and marries. Crassus’s power-hungry Grandson Clodio (Shia LeBeouf), along with assorted other side characters played by the likes of Jason Schwartzman, D.B. Sweeney, Talia Shire, America’s Got Talent winner Grace VanderWaal, Dustin Hoffman, and Laurence Fishburne as Cesar’s Valet, to name a few.
     I have been looking forward to this film, had heard it was weird and was prepared for it. Look, I like a weird movie from time to time. I consider myself a fan of David Lynch, Terry Gilliam, Stanley Kubrick, and David Cronenberg. I haven’t loved everything they’ve made but have liked the majority of their work. This is the first downright weird movie I’ve seen from Francis Ford Coppola. Though Apocalypse Now has its share of weird. Unlike his Vietnam classic I couldn’t really tell you what is going on in most of Megalopolis. There really isn’t any character to like here. Even the most likable do something questionable at some point. Fishburne’s character is the only consistent character in the thing. There are definitely interesting concepts and messages addressed in the film, but they don’t seem to coalesce into anything. Perhaps my knowledge of those concepts is limited and just couldn’t put it all together, but Coppola is definitely making statements about greed, government corruption, capitalism, fascism, and even love in there. In the end I think he’s leaving us with a hopeful message about the future, but it’s kind of a drastic shift in message in the final minutes of the movie.
     I made the comparison to Terry Gilliam’s The Man Who Killed Don Quixote earlier. A film I just didn’t like. I have compassion for Gilliam because he put so much effort into getting it made but in the end it just didn’t work. There’s is a sense of that in Megalopolis too. I feel for Francis Ford Coppola. He sunk everything he had into getting this dream project made and it just didn’t land. At least not for me. One problem he and Gilliam had was casting Adam Driver. An actor I like, and think is talented. He just seemed miscast in both films. Just because someone is “hot” at the time doesn’t mean they are right for the role. In this case I think someone else would have worked better. Making an unlikable guy at least sympathetic can be tough. Especially with a script that isn’t written the way people talk. This is an issue Coppola shares with screenwriters like Kevin Smith, and Coppola’s friend George Lucas. It takes a special actor to make a script like that work. Driver just didn’t have the charisma and subtlety to walk that line. Mostly he is WAY overacting. I didn’t believe him for a moment. Nearly every featured player had at least a few moments where I could see them acting. Those who handled the job best, in my opinion, were Jon Voight, Talia Shire, and Laurence Fishburne. Perhaps just by their years of experience helped them be able to shape the words into something “real”. The overacting award I give to Driver was challenged though, by wack-a-doo Shia LeBeouf. Some of his role certainly called for it, but he was definitely aiming for BEYOND the fences with this performance. He did have a nice moment where he is storming into a building, followed by his entourage, tosses his hat on the floor and says to the man behind him “get my hat!” That man picks up LeBeouf’s hat, drops his own and says to the man behind him “get my hat!” and this is repeated until the final guy. I chuckled and really appreciated the moment. Mostly the performances are kind of… fine, at best. You can see some actors just giving it there all to make it work. The script if full of Shakespeare quotes too. Adam Driver has to deliver at least half of the “to be or not to be” speech from Hamlet. More follow but not to that extreme.
     It’s a beautiful looking film. The art direction is amazing and the spfx are better than you’d expect but even the most beautiful movie still needs a good story to hang its beauty on. That part of the movie was lacking, or at least I wasn’t able to grasp it fully. The Roman trappings of the film are interesting. From woman’s fashion, to wrestling and chariot races in Madison Square Garden. All interesting but I’m not sure if there was a reason for them. There are a lot of “why’s” in this movie. Cesar had been accused of killing his wife in the past. It was “in all the papers” and images of his wife, her death, and press images appear often. He is definitely deeply affected by her death, but is it resolved? I... don’t…think so. Why can he stop time? It has absolutely no bearing on the story. No reason for the ability to exist. Coppola’s style in this film is a strange combo of Fritz Lang meets 1940’s crime drama with a dash of silent film framing with title cards and closing iris transitions. It looks nothing like we’ve seen from him before. Now I have no problem with a filmmaker taking risks and believe me, Megalopolis was a risk. It’s a big expensive looking art house film. I do hope that Francis Ford Coppola is happy with the movie. There were times when I felt like I was missing something. Like a scene was missing that would have explained what his happening now. What I’m saying his, I hope Coppola did not compromise to get his movie “out there’ and seen. I’m also not saying I’d like to see an even longer version of this movie. I just hope this is the version of the movie he wanted to make. It’s his art and if he’s happy that’s what counts. It didn’t totally work for me, but if he made what he set out to make then that makes me happy too.

The 4:30 Movie

     I’m a Kevin Smith fan and even then, when it comes to Kevin Smith, a little can go a long way sometimes. His latest film, written and directed, is The 4:30 Movie. A somewhat autobiographically inspired story of a high school movie lover, his friends, and the girl of his dreams.

     It’s 1986 and we meet teenager Brian David (Austin Zajur), a movie lover, and his friends Belly and Burny. Their plan is to spend the day at the movie theater seeing movies, only earlier that day Brian finally got up the nerve to ask the girl his dreams- Melody (Siena Agudong), who he spent some time with nearly a year ago, on a date to the movies. After some shenanigans at the movie theater gets them banned by the manager (played by Ken Jeong) Brian now has to figure out, not only how to get into the R rated movie he wants to take Melody to, but how he’s going to get into the theater at all now that he’s been banned.

     The 4:30 Movie an okay enough bit of fluff. I thought I’d be the exact audience for this one, having come of age in the ‘80s as well and also being a big movie fan, but I think teens of today might actually like it more. That is if any of them were to go see it. I was the only person in the Sunday matinee showing I attended. Unlike most of Kevin Smith’s movies he isn’t really revisiting his View Askewniverse again. No Dante, no Randal, and no Jay & Silent Bob in this one, which is fine. As much as I enjoy those movies, they are for a very limited audience of fans. With The 4:30 movie Smith moves more into the Jersey Girl lane for a film that exists outside that world (or does it??). In real life Kevin Smith bought the movie theater he attended growing up in New Jersey. Having done that he thought it would make a good location for a movie. So he wrote this movie with that location in mind. It’s also, obviously, him looking back on his teens in the ‘80’s watching movies, reading Starlog Magazine, and hanging out with his friends. There’s not doubt, right from the beginning, that the Brian character is filling in for Smith. I got all the references, since I was also a teen in the 1980’s, and actually loved the Starlog shout out. What the movie does a lot, unfortunately, is get a little too caught up in gags, like fake movie trailers, and way too much time is spent dealing with Ken Jeong’s very annoying theater manager. The movie is working best when in the moments with Brian and his friends and Brian with Melody. Unlike those View Askewniverse movies, I found the cameos by members of the “Kevin Smith players” to be distracting. Those are people who have appeared in other of his films, some in nearly all of them. People like- Harley Quinn Smith, Jennifer Schwalbach Smith, Justin Long, Method Man, Ernie O’Donnell, Jeff Anderson, Ming Chen, Ralph Garman, Jason Mewes, Jason Biggs, Diedrich Bader, and Jason Lee. When I saw something like Jay & Silent Bob: Reboot, those were great moments, but they play differently here. In this movie they pull someone like me out of the film while my brain says “Hey! That’s so and so!” I’m not saying some of those people couldn’t be in the movie, Kate Micucci plays Melody’s Mom, but when they are used as cameos to make you say what I said, it’s just fluff.

     The 4:30 Movie, like nearly every other Kevin Smith film, is rated R. In this case, the movie would probably have been better served if he could have avoided an over use of the usual profanity and “dick” jokes. At it’s heart this film is a story of a young man who has found a girl he really likes and, even better, likes him back. Sure sometimes my language with my high school friends could have been “R” rated, but for the most part, it really wasn’t. The innocence of the story is what works best. Plus, the actual audience for this movie, much like the kids in the film, can’t see it due to the rating. Because of what I thought of as all the padding, what Kevin Smith has here is a tight 60 minute idea stretched to just short of 90 minutes.

     Being a Kevin Smith fan, in this case, may have hurt my enjoyment of the movie. None of the principle actors are part of the “Smith Stock Company” and, even with their youth, are actually quite good. I went in knowing that Austin Zajur, who plays Brian, is Smith’s daughter’s real life boyfriend so I, fairly or unfairly, did not expect much from him. Luckily, he’s quite good in this film. As is Siena Agudong and Nicholas Cirillo & Reed Northtop who play Brian’s besties. Northrop’s hairdo looks just like Despicable Me 3’s villain “Balthazar Bratt” and that’s all I could think of when he was on screen though. The movie also suffers a bit from what I call the “Sweathog Proble”. That is when actors playing teenagers are fairly obviously not actual teenagers. These young actors come close, but the only one who might pass for 17 is Siena Abudong (who is really 20 years old). The 4:30 Movie is worth a look if you like teen comedies but if you’re a Kevin Smith superfan this is probably a “one and done”.

Beetlejuice Beetlejuice

     You know the phrase; “You can’t go home again”? Beetlejuice Beetlejuice is a perfect example of it. The original 1988 Tim Burton classic came out of nowhere with it’s manic and visually captivating style and still makes me laugh, having seen it at least a dozen times since it’s release. Now Tim Burton, along with his “Wednesday” writing team Alfred Gough and Miles Millar have tried to catch lightening in a bottle again and miss the mark more often than not.

     It has been over 30 years since Lydia Deetz (Winona Ryder) and a ghost couple drove the nasty spirit “Betelgeuse” (Michael Keaton) away. Now Lydia is a widowed mother of a teenage daughter of her own, Astrid (Jenna Ortega), and Betelgeuse is about to return, with the same goal of making Lydia his bride.

    What I think made the original Beetlejuice work was it’s manic/off kilter sense of comedy danger. By that I mean that first film felt improvised, especially Keaton’s Betelgeuse, and for the most part that character was. This time out there is very little of that feeling. Even when Betelgeuse is talking it all feels scripted. That sense of comedy danger is just not there. Burton and the writers have also put together a rather overly complicated story. When the death of Lydia’s father brings her semi-estranged daughter back to her and her now famous artist stepmother (Catherine O’Hara) they are dealing with their relationships to each other. We also have Lydia’s, now a TV star as the host of a “ghost hunting”-type show, manager/boyfriend (Justin Theroux), Betelgeuse’s ex-wife (Monica Bellucci), a love interest for Astrid (Arthur Conti), and an afterlife detective (Willem Dafoe) all in the mix to muddy the story. Danny DeVito is in there too. For fun I guess. The original film had a very simple premise-- newly dead couple wants to get rid of the weird family that moved into their house, hires an afterlife “exterminator” but he is not what they want. All the crazy visuals and zany improvised shenanigans of Michael Keaton came together to make comedy magic. Beetlejuice Beetlejuice comes nowhere near recapturing it.

     Beetlejuice Beetlejuice isn’t a terrible film, but in comparison to it’s predecessor it’s a disappointment. The returning players- Ryder and O’Hara are trying their best and the new players are giving it their all too, but it feels like the reins on Michael Keaton were being held too tightly by Tim Burton. There is not one moment where we feel that Keaton’s character is allowed to just “go nuts” like he is constantly doing in the original film. There are some nice gags here and there and the art direction and special effects, mostly practical, do a great job of making you feel like your back in the same world as the original movie. While most of the effects are practical, and look great, there are some computer generated effects used with mixed results. There is a good Beetlejuice follow up in this movie, but it’s buried under two or three other story lines that do nothing but get in the way. If Burton could have cut all the fat, and there is a lot, and let Keaton just GO, we could have seen a better movie. At least I think so. If you’re a big fan of the original movie, I’d say; go check it out, just PLEASE, temper your expectations.

Alien: Romulus

    After what seems like countless entries in this series since it’s first sequel- James Cameron’s amazing Aliens in 1986, I have grown a bit weary of the attempts. Even the man who started it all, Ridley Scott, made two prequels and, while they were interesting, just don’t match up to the first two Alien films. So I went into seeing Alien: Romulus with hopeful skepticism. Before seeing the film I’d heard others referring to it as a “greatest hits” and you know what? It is. This film offers very little that is new to the series, other than a Y.A. cast. I had some trouble working up a lot of enthusiasm for the movie as it played out in front of me. I think the best I came up with was an appreciation for what they were doing more than finding myself caught up in the story being told.

    In this film we follow a group of young 20-somethings as they attempt to free themselves of life on a dreary mining colony by taking a derelict vessel, in orbit around their world, and use it to travel to another world for a better life. Once they reach the derelict it appears to be an abandoned research station called Romulus and Remus. Their plan changes to taking cryo-pods from the station for their ship so they can still travel to that new home. What they discover is the object of the research the station’s crew was doing. Yep...it was the very Xenomorphs introduced in the 1978 film. Now they not only have to get what they came for but try to survive the Aliens.

    The two main characters are Rain and her intellectually challenged synth brother Andy. It seems Andy was found by Rain’s late father and repaired to become a companion and protector for her. Her “friends” recruit her help mainly for the synth’s abilities. I thought Cailee Spaeny, who played Priscilla Presley in the recent film “Priscilla” was quite good, though she isn’t given much of anything more to do then Ripley ever was in the original 4 films. I did like the character of Andy, played by David Jonsson, and what happens with his character. That was as close as this movie came to introducing a new angle to the series. The rest of the young cast- Archie Renaux, Spike Fearn, Aileen Wu, and Isabela Merced are fine. There isn’t time to really flush out their characters and the dialogue isn’t as clever as the original Alien film, which did most of that work for us. The story is also fine. We learn that this tale takes place after the events of Alien but before Aliens and the first film is referenced. I’m nearly done with my thoughts but I would like to get into some spoilery territory just to make some points, so if you have not seen Alien: Romulus go see it before coming back.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

    Here we go. The mining colony is run by the Weyland-Yutani Corporation, introduced all the way back in 1978’s Alien. So we know from the franchise that they are huge and not the most ethical of companies. How would they not know about this derelict space station that is now orbiting the planet? Wouldn’t they have sent someone up there to check it out or destroy it? I mean, the station was theirs and what was on it was important to them. So right away I was a little put off by that plot point. Our rag-tag “Scooby Gang” that go up and check it out are a terrible team. They seem to have the same goal but are definitely not of the same mind as to HOW to go about it. I had very little compassion for anyone but our two main characters, and maybe a little for Isabela Merced’s Kay. Maybe. Speaking of homages to the previous films, that transition will make sense in a moment… The little beak-dipping bird was a nice touch, the interior design of the Weyland-Yutani station and the xenomorph “stuff” is consistent with the series (though I don’t think we’ve had such an obvious H.R. Giger inspired vagina in the series until now). The score by Benjamin Wallfisch, which doesn’t seem to be borrowing themes so much as being in the style of Jerry Goldsmith’s score of Alien. We get the return of Ian Holm (at least his computer generated face and voice) as a synthetic character. Not Ash this time but Rook and still a creepy dude. There is a “get away from her you bitch” which was a bit of a moaner from me, and a nod to Alien: Resurrection with a human/Xenomorph high-bred. Now, was it just me or did the “baby’s” face look a lot like one of the Engineers from Prometheus? That couldn’t have been a coincidence. We even learn that it was the very Alien that Ripley battled in the original film that was used to begin all the research on the space station. Director, Fede Alvarez, who also did the Evil Dead remake, Don’t Breath, and The Girl in the Spider’s Web, is obviously a fan of the franchise. Filling it with nods to the other movies can be fun, but in this case he really did deliver a greatest hits more than craft a wholly original story.

    After all that I will say that I didn’t NOT like Alien: Romulus, it’s fine. There are a few good moments and the two leads bring some charisma to the piece. The SPFX are very good, though the “Ian Holm Rook” face, while good, is still obviously not natural. The whole de-aging and face replacement effect is still not as good as it wants to be and I have conflicting feelings about it’s use. Overall I thought the film was an entertaining enough thriller, but after it was over I found myself thinking about the previous entries in the franchise and not much about the one I had just watched.

Deadpool & Wolverine

    Deadpool & Wolverine is a blast for comic book/Deadpool/MCU fans. How it would play for John Q. Public, who has only a passing knowledge of the Marvel Cinematic Universe, is up for debate. This movie is chuck full of fan service and cameos from Marvel characters featured in the 20^th Century Fox films. I, being a huge comic book fan and having seen all the Marvel movies, no matter the studio, and no matter the quality, appreciated them...mostly. Having Deadpool and Wolverine, finally, together could have been enough on it’s own but this movie is trying to do a lot of work beyond just getting these two characters together.

     I hated X-Men Origins: Wolverine and, along with every other comic book fan, their treatment of the Wade Wilson character (played by Ryan Reynolds). I mean, they took “The Merc with the Mouth” and sewed his mouth shut. Talk about missing the point of a character. Luckily we were given, thanks in no small part to Reynolds himself, the 2016 Deadpool movie. It was pitch perfect with it’s treatment of the character. The 2018 follow up, while definitely not an improvement over the first, is not too bad either. So, when we first learned that, after the purchase of the Fox studio by Disney, Hugh Jackman agreed to return to the role that made him a star, and do it with Reynold’s Deadpool, I got pretty excited. For the most part, this movie delivers the goods with this team-up. I have a few issues with it, but I also loved the fan service stuff.

     At this point I’ll probably drop a few spoiler-y details so, if you don’t want to know anything, go see the film, then return for my thoughts….

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

ok. You’re back. Here we go...

     From the opening moments with Deadpool humming along as the Marvel Fanfare plays over the MCU logo I knew the tone of the first two movies was still intact, though I was a little disappointed by the opening credits not being used as a gag like the previous Deadpool movies. The premise of the movie is, basically, Deadpool has to find a Wolverine in the multiverse, via the TVA, introduced in the Loki TV series, to save his timeline. Now, the movie takes over 2 hours to accomplish that one sentence premise. When our heroic duo find themselves in the “The Void”, also introduced in the Loki TV series, they encounter several of those characters we knew from the 20^th Century Fox Marvel movies. Some actually do help move the plot forward and a few are just extraneous. There is also an army of Deadpool variants that seem to be there as just an excuse to feature a few Deadpool characters seen in the comics, like Dogpool and Lady-Deadpool. Even the Zombie-Deadpool-head-with-the-propeller-beanie-on. While it was fun to see these on screen, they, and the big fight that followed, really could have been cut without effecting the narrative. There are also a couple too many fights, like serious fights, between Deadpool and Wolverine. We get it. They have a complicated relationship. Is it cool to see these two characters with healing factors beat up on each other? Of course, but I think it happened too many times.

     What did I like? Ryan Reynolds’ Deadpool and Hugh Jackman’s Wolverine. Finally together. They look great, especially finally seeing Jackman in the classic yellow and blue comics accurate costume. They each have such a terrific sense of their characters that putting them together just naturally worked. I loved the montage of Deadpool visiting different timelines in the multiverse looking for a Wolverine. Seeing “Patch”, comics accurately sized Wolverine, Feral Wolverine, and Cavill Wolverine was a joy. I also did like seeing those Fox (and New Line) characters. I especially loved the redirection of the use of Chris Evans in the film. I fell for it, and loved it. For the most part, the Fox characters actually were useful to the plot. Did we need all of them? Absolutely not. We could have easily done without Gambit. Admittedly, he was never a character I liked much from the comics in the first place. I did appreciate Deadpool’s mocking his accent. “chef’s kiss’ Ryan Reynolds.

     Each of the three Deadpool films had a different director. This time it was Shawn Levy, who directed the Night at the Museum movies and worked with Ryan Reynolds on Free Guy and The Adam Project. Two “good, but not great’ movies. Thankfully, he does a pretty good job of walking that line between the Deadpool universe and the Marvel Universe and handles this effects heavy film while maintaining the character’s motivations. Yes, there are a few scenes that take us away from the plot for a few minutes, but, as a big nerd, I can forgive them. When I first heard he was directing, I was a little worried. I’m not a huge fan of the Night at the Museum franchise and wasn’t overly impressed with either New Guy or The Adam Project, but he delivers pretty well here.

     To break it all down… I, an admitted comic book nerd, really enjoyed myself with Deadpool & Wolverine. To be honest, just having Deadpool & Wolverine together on screen got me most of the way there anyway. The fan service took me the rest of the way. In some of his promotional interviews Shawn Levy said you didn’t need to “do any homework” to enjoy this movie. That could be true, but you would certainly appreciate it more if you’ve seen all the Fox Marvel movies, at least one Doctor Strange movie, Loki Season 1, both previous Deadpool movies, aaaaand it would be nice if you’ve seen some Mad Max movies. Acknowledging that this movie has some flaws, I still had a blast and am curious to see how/if the MCU utilizes Ryan Reynold’s Deadpool in future films.

Despicable Me 4

    I am an unapologetic fan of the Despicable Me movies. Not as much the solo Minions movies, though “Rise of Gru” was an improvement. So, it’s not going to surprise anyone that I enjoyed the latest- Despicable Me 4. Is it a great movie? No, but there is enough fun in there to send me out of the theater with a smile on my face.

    This time out, Gru (Steve Carell) and his wife Lucy (Kristen Wiig) are still working for the Anti-Villain’s League and raising his three adopted daughters- Margo, Edith, and Agnes. Only now there is a new addition to the family, little Gru Jr. After a dangerous super villain, Maxime (Will Ferrell) escapes prison and vows revenge on Gru, the family must go to an AVL Safehouse and assume new identities. This only lasts so long before the baddie finds them and plans to abduct the littlest member of the family.

    Along with all the returning voice actors, and Will Ferrell, the likes of Joey King, Sofia Vergara, Chloe Fineman, and Stephen Colbert join the cast. They all bring great talent to a story that could have been tighter. This time around I found myself much more interested in Gru and his family, and to a lesser degree the Minion secondary story, than the plot involving the super villain and his plans. I had similar feelings about the third movie too, but the charm of the characters and animated gags keep the movie going at a pace that won’t allow even a small child to lose interest. I’m a fan of Will Ferrell, and his Maxime character is fine, I just didn’t care that much about him or his intentions, I was having too much fun with Gru and what he and his family, and again Minions, were up to. Their trying to fit into a new town and new identities is fodder for some pretty funny segments.

    The original creators of the franchise- Pierre Coffin, Chris Renaud, and Ken Daurio are back but I noticed a name as a writer on the movie that jumped out at me… Mike White. I had to look it up to see if it was the same Mike White I thought it was-- the one who wrote School of Rock and created the great HBO show The White Lotus, and it is! Which does explain how a “not all that absorbing plot” can still come out so entertaining. Seeing his name was a welcome surprise. If you have never been a big fan of this franchise then stay away, it’s a lot more of the same, but if you do have fun with these flicks I recommend it. If I were to rank the Despicable Me movies, I’d rank them in order of release. The first still being the best and the latest being the weakest, though still delivering enough fun to enjoy.

Horizon: An American Saga- Chapter 1

Inside Out 2

   It’s hard to believe that it has been nearly ten years since the release of Pixar’s Inside Out in 2015. Written and directed by Pete Doctor, it turned out to be one of the best films in the Pixar quiver. The follow up- Inside Out 2 is another gentle and entertaining trip into the mind of the now 13-year-old Riley. This time out though, Pete Doctor’s involvement is that of a producer and first time Pixar feature director Kelsey Mann is at the helm. While Inside Out 2 doesn’t quite reach the emotional and comedic heights of the first film it is, in my opinion, the best Pixar film since Coco in 2017.
     Amy Poehler returns to voice Joy along with Lewis Black as Anger and Phyllis Smith as Sadness. Taking over voice duties for Fear and Disgust are Tony Hale and Liza Lapira. I thought I might bump up against not hearing Bill Hadar and Mindy Kaling as those characters, but I never did. In this film we still follow Riley, who is about to begin High School in the fall and is attending a hockey summer camp in hopes of securing a place on the High School team. Only her body has other plans when the “puberty” alarm goes off and we are introduced to some new emotions-- Anxiety (Maya Hawke), Envy (Ayo Edebiri), Ennui (Adele Exarchopoulos), and Embarrassment (Paul Walter Hauser). Anxiety, in her effort to help Riley, sends Joy and her group off to be suppressed. As you may guess, leaving Anxiety in charge is not going well, and our band of outcasts must travel to the back of Riley’s mind to retrieve her newly forming sense of self and get it back to headquarters before Riley falls too deep into her anxiety.
     Unlike many of the previous Pixar features, Inside Out 2 doesn’t stray that far from the premise of the first movie. Some of our characters need to take a quest in order to help Riley. So, overall, it’s not the most original take on the concept. What saves this movie from completely feeling like a rehash of the first is the addition of some new and original characters. Maya Hawke’s voice performance as Anxiety is “out of control” great. She brings a lot of energy to the film and is what I would imagine the embodiment of anxiety to be like. She’s sort of the bad guy, but you just can’t hate her because she is genuinely trying to help Riley. Ennui, Envy, and Embarrassment don’t get a lot to do but each do have a few nice moments. There is a sequence where the hilarious comic Ron Funches voices a pre-school cartoon character Riley loved as a small child, kind of a cross between Blue of Blue’s Clues and Dora the Explorer, which is a highlight of the entire movie. The presentation of puberty and the emotional turmoil that comes with it is fun to watch and relate to. I’m a father of teenage girls so I related not only from my own experiences but as a father too
    I saw Inside Out with my teenage daughters, who love the first movie, and was surprised by the fact that they didn’t enjoy it as much as I did. I think they were overthinking it, but they were in agreement that they didn’t find it as funny as I did and didn’t find it emotionally effective either. I can only give you my opinion and mine is that this is a pretty good family film. It is rated PG, but I have no idea how the ratings board came up with that. Because they use the word Puberty? The movie is not about Riley’s sexual awakening in any way and there is really no violence of any note either. Inside Out is a movie that children of any age can enjoy, and will, and, like any good Pixar film, there is plenty humor for the parents in there that will just sail over small children’s heads. I enjoyed myself with this one.   

Furiosa: A Mad Max Saga

     Well, this one is kind of tough for me. I am not the lover of Mad Max: Fury Road that the rest of the world is. I didn’t buy Tom Hardy as Max and due to his age; it messed the whole chronology up for me. I will say that the vehicular action is amazing in that move, though I think a movie that it 75% action with 25% storytelling is not great cinema, or even a great Mad Max movie. Anyway, I am aware that I am in the minority there. This prequel to Fury Road, Furiosa: A Mad Max Saga, gives us the origin to the character of Furiosa (originally played by Charlize Theron, the best thing about Fury Road) now played by Anya Taylor-Joy. As we learned in Fury Road, Furiosa was taken from her home in ‘The Green Place”, here we see it happen. She ends up in the hands of a mad leader of a band of marauders- Dementus (played by Chris Hemsworth sporting a prosthetic nose and fake teeth). From there she is traded to Immortan Joe, a character first introduced in Fury Road. She makes her way through the ranks all the while plotting her revenge on Dementus and her return to The Green Place. All this plays out against lots of vehicular action in the desert.
     As a standalone action film, it’s fine. I had a pretty good time with it. I did find myself nodding off during one interminably long action sequence. Admittedly, I did not sleep will last night and that had a lot to do with it. I wondered how Anya Taylor-Joy playing Furiosa after seeing Charlize Theron already would be, but it’s not that big a leap. Taylor-Joy looks young for her age, and I could imagine her aging into the Furiosa we see in Fury Road. I hadn’t really seen her as an action star before. To a small degree in The Norseman, but nothing like she has to do here. She handles herself really well, behind the wheel of a chrome plated tanker truck or on a motorcycle. She pulls it off. Chris Hemsworth is having fun being a terrible person as Dementus. He played a baddie in the criminally underseen movie Bad Times at the El Royale, though he’s more a chewing up the scenery baddie in Furiosa. I guess the fake nose and teeth were because he’s actually a very attractive man and Dementos was just a nasty fella inside and out. Watching him here I could actually imagine him taking over the role of Max. He’d have been great, I think. Much more in the mode of Mel Gibson’s establishing performance. While the two primary stars turn in fine enough performances, I was most impressed with Tom Burke who played Praetorian Jack, who ends up being a sort of love interest for Furiosa. He handles the action well and plays small moments with real emotion and subtext all while driving a huge semi-truck speeding across the desert. I hope I see more of him in the future.
     One thing I hoped might be explained in this film that bothered me in Fury Road was the fact that Furiosa had an American Accent, and the action takes place in Australia. This movie did not, it actually confused me further. When we meet young Furiosa she sports an Australian accent and continues to until Anya Taylor-Joy takes over. At that point she has an American accent, just like Charlize Theron did. Theron is originally from South Africa and her natural accent is similar to an Australian one. So that always bothered me. At least having English actress Taylor-Joy put on an American accent was consistent with the adult Furiosa, but why?? The Mad Max timeline tripped me up again here. There is a shot of someone standing next to their “Interceptor” car, looking down from a cliff-face at the action below. It is strongly hinted visually that we are seeing Max. He didn’t have his interceptor in Beyond Thunderdome and was sporting some grey hair in that film. Not so in Fury Road. So, I think, maybe the events of Fury Road take place between The Road Warrior and Beyond Thunderdome. It would explain a lot that bothers me. I can’t find anywhere that writer/director George Miller intends that to be fact though. The fact that the world fell into chaos so fast between the original Mad Max and The Road Warrior is jarring as it is. Now we have a character in Furiosa who has lived her whole life in this world. The whole chronology is wonky, but, again, no one else seems very concerned about it. This is really my issue.
     Furiosa: A Mad Max Saga is entertaining enough. There’s a lot of crazy car, truck, motorcycle, even horseback action to enjoy. The performances are good, and we revisit, or rather see before the events of Fury Road. George Miller still knows how to shoot wild action, though not as wild as Fury Road. I’m not sure where you’d go from there anyway. If you loved Fury Road, you’ll enjoy yourself here. I think there is more narrative in this film than Fury Road, which was nice. Who knows? Maybe I’ll enjoy myself more the next time I revisit that film now.  

IF

     John Krasinski moves on from his A Quiet Place series to write and direct a more family friendly film with “IF”. IF is short for Imaginary Friends and 12 year old Bea (Cailey Fleming) can see all of them. Bea lost her Mother to cancer a few years prior and now her Father (John Krasinski) is in the Hospital for heart surgery. While staying with her Grandmother (Fiona Shaw) in New York City she notices something odd and follows it to an upstairs apartment where she finds Cal (Ryan Reynolds) who is trying to find new kids for Ifs whose children have outgrown them. Since she can also see the Ifs she decides to help try and find new kids for the Ifs.

     For the most part, IF is a nice family movie with some “feels” for the kids and adults. It has some structural issues and is very guilty of under-utilizing the comedic talent of Ryan Reynolds. Sometimes I could feel his energy trying escape but never getting the chance. I’m not saying that Reynolds can’t play the straight-man, but in this case it would have been ok for him to use some of that manic comedic energy. Cailey Fleming, who played young Judith “Lì'll Ass-Kicker” Grimes in the last couple of seasons of The Walking Dead, plays Bea and is just terrific. She is a natural actress, always seeming sincere in very serious or silly moments. She also shines in a little dance sequence with the Ifs. I can’t say enough good things about her. It’s so nice to see her getting work outside of The Walking Dead because she could have a very promising future if she wants it. The voice cast of the CG Ifs is pretty impressive too. Steve Carell, Phoebe Waller-Bridge, the late great Louis Gossett Jr., Awkwafina, Emily Blunt, George Clooney, Bradley Cooper, Bill Hader, Sam Rockwell, Amy Schumer, and Maya Rudolph to name only a few. They give these characters heart and individualism with limited screen time.

     Some may point out a similarity to the Cartoon Network animated show from about 20 years ago- Foster’s Home for Imaginary Friends, and yes, there are some similarities. A home, or retirement home in this case, where someone is trying to find a place for the Ifs. The difference here is that, while there is plenty of silly- one If is a flaming marshmallow (voiced by Krasinski) who’s eye oozes off from time to time, but here the human character, Bea, is dealing with serious issues and the fate of the Ifs is treated more seriously too. So, yes, there is a surface similarity to the properties but they are otherwise pretty different. I think Foster’s creator Craig McCracken would agree.

     Other than the criminal mistake of holding Ryan Reynolds back, the film makes some jumps in its logic and storytelling that could have been smoothed out a bit more with a few more passes on the script. The Grandmother character is very nice, but doesn’t seem too concerned when her 12 year old grandchild is gone most of the day, doing something in New York City. Sometimes it feels like moments or scenes were missing that might have connected story elements a bit better. It’s not like you can’t follow the story, there are just a few “conveniently” ignored issues that, I think, Krasinski just didn’t want to spend time on because they may have messed with the pace of the film. The pace is good, but there is little to no “downtime” for the viewer or for Bea. The film may have been better served if Bea did get a quiet moment or two to express or ponder everything she is dealing with. Remember, this is a child who has lost a parent and now has her remaining parent in the hospital for a risky surgery. It’s a fact that we are aware of and know that she is dealing with it, but she doesn’t really stop to deal with it until the very end of the movie. The end is probably a little predictable to some, though I somehow didn’t see it coming, even though all the clues were there and I just ignored them.

     Sure, IF is flawed but it’s not bad. I heard John Krasinski in an interview say that his goal was to try to make a live-action Pixar movie. A great story for the whole family with the deep emotions baked in. He comes pretty close here. The film would have been better served had the script gotten a couple more passes, but it is an enjoyable time at the movies that you can share with every member of the family. There are emotional moments and some very silly moments too. I had a pretty good time with it.

Kingdom of the Planet of the Apes

    It's no secret that I have been a fan of the Planet of the Apes franchise since I was a very small child. The first apes film I saw in it’s theatrical release was Escape from the Planet of the Apes and I’ve seen every film since as soon as I could. The latest entry- Kingdom of the Planet of the Apes, takes place in the same world as the most recent series featuring the character Caesar, introduces a new group of characters a few generations after the time of Caesar. Now we are following a young ape named Noa (Owen Teague), who is a member of the Eagle Clan. They have incorporated eagles into their culture and part of their “coming of age” tradition is to retrieve an eagle’s egg from a nest, then raise it themselves. When the Eagle Clan’s village is destroyed and it citizens either killed or captured, Noa, who was away at the time of the attack, sets out to rescue them. What he finds is an ape society being ruled by a tyrant calling himself Proximus Caesar (Kevin Durand) who has enslaved the Eagle Tribe (and others) to help him uncover the secrets of human technology. Noa, along with a young human named Mae (The Witcher’s Freya Allan), have to stop Proximus and free his people.

    The performance capture used in this latest series of apes movies has only gotten better and better with each film. This time I even noticed a physical resemblance between Owen Teague and his character Noa. We are definitely watching an actor’s performance in these computer generated characters. It’s pretty amazing. The “mo-cap” performances are terrific all around. After Andy Serkis’ performance as Caesar in the previous 3 films, Owen Teague had some big shoes to fill and he does brilliantly. The story itself isn’t all that new, it even has some similarities to the previous entry, War of the Planet of the Apes, but the originality of the new trappings and performances keep it from feeling stale. There is quite a bit of action in this film, especially in the third act where it just doesn’t quit for nearly the entire final 30 minutes. That’s not to say there aren’t good character moments in there too. We get to know Noa and his two besties fairly well before things really go south. The human character, Mae, is a bit short changed in that department, but I understand that if we had learned too much about her before the third act the end would be less impactful. If Mae appears in a future film it would be nice to get more background on where she comes from and why she is who she is. In this movie you just never know whether to trust her or not. One of my favorite characters, and one that is not in the film nearly enough, is an orangutan called Raka. He’s kind of a Preacher of the teachings of Caesar (the good one) and his voice was so familiar to me but I couldn’t place it until I saw him in the credits-- Peter Macon who played Bortus in the TV series The Orville. He’s great and I do wish he had more screen time. Kevin Durand, who I know best from his role as a creepy scientist in the recent Swamp Thing series, plays it very big, like huge, so when Proximus has a soft moment he seems all the nastier. Proximus is also a villain I, kind of, understand where he’s coming from. His methods are not to be commended, but in his way he does want to help ape-kind to progress. Learning human technology would save them centuries of self discovery. So, I get it. If it hadn’t been for enslaving his people Noa probably would have gone along with it. At the beginning of the film his opinion of humans is not very high. The concept of the eagles as part of Noa’s clan is an interesting one. It’s portrayed as such an important thing that I knew, and therefore was waiting for, it to pay off in the end, which it does.

    As an introduction to a new chapter in the Ape-Saga Kingdom of the Planet of the Apes works fine. In my personal opinion, War of the Planet of the Apes is still the best entry in the latest series, but Kingdom gives us a new jumping off point to take the franchise further into the future. Each of the newer movies has had a few easter eggs that hearken back to the original series and this one is no different. We see some familiar, lets call them, scarecrows, and even a baby doll that calls back to the original ‘68 film. All stuff for fans like me to smile at, but not a distraction to a new viewer. I enjoyed Kingdom of the Planet of the Apes and know I’ll revisit it. They do set up an interesting direction for the series to go and I would love for them to do so. To paraphrase Proximus Caesar, while not a “Wonderful day”, I had a “pretty darn good day” watching this movie.

The Fall Guy

     Inspired by the success of movies like Hooper, starring Burt Reynolds, The Fall Guy television series ran from 1981-86 and starred Lee Majors as stuntman/bounty hunter Colt Seavers. I was in high school at this time and The Fall Guy was a favorite show of mine. Seeing the trailer for this movie featuring Ryan Gosling as Stuntman Cold Seavers, I could tell that the filmmakers had kept the character’s name and the fact that he was a stuntman and pretty much jettisoned the rest of the concept. Knowing that, I didn’t go in expecting a reboot of the show, but a film that I should let be its own thing. So, I went into viewing the movie with that mindset and was open to whatever it turned out to be. What it is, is a film with all the ingredients of a big, fun action/comedy yet still misses most of the marks it tries to hit.
     In the film Gosling plays Colt Seavers, a stuntman for Tom Ryder (Aaron Taylor-Johnson), a hugely popular action film star. Colt’s dating a lovely camera operator, Jody (Emily Blunt), when there is an on-set accident that leaves him with severe back injuries. Almost 2 years later we find Colt working as a valet at a nightclub, depressed and still nursing his injury he gets a call from Ryder’s producer- Gail (Hannah Waddingham) telling him that Jody is now directing a movie and she wants him to do stunts on the production. When he gets to the set in Australia, we learn that after his injury he basically ghosted Jody, due mainly to his own ego and fear of her reaction. It turns out that Star Tom Ryder has vanished, and Gail would like Colt to find him and get him back to work on the movie. Now Colt has to find Ryder and restore his damaged relationship with Jody, but one of those tasks is much more complicated than he could imagine.
     What we have in The Fall Guy is a film full of very talented, charming performers- Gosling, Blunt, Taylor-Johnson, Waddingham, Winston Duke, and Stephanie Hsu. All have been great in other projects and are doing their best here. The problem is, the story is in no way original, nor cleverly written. Sure, there are a few laughs here and there...well, maybe not laughs, but chuckles for sure. A self-described “love letter to stunt-people” there are some cool stunt set-ups and sequences in this movie, though, at times, I felt like they were trying to find reasons to work the story around them, instead of the other way around. Now this is a process that seems to be working well on the Mission: Impossible franchise, but it doesn’t quite work all the time here. Surprisingly, the chemistry between Ryan Gosling and Emily Blunt isn’t that great here. I recall them presenting together at this past Academy Awards and being delightful together. What happened?
     Drew Pearce is the credited writer, and he has had his fingers in the Marvel, Fast & Furious, and even Mission: Impossible franchises in the past. I don’t know if his script was adjusted in order to make the desired stunts work or if this just wasn’t one of his best efforts. I would imagine that most of the credit, or blame, rests with director David Leitch. A former stuntman himself he has directed Atomic Blonde, a surprisingly effective action flick, Deadpool 2, not as fun as the first but an enjoyable watch, and Bullet Train, others love it, but I thought it was an over complicated story used as an excuse for big action pieces. I just have a feeling that Leitch’s focus was more on presenting the stunts and less on the story. The dialogue is “meh”, but when delivered by this talented cast you don’t really notice all the time. I did think that Emily Blunt had the most trouble delivering the awkward dialogue. She was probably thinking of how she could make it more natural, but she came about as close as anyone could. The stunts look good, but sometimes they even fell short. By that I mean, when they didn’t seem to fit naturally into the movie it was easy to dismiss them and the effort that went into them. The finale set piece, where the baddie is taken down is probably the action highlight of the film and does help to end on a high-ish point.
     There is little chance that The Fall Guy will be thought of in the same way that Hooper or the 1980 comic/drama The Stunt Man are. Both of those films, at least to me, really do feel like love letters to stunt-people. They are also consistently very entertaining from beginning to end. I did want to enjoy The Fall Guy. A big, stunt-filled action/comedy can be great, and all the pieces were in place for this to work. It’s just missing that little bit of magic that holds all the pieces together.   

Godzilla x Kong: The New Empire

     I think if you’re a fan of 2021’s Godzilla vs. Kong then you’ll have a fun time with the follow up- “Godzilla x Kong: The New Empire”. I feel about the same about this one as I did for it’s immediate predecessor-- it’s fine. There is some very fun stuff in this movie, and a ton of giant creature scenes, but it starts to wear on you after a while. I found myself checking my watch at about the 65 minute mark, and it wasn’t for a lack of action.

    This time out we find Kong in the Hollow Earth, just chillin’, watching sunsets (or whatever pass for them in the Hallow Earth0, and eating nasty dog creatures, when a hole opens up in the ground (yes, of the Hallow Earth) so he investigates. What he finds is a civilization of giant apes, like himself. The thing is, it’s being ruled by a very mean ape, who has a titan under his control who has “freeze” breath and he uses it to control his underlings. Kong sees this and tries to free the ape community but just isn’t powerful enough to do it on his own, so he heads to the surface world to get help. That help being his frenemy Godzilla. Maybe together, and with the help of another titan I won’t disclose, can get the job done.

     I used to say; “More monsters, less people.” Godzilla Minus 1 made me question that. Godzilla x Kong: The New Empire also makes me question that but for the opposite reason. Here they deliver more monsters and less people, but I started to get a bit weary of the monster stuff. The thing is, even though I did enjoy the cast of human characters, I became weary of them too. Rebecca Hall’s Dr. Ilene Andrews, her adopted daughter Jia (Kaylee Hottle), and conspiracy theorist/podcaster Bernie (Brian Tyree Henry) return from the previous film. Dan Stevens is introduced as Titan Veterinarian “Trapper” and he is a breath of fresh air. He’s silly, full of energy, and fun to watch. He also brings along with him a lot of classic rock needle-drops, ala Guardians of the Galaxy’s Peter Quill. Most work great, while others had me scratching my head a their relevance. As I hinted at before, we do meet some new Titans, a couple who are recognizable from the old Showa era Toho movies. I had no problem with their appearances, they were part of the fun, I was just getting so warn out by all the CG animated scenes. “More Monsters”? At least not this time. All the CG monsters we’ve seen over the past few years, for the most part, look great, but lack the charm of those old “guy in a suit” flicks we grew up with. One thing this movie does have in common with the classic Kaiju movies is how it’s just stupid fun. I actually mean that as a compliment. The same as something like the movie Armageddon, which is so stupid and ridiculous but loads of fun to watch at the same time. I don’t think The New Kingdom is as much fun as Armageddon, but you know what I mean.

     Personally, if this movie had been any longer (it runs 115 minutes) I would probably have turned completely against it. As it is, it ends just before that point. The final Kaiju battle in the Hallow Earth goes on a bit too long, but is otherwise a lot of fun watch. There is a little “child” ape who at first is just annoying but won me over in the end and some there’s some CG work on the faces of Kong and even Godzilla, that are kind of silly, but actually work. Director Adam Wingard (who returns from the previous entry) and the writers know they aren’t making Citizen Kane. They are in on the fact that it’s all kind of goofy and that’s why this movie works as well as it does. So if you’re a fan of the previous American Godzilla and or Kong movies you’ll enjoy yourself. If they didn’t work for you, well, this one won’t either. I enjoyed myself more than I didn’t, and was sure to catch it on a BIG screen with BIG sound. Even then, it will be a while before I feel any need to revisit this one.

Ghostbusters: Frozen Empire

     Let me establish right here that I am a sucker for the Ghostbuster Franchise. I’ve loved it since seeing the original movie in 1984 and have enjoyed all the films that have followed. Yes, that includes the attempted reboot with the all female team. With the exception of a just terrible third act, it’s a fun movie. Having said that… Ghostbuster: Frozen Empire is an enjoyable ride too, though it is, for sure, flawed. With the introduction of the next generation of Ghostbusters in 2021’s Jason Reitman led “Afterlife”, “Frozen Empire” follows those characters, with some familiar faces from the original films, to make up a fairly crowded group of players this time out.

     The aforementioned ‘next generation” of Ghostbusters, made up of Callie Spengler (Carrie Coon), her kids Phoebe (Mckenna Grace) and Trevor (Finn Wolfhard), and her beau, and former schoolteacher, Gary (Paul Rudd) have moved into the original New York City headquarters and have taken up the mantle of bustin’ ghosts. When they come into possession of an artifact that contains an ancient entity that, when released, threatens the world, which of course it does, they, with the help of some O.G. Ghostbusters and friends Podcast and Lucky, have to find a way to stop it.

     Overall, I had a good time with this movie. Let me get what is wrong, or at least what is keeping it from being great, out of the way before I tell you why. The main challenge this movie has is just the sheer number of characters in this thing. We have Phoebe, Trevor, Gary, Callie, Ray (Dan Aykroyd), Winston (Ernie Hudson), Lucky (Celeste O’Connor), and Podcast (Logan Kim). Along with some new characters- Nadeem (Kumail Nanjiani), Lars (James Acaster), and a ghost character named Melody (Emily Alyn Lind). We also see the return, in what amount to barely more than cameos, of Bill Murray’s Peter Venkman, Annie Potts’ Janine Melnitz, and William Atherton’s Walter “this man has no dick” Peck, now the Mayor of NYC. Funnyman, and fellow nerd, Patton Oswalt also shows up as a professor who gives the team important info about the new baddie. You cannot serve and do justice to that many characters in a two hour movie. There are also call-backs to the GB movies of the past like more mini-Stay Pufft Marshmellow men, Slimer, and the librarian ghost. None served any real purpose in the story. While I like the characters of Podcast and Lucky from “Afterlife”, they were not integral to the plot. The same goes for Patton Oswalt (Ray could have found that info), Janine Melnitz, and even Bill Murray’s Venkman. They are just there because we liked them before. They take up time and space that could have been used to shore up the other characters and to give the big bad even more of a build up before his ultimate appearance. The big third act confrontation with the world ending entity is fun but comes on very quickly and is resolved fairly quickly as well. I appreciate the film makers keeping the running time under two hours, but it’s just jammed too full of “stuff” to pay it all off.

     With that said, I enjoyed it. The focus is mainly on Mckenna Grace’s Phoebe, she’s the main character here. I liked that Dan Aykroyd’s Ray plays a pretty large part in the story too. He definitely does not have a glorified cameo, he’s important. At first I was a little annoyed by Kumail Nanjiani’s character, figuring he was another “nerd-friendly” actor shoehorned in (like Oswalt), but by the end he plays a role in defeating the baddie. He also delivers a few chuckles along the way. I know that when the trailer came out there was little to no humor in it and lets get this straight, Ghostbusters movies are comedies first, so there had better be some laughs. “Frozen Empire” does have more humor than the trailer let on, though, like “Afterlife”, it’s not as funny as the ‘80’s classics. I think Paul Rudd, Carrie Coon, and Finn Wolfhard’s characters are underserved but they each get, at least, one good scene. Well...Carrie Coon is involved in some scenes that serve the other two, but thinking back on it, she doesn’t get a whole lot, character wise, to do. Admittedly, it’s got to be tough when Paul Rudd can so easily steal a scene with only a look. I like that the Big Bad is not related in any way to a past villain. It’s an original idea and creature. The threat is big enough, though, again, resolved a bit too quickly. If Sony/Columbia want to continue the franchise with these characters I think they could successfully do so. Mckenna Grace shows that she can handle carrying the majority of the weight of a franchise movie. If she, Wolfhard, Rudd, and Coon come back for more action, I’ll be there. I do like seeing the characters I’ve come to love over the past 40 years, but maybe not bringing them all back at once would be a good idea. That way, when we see one, it can be that much more special.

     In my opinion, if you’re a fan of the franchise, and had a good time with “Afterlife” you’ll have a good time with Ghostbusters: Frozen Empire. I may have some issues with the large cast, but at the same time it was fun to see Dan Aykroyd, Bill Murray, Annie Potts, and Ernie Hudson on screen together as those characters again. Don’t go in with huge expectations, just sit back and have fun with it. The movie works more than it doesn’t. I’m happy to say that bustin’ still makes me feel good.

Dune: Part 2

    I took a look at my review of the first chapter of Dune from 2021 and I was a bit critical. I actually rewatched it a few days ago, for the first time since seeing it upon its original release, and I have to say I actually enjoyed it a lot more the second time. I was glad, since the release of part 2 was coming up fast. So, going into seeing Dune: Part 2, I was more on writer/director Denis Villeneuve’s side. Having seen Part 2, it makes Part 1 look like a 155-minute prologue to this new film. I mentioned in my original Dune review that I have not read any of Frank Herbert’s books, I’ve only seen the film and television versions that have been produced. So, if there were changes from the book, I don’t know them and can’t comment on them.
    Dune: Part 2 picks up not long after the events of the first movie- Paul Atreides (Timothee Chalamet) and his mother (Rebecca Ferguson) have been taken in by the native people of the desert world of Arrakis, the Freman, and the more time they spend with Paul the more they become convinced he is the one foretold to become the champion of their people. With the terrible Harkonnens now in control of Arrakis and mining of the spice, Paul has to unite the Freman and bring down the Harkonnens along with the Emperor (Christopher Walken) who set the Atreides family up to be eliminated in the first place. All while trying to keep his worst visions from coming to pass and his relationship with his Freman sweetheart, Chani (Zendaya), from ending in the process.
     I’ll tell you right now that I had a great time with Dune: Part 2. It does slow down a bit at around the two hour mark but picks up and leads to a huge final battle scene that is worth the wait. This film’s running time is 166 minutes and, except for that lull just over midway, goes by quickly. I never caught myself looking at the time, and that is saying something for a movie that is nearly 3hrs long. One thing I realized with this film is one of the reasons this version of Dune works so well is the fact that it is cast with really good actors. Chalamet (who wowed me recently in Wonka), Zendaya, Rebecca Ferguson, Javier Bardem, Josh Brolin, and Stellan Skarsgard, along with Charlotte Rampling and Dave Bautista return from the first installment. The likes of Florence Pugh, Austin Butler, Lea Seydoux, and Christopher “freakin;” Walkin join the cast this time around. Not only is the film well-acted, but well directed, edited, and, as with the first movie, the production design is amazing. The special effects are invisible. By that I mean, I was completely transported to whatever environment they wanted me to be in. They’re great. I still had some issues with the score. I know people who love the Hanz Zimmer’s score. I still found it to be a bit grating with its loud blasts from the brass section and Tarzan yell-like vocalizations. Not enough to ruin it for me, but still kind of irritating.
    Not to get spoilery, but this movie does end on something of a cliffhanger. My assumption is that the book ends in a similar fashion since there is a second Dune book, Dune Messiah, that continues the story. Also, unlike the first movie, in my mind I would flash to scenes from the 1984 David Lynch film, as the same moments played out in front of me again. Only with a better budget and, for the most part, better acted. Especially those involving Feyd Rautha, played by Sting in ‘84, now portrayed by a very creepy Austin Butler. I also recalled Paul’s sister being portrayed by a little girl in the ‘84 movie, but she is yet to be born in this version. While I do still have love, along with the confusion, of the David Lynch movie, I had no problem following the story, or the politics of the story, in this version. You really do need more than 2-3hrs to retell the entirety of the Frank Herbert book. If I am recalling the SyFy channel TV mini-series version correctly, I kept bumping up against the special effects that were just not as good as they needed to be. Taking both parts of Deni Villeneuve’s Dune as a whole, I find myself thinking of the experience of watching it as a good one and I’m sure I’ll revisit these films again in the coming years.       

Lisa Frankenstein

     Written by Diablo Cody (Juno, Jennifer’s Body, United States of Tara) and starring Katheryn Newton (Freaky, Ant-Man and the Wasp: Quantumania) I guess I expected more from Lisa Frankenstein. This film plays like Cody couldn’t make up her mind if she wanted to pay homage, with a zombie twist, to 16 Candles or Heathers. There are a few cute moments, but the gags don’t land and if there were supposed to be heart-string tugging moments I didn’t get them. Lisa Frankenstein is the feature film directing debut of Zelda Williams (daughter of beloved comedian/actor Robin Williams), who has directed some TV and music videos and does an adequate enough job but doesn’t seem to be trying anything new or show a sense of her own style yet.
    Lisa is a high school student in 1989 whose mother was killed in a violent home invasion, while Lisa was home too. Shortly after her mother’s death her father meets another woman, with a teenage daughter of her own, they marry and move in with her new stepmother and sister. Lisa has a taste for darker fair like horror movies and hanging out in a nearby abandoned graveyard, where she has “adopted” the grave of a young man who died in the 1830’s. During a freak storm the grave of that young man is hit by ball lightening which seems to have resurrected him and he shows up at Lisa’s house one evening when she is home alone. After the initial scare she hides and cares for him. Using her sisters defective tanning bed to shock him into better and better shape. While keeping him a secret her personality turns a bit darker too.
    “Stuff happens” that I will not give away, but it just doesn’t seem to happen for any real reason. Lisa already likes the darker side of things but isn’t “goth” really. After the young dead man comes into her life, she starts wearing slutty black outfits and dark things happen. Now he is not really doing anything horrific or scary she just changes. There’s no lead up to it, the dark stuff just starts to happen. It would have made more sense to let the dark stuff bring her to that darker place, but she goes from Molly Ringwald to Winona Ryder in Beetlejuice overnight. Cole Sprouse (Big Daddy, Riverdale) plays the “creature”. For most of the film he’s under some pale make-up and appliances to make him look dead and he moans, groans, and gestures to communicate. Other than playing the piano, he isn’t really given much to do. The rest of the cast seem to be playing in different movies. Lisa’s Dad, played by Joe Chrest is playing the same guy he does in Stranger Things as Mike and Nancy’s Dad. Carla Gugino, who I normally love, is terrible here as the stepmom. She’s just mean with no sign of a reason for it, so she just plays it mean. Liza Soberano plays Lisa’s stepsister Taffy, who’s performance is pretty consistent throughout, but, again, there’s nothing else there. I’d have to say the reason was poor writing and maybe a lack of direction. I wasn’t there, I don’t know, I just know that a talented group of actors were floundering around looking for the humor to play up. Sometimes they are playing for the laugh and at others glossing over the laugh. Why was it placed in 1989? Was there a reason other than fun wardrobe opportunities and a lack of cell phones? The needle-drops aren’t even very clever. There is a scene where Lisa is singing REO Speedwagon’s “Can’t Fight This Feeling” that just takes the story nowhere. I was a little embarrassed for Katheryn Newton, she didn’t seem to know how to play it. Like the reanimated boy, the whole thing left me cold. I know it’s a dark comedy, but it’s afraid to go as dark as Heathers or Jennifer’s Body nor be as “in your face funny” as something like Weird Science or Shaun of the Dead. It’s a big disappointment considering the really clever stuff we’ve seen from Diablo Cody in the past.

The Movies of 2023

     2023 was the year that saw the end of the original It’s a Geek’s World After All website. The provider closed up shop and I had to move to a new home, so several years of reviews are no longer available on the new site, though most can still be seen in the Geek’s World Blog, which has remained as is. The new site began around mid-summer, with my review of Asteroid City, but as I mentioned before, most reviews of the films prior to that one can still be seen on the Blog.

     Of course I was not able to see all the movies of 2023 that I would have liked to and, that being said, I probably haven’t seen some of the best films of the year. I can only judge by the films that I did see and, in my opinion, it wasn’t a fantastic year for movies, but very few I would call great. Sure there was some good stuff. There was some overrated stuff and underappreciated stuff as well.

     Below are the movies released in 2023 that I did get the opportunity to see. You’ll find full reviews of many of these films on the Geek’s World Blog and website.

M3GAN – received it’s wide release early this year. Horror not being a favorite Genre of mine, I was surprised at how entertaining it was.

A Man Called Otto- Grumpy Tom Hanks? Nonsense. He’s just depressed. This movie is fine. Nothing amazing but a nice quiet film.

The Old Way- Nicolas Cage’s first western and, while it’s not a classic and his prologue mustache is laughable, it’s a fairly good movie. Young actress Ryan Kiera Armstrong is terrific.

Knock at the Cabin- The First M. Night Shyamalan movie I’ve liked in quite some time.

Ant-Man and the Wasp: Quantumania- I enjoyed myself with this movie. It was different from the other Ant-Man movies, but played a bit like a poor man’s Guardians of the Galaxy. Still, the charisma of the cast and characters kept it from sinking. IMO.

Cocaine Bear- I found myself really enjoying this comedy inspired by actual events.

Creed III- The first Rocky-free Creed movie and directed by star Michael B. Jordan. It’s fine. I don’t think it brought anything new to the franchise though.

Shazam! Fury of the Gods- There are some nice moments, but over all a little more of a mess than the first movie.

John Wick: Chapter 4- I mean, can this franchise do wrong? I think this entry is needlessly long, but enjoyed the heck out of it anyway.

The Lost King- This was a little seen, quite good, light drama based on a true story, starring the always great Sally Hawkins.

Dungeons & Dragons: Honor Among Thieves- Overall I wasn’t a big fan but this movie has some really fun stuff in it and the cast appears to be having a good time.

The Super Mario Bros. Movie- I didn’t get it. I’m not a gamer so that part is lost on me, but as an animated family comedy it falls short.

Air- Another “based on a true story” movie. This ones pretty good. I liked it more than I thought I would.

Renfield- Uneven horror/comedy with moments of brilliance. I did get the impression that Nicolas Cage was having a good time playing Dracula.

Guardians of the Galaxy Vol. 3- Probably James Gunn’s final MCU movie and he knocked it out of the park. It’s funny and emotional.

The Little Mermaid- I have disliked all but one of the live action remakes of classic Disney animated movies. This one is fine. I did not, not like it.

Spider-Man: Across the Spider-Verse- A very good follow up to the amazing Into the Spider-verse. It looks incredible but does suffer from being a bit too long. Especially since it has a “To be continued...” ending.

Daliland- Ben Kingsley is great as Salvador Dali but the movie itself never gets as interesting as it’s subject.

Elemental- Another good one from Pixar. I think more people will appreciate it as time goes on.

The Flash- I believe this movie was defeated by it’s own studio before it could ever be released. Too much second guessing the film makers and attempting to “give the audience what they want” made it a bigger mess than it probably was conceived to ever be.

No Hard Feelings- This felt like a return to the R rated sex comedies of the 1980’s. Not as cheesy as those were, but it had an air about it that we haven’t seen in comedies in a long time. It’s a good movie, but not great.

Asteroid City- Maybe not Wes Anderson’s best but it hit on all the stuff I like. Plus it’s fun and beautiful to look at.

Indiana Jones and the Dial of Destiny- Better than Crystal Skull, but something was missing. It should have been great but in the end is just fine.

Ruby Gillman, Teenage Kraken- Not a bad little animated family movie. Unfortunately, it covers a lot of the same territory Turning Red did a couple years earlier.

Mission: Impossible- Dead Reckoning Part One- Another great entry in the series. It’s a little long, and like Spider-verse “to be continued”, but does contain some amazing action pieces while still ending on a fairly satisfying note.

Oppenheimer- For me, by far, Christopher Nolan’s best film to date. It is too long, but moves along at a pretty good pace in spite of it’s running time.

Barbie- A surprisingly fun movie. I think it does get a bit preachy at the end, but the fun stuff won me over.

The Haunted Mansion- A terrific cast couldn’t save this mediocre film.

Teenage Mutant Ninja Turtles: Mutant Mayhem- Others loved this movie. I thought it looked weird, trying to capitalize on the Spider-Verse look and I was kind of bored most of the time.

Meg 2: The Trench- Like the first Meg movie, it’s silly, goofy, fun action. Turn your brain off and enjoy the ride stuff.

Blue Beetle- Another movie that is better than people give it credit for.

My Big Fat Greek Wedding 3- I’d heard this was just terrible, but I had some fun with it. I mean, they weren’t trying to make Oppenheimer here.

A Haunting in Venice- I really liked this one. For me, the best of the Kevin Branagh Poirot films.

The Retirement Plan- Nicolas Cage again. This time a retired spy who’s estranged family is caught up in nastiness that he helps get them out of. It’s a fun action comedy.

The Creator- Now this is a good movie. Good, but not great. It looks great but the story never engaged me like it was trying to. It would have benefited from another pass at the script.

The Exorcist: Believer- There are some nice moments in this follow up to the classic horror movie. Overall, it’s just meh.

Butcher’s Crossing- Nicolas Cage’s second western and this one is good too. He’s totally different here and does get a “crazy Cage” scene toward the end. Beautiful looking, but all in all, just good.

Five Nights at Freddy’s- I bumped into the fact that I’m not a video game guy nor a horror guy so this one was fine. Nothing special.

The Marvels- I wish more people had checked this follow up to Captain Marvel and the WandaVision and Ms Marvel TV shows. It’s fun, breezy, and has some nice action. It doesn’t try to overstay it’s welcome either by coming in under 2 hours too. I really enjoyed this light Marvel flick.

Trolls Band Together- I had fun with the previous 2 movies in this animated franchise and, believe it or not, this one is fun too.

Wish- I was pretty disappointed by this Disney animated release that is supposed to celebrate their 100^th anniversary as a company. I was never fully behind the hero nor fully against the baddie. It’s a muddle of ideas that never engaged me.

The Holdovers- Alexander Payne’s latest. I really liked this one. It’s better than Sideways but I think The Descendants is still my favorite of his films.

Godzilla Minus One- Just when I thought nothing could surprise me more than a Barbie movie, Godzilla says “hold my beer”. Fun, moving, and epic. I really enjoyed myself watching this one.

Wonka- Delightful, funny, charming, and has some very “earworm-y” songs.

Aquaman and the Lost Kingdom- The last remnant of the Snyder-verse. I’m a fan of the first solo Aquaman film. This one is fine. It suffers from a lot of what happened to The Flash, but not as much. It’s a flawed, but serviceable superhero movie.

Streaming/non-theatrical

You People- Eddie Murphy and Jonah Hill? This should have been a slam dunk comedy, but it’s barely ok.

We Have A Ghost- Another “just ok” comedy.

Still: A Michael J. Fox Movie- This is a decent documentary detailing Michael J. Foxes career and battle with Parkinson’s. The recreations were a little cringey but when Fox was the one telling his story it really worked.

Peter Pan & Wendy- Not the worst, but one of the worst live action remakes of an animated Disney classic. It’s boring and then they tried to make Captain Hook sympathetic.

Extraction II- I didn’t think it was as good as the first movie, but it’s a pretty good action flick.

Nimona- Here’s an animated movie that swung for the fences and succeeded much of the time. Others loved it, I liked it but appreciated it more than anything else

Batman: The Doom That Came to Gotham (Home Video)- It took a few minutes to win me over but when it did I was totally engaged in this H.P. Lovecraft inspired Batman Elseworlds story.

They Cloned Tyrone- Here’s another movie that others seem to really love. I just found it to be a flick that wanted to be as clever as Get Out and not succeeding

Heart of Stone- A serviceable action movie. It brings nothing new to the genre except for star Gal Gadot, who’s actually quite good.

Reinventing Elvis: The ‘68 Comeback Special- This doc takes too long to get to the comeback special, but when it does it’s really good.

You Are So Not Invited to My Bat Mitzvah- Surprisingly funny teen comedy. I’m not normally a big fan of Adam Sandler movies, but he’s not the star here. His teenage daughter is and she’s not bad. The movie itself works quite well.

The Slumber Party- This is a goofy tween comedy. It’s not terrible but I am NOT the target audience.

Murder Mystery 2- I actually enjoyed the first Murder Mystery movie and found myself not hating this goofy follow up.

No One Will Save You- This movie works, most of the time. I am also still a little unsure if I love the ending or hate it. Which, in a way, is a good compliment.

Theater Camp- A mixed bag of a comedy. It’s not bad.

Totally Killer- More clever than it’s premise deserved to be.

Slotherhouse- I mean it’s a sloth puppet killing Coeds. You’re in or out. I was mostly in. Don’t expect a lot from this movie though.

Justice League: Warworld (home video)- Uneven DC animated Elseworlds movie. There is some really good stuff in there.

Quiz Lady- I thought this was a very successful comedy and even could have worked with a theatrical release. IMO

Albert Brooks: Defending My Life- Probably my favorite doc of the year.

Sly- Not my favorite doc of the year. Sly actually deserves a better examination of his life and career. It’s fluff.

Being Mary Tyler Moore- A quite good HBO doc on the TV icon.

The Killer- For me, a swing and miss from writer/director David Fincher.

Dashing Through the Snow- A surprisingly enjoyable new Christmas movie with a new and quite fun take on Santa by Li’l Rel Howery.

Legion of Super-Heroes (home video)- I was surprised at how much I enjoyed this new DC animated flick.

David Holmes: The Boy Who Lived- This is an example of a documentary that, by the end, makes you feel like you know it’s subject very well and care about him as much as his friends and family. It’s very good.

Babylon 5: The Road Home (home video)- As a big B5 fan I was a little cautious about this animated follow up to the series that ended 25 years ago. Many of the original cast members have passed away since, but the voice casting of their roles works quite well. The returning cast and the fact that it was written by creator J. Michael Straczynski is the reason it works as well as it does.

Family Switch- A body switch movie that involves an entire family. A very talented cast is wasted in this bit of fluff with TERRIBLE CG work.

Mr. Monk’s Last Case: A Monk Movie- If you were a fan of the Monk TV series you’ll enjoy yourself. It inspired me to revisit a couple of eps of the show again.

Merry Little Batman- Not a fan.

Little Richard: I Am Everything- A decent CNN films doc about the rock-n-roll pioneer.

Candy Cane Lane- This one surprised me. It’s a lot of fun and helped me to forgive Eddie Murphy for You People.

Genie- An enjoyable enough holiday comedy with Melissa McCarthy as a genie. The movie would have been better served if they’d let McCarthy go and do her thing. It felt like she was holding back and sticking to scripted words when we all know she could do better off the top of her head.

Maestro- I know it got a very limited theatrical release, but not around me. This is a beautiful to look at movie, that gets a little lost in it’s cleverness and forgets its telling a story most of the time.

     So, those are my thoughts on what I was able to see this past year. There was a lot of talk of Superhero fatigue. Perhaps there is some… it’s interesting that there were 4 DC movies and 3 MCU movies this past year. All under performed financially. “Guardians” probably the most critically successful. I think this is the year the MCU got hit with the inevitable moment where fans turned against it. This happens with everything that is hugely successful. After a while a group of vocal people decide it’s all garbage and flood the internet with their declaration. In reality, all the MCU movies that came out were good. None reaching the heights of Avengers: Endgame, of course, but they will most likely never have that happen again. Even Quantumania is fine. There was also a turn against anything related to the Disney company. That affected everything released by them, including the MCU films, whether deserving or not. There was a lot of mediocre movies in the past year. Indiana Jones was just ok. Some of the DC stuff was just ok too. Since there was so little to really love it’s tough to rank my favorites, but I feel like I have to so, at least as of this moment, here are my top 10 movies, that I have seen, of 2023--

10- The Marvels

9- John Wick 4

8- Barbie

7- Spider-Man: Across the Spider-Verse

6- Wonka

5- The Holdovers

4- Oppenheimer

3- Guardians of the Galaxy Vol. 3

2- Mission: Impossible- Dead Reckoning pt 1

1- Godzilla Minus One

Now that the film industry is back to work after a lengthy break due to the writers and actor’s strikes, I’m hoping we’ll get some great stuff in 2024.

Aquaman and the Lost Kingdom

       Aquaman and the Lost Kingdom is the victim of a lot of challenges. The first Aquaman movie came out in 2016 and made a billion dollars. Warner Brothers was beside themselves and fast tracked a sequel AND a spin-off called The Trench. Writer/Director James Wan was cool with it but wanted to make a horror film (the genre that brought him into the public consciousness) so, while watching over early pre-production on the Aquaman projects he went to work on Malignant. Then the world shut down for the Covid pandemic, delaying everything. He got Malignant made and released in 2021 and then turned his attention back to Aquaman. By this point the studio was having second thoughts about the spin-off because of the poor greeting the Wonder Woman sequel received. So The Trench was cancelled and some of its elements went into the Aquaman sequel. Production finally begins and things seem to be going pretty well. Oh wait, Warner Brothers and Discovery have now merged and the new regime delays the movie’s release. At the same time, The Flash film was caught up in many of the same challenges. As a matter of fact, Aquaman 2 was originally planned to be released before The Flash and a cameo by Ben Afleck’s Batman was shot. With The Flash seeing release before Aquaman 2 they decided that Michael Keaton’s Batman, being reintroduced in The Flash, should have a cameo. But when The Flash came out and was disliked by audiences and critics the new folks at Warner Brothers/Discovery decided that cameos may not be a good idea and ordered some reshoots. At the same time Amber Heard, who plays Aquaman’s best girl, gets canceled by the public at large and more reshoots were ordered to reduce her already shot role. Finally comes December 22^nd and Aquaman and the Lost Kingdom is finally released. Mit uch like Wonder Woman 1984, it is labeled a disappointment by early audiences and critics. Well, now I’ve seen it and can give you my opinion. Phew, how’s that for a preface?

     I saw Aquaman and the Lost Kingdom a few days after it’s release, so having heard the disappointing reactions to it, must have lowered my expectations. This is not a terrible film, though there had to be a better title. It does show it’s scars and is not as much fun as the first movie, but it’s not a total train wreck either. Arthur “Aquaman” Curry (Jason Momoa) is now married to Mera (Amber Heard) and they have an infant son, Arthur Jr. They split their time between Atlantis, where Arthur is king, and Arthur’s father’s lighthouse in the surface world. They are very happy but Arthur is discouraged that he can’t get anything done or improved on in Atlantis because of political bureaucracy. Meanwhile Black Manta (Yahya Abdul-Mateen) is still seeking revenge against Aquaman for events of the first movie. This time though he has uncovered ancient magical technology of Atlantian origin that will help him in his quest. Since Orm (Patrick Wilson) worked with him in the past, it is decided that they will seek help from Arthur’s half brother, imprisoned for his nastiness in the first movie. Together the pair set out to find Black Manta and his minions and stop their plot to destroy the world and Arther and his family along the way.

     Sure there are what you might call superhero tropes in this movie, but in the past decade there have been, literally, dozens of superhero movies that have come out. People who complain about superhero tropes in superhero movies are like people complaining that all westerns have too many horses in them. “Guy in funny costume beats up bad guy in funny costume”, we understand the conciet. Now I had no problem with any of the performances, as a matter of fact, Jason Mamoa’s delightfully huge personality does a lot to keep this movie afloat (pun not originally intended, but I’ll take the credit for being clever). He brings a lot of energy to a movie that seems to move from one big action piece to the next with only the smallest amount of connecting tissue. It does feel at times like something is missing that might have made the narrative flow a bit better. This is what I meant by this movie showing it’s “scars”. I got the feeling that the studio execs decided that they should play up the action and tone down the character “stuff”. So scenes of Arthur with his family are relegated to a montage and his mother, Queen Atlanna (Nicole Kidman), just shows up in the middle of an action scene. The addition of Randall Park as Atlantis obsessed scientist Dr. Shin (introduced in a post credit scene of the first movie) is welcome, he always brings some fun to whatever he’s in. He does his best but, much of the time, gets relegated to being the misled enabler to the villain. There are a couple of fun voice actor performances that were pleasant surprises. Martin Short voices a, sort of, fish gangster called Kingfish and John Rhys-Davis lends his amazing voice to the Brine King. Because the bulk off the movie is taken up by these big action set-pieces, there is a lot of CG. Like a LOT. Some of it looks great and some not so much. My guess is that the “not so much” stuff is what had to be produced quickly due to last minute changes. The basic story is fine, we’ve seen this type of thing many times before. Two people who had been enemies in the past must now work together to defeat a common foe and along the way become friends. It’s familiar territory, but can still work. I was disappointed by the needle drops used in this movie. The biggest being “Born to Be Wild”. Yes, the song does seem to describe Mamoa’s Arthur Curry, but it’s been used many many many times over the years. I know there is something else out there that could have been effective and surprising.

     I would be curious to speak to James Wan about the original cut of this movie, before the world seemed to do what it could to sabotage it. There is a fun movie in there and, at least for me, just enough there to keep it from being a waste. Aquaman and the Lost Kingdom is the final remnant of the DCU or “Snyderverse”. I’ve not been a fan of most of the “Snyderverse” films. I think Zack Snyder gathered a terrific cast to bring the DC characters to life, the films, with a couple of exceptions, just didn’t work very well. Mamoa is a great Aquaman and has proved it with each appearance he’s made as the character over the years. This film is most likely his final performance as Arthur Curry and it’s a shame because he has taken what some people always thought was a silly character and made him cool. If you can go into viewing Aquaman and the Lost Kingdom with no high expectations you’ll have some fun. If you’re looking for a piece of groundbreaking cinema stay away.

Godzilla Minus One

      Like the previously produced Toho Godzilla movie, Shin Godzilla (which I love by the way), Godzilla Minus One works as another reboot or retelling of the world’s introduction to Godzilla. This time, though, taking place in the early years after WWII, during the U.S. occupation. The film maker’s implying with the title that the country was devastated by the war, then again by Godzilla, setting them back from zero to minus one.
     In the final days of WWII, a young Kamikaze pilot, Koichi Shikishima, fakes technical trouble during his mission and lands on a repair station on a remote island. While there he and a small group of mechanics are attached by a creature known to the locals as Godzilla. Everyone is killed except for Koichi and one of the mechanics- Tachibana. During the attack Tachibana told Koichi to get to his plane and use its more powerful gun to kill the beast, but Koichi freezes and can’t do it. After the war he finds himself in a devastated Tokyo, his family gone and home in ruins. A young woman with a baby, Noriko, sort of moves in with him, where they stay for the next few years. Koichi gets a job locating and destroying mines in the waters off the Japanese coast and they begin to prosper. The whole time Koichi is haunted by the fact that he failed his duty twice and blames himself for the deaths of those mechanics on the island. When Godzilla makes his way to the Japanese mainland the Japanese government, still in a bit of disarray, and the U.S. claim to not be able to do anything militarily to help for fear of a reaction from the Soviet Union. So, the people are left to deal with the beast. Koichi becomes involved in the plan to defeat Godzilla, but will he use this opportunity to give his life for his people?
     I’m going to begin here by saying, I did enjoy this movie quite a bit, BUT… it’s the fact that the third act is so good that it makes up for some of the challenges of the rest of the movie. In most cases, I’m a firm believer in the “less people, more monsters” school of thought in Kaiju movies. I’m not saying that is always what’s best for a movie, just normally my preference. We definitely spend more time with people in Godzilla Minus One than the monster, but in this case it’s ok. The original 1954 film worked the same way and in a lot of respects this movie works like and pays tribute to that film. There is elevated even a train sequence with moments and images recreated right from that original movie, which made me smile broadly. I also felt a, if not homage, a definite inspiration from the classic Steven Spielberg film Jaws. Especially the scenes in the wooden minesweeper boat. It was interesting to set the story back a few years from the original’s 1955. Japan was not in a great place in those early post-war years, so the everyday citizens of Japan are automatically granted credit as “scrappy underdogs” who’ve already been through so much. I was born in the mid 1960’s so I don’t bump up against the fact that the Japanese were the “enemy” in WWII as older generations might. This story has nothing to do with the reasons for or politics of that war, there are even a few characters in this film who question “why” it happened themselves. This is a film about survivors' guilt and survival itself.
     I did find myself, at times, finding the story to be treading water a bit at the midpoint. They spend a lot of time getting to know our main characters, and I appreciate that. It actually pays off at the end. I just found myself waiting for the “good stuff”. Meaning the creature. This Godzilla, more like the 1955 O.G. and to some extent Shin Godzilla, is much nastier than he would become over the decades. For quite a while he became the hero of what amounted to kid’s movies by the mid ‘60’s into the ‘70’s. This Godzilla is eating people and stomping on dwellings where you know people are. There is a very high body count in this one, and we see a lot of them. Growing up during the “hero” era of Godzilla, part of me didn’t like seeing him being so indiscriminate and destructive, but that’s what the original was. That’s the origin of the character. One of the things that helped me get over that in Shin Godzilla was how funny it was. The creature is treated deadly seriously, but the government of Japan is not. It’s a takedown of bureaucracy and is very funny. Godzilla Minus One takes everything deadly seriously and I found myself yearning for a light moment. There are a couple, provided mainly by Koichi’s minesweeper friends, but not many. Yes, most of my challenges with the movie are “my” challenges. I know and admit to it. That’s not to say I couldn’t enjoy it. I did and, as I mentioned before, the third act is so terrific that I just about forgot I had any issues leading up to it.
     The final confrontation with Godzilla and the carrying out of the “big plan” is worth the price of admission alone. The fact that time was spent getting to know these characters does make a difference in your personal investment in their wellbeing and adds a level of emotion that, let's face it, most Kaiju movies don’t bother with. Mainly because of an audience who wants “less people, more monsters”. I get it. The recent American produced Godzilla movies are trying to do the character building, but in their case, it’s not working that well and I really want them to focus on the Monsters. Toho is showing us that they are able to create real drama using good storytelling in a movie that focuses on a giant monster. Speaking of the giant monster, there is no “guy in a suit” (I’ll admit that has always been part of what I love about those old kaiju movies) or miniatures in this one. This movie is jam packed with computer generated effects and they work. I appreciated the final Godzilla design having something of that guy in a suit look, only better. The smaller creature we encounter at the beginning of the movie, to me, just looked like something I’d seen in a Jurassic Park movie, but the full sized “Tokyo busting” creature looks great. I could probably go on, but I’ll wrap this up. If you enjoyed Shin Godzilla I think you’ll really enjoy Minus One, and if you’re a lifelong fan of the franchise, and especially a fan of the 1955 film, you’ll have a good time here too. If those lighter, kid-friendly films are your thing, then you may have some problems with this one. This is definitely inspired more by Ishiro Honda’s 1954 Gojira than, say, 1967’s Son of Godzilla. I can appreciate both but admit it’s the original that I return to the most.    

Wish

     Walt Disney Feature Animation’s latest, Wish, a movie that is being presented as their big 100^th anniversary release, is barely just O.K. Forgettable and uninspired songs and characters make this 95 minute film feel much longer than it really is.

     The movie takes place in the island nation of Rosas, where all people from anywhere are welcome. The land is ruled by the magic wielding King Magnifico (voiced by Chris Pine), who several times a year will take a wish from one of his subjects and it could be granted at any time in the future. The twist is, when he takes the wish the wisher then has no memory of it. He also grants a wish a few times a year. Otherwise he has this collection of wishes in his castle that he watches over and keeps safe. One day a young citizen named Asha (Ariana DeBose) interviews to be the King’s new assistant. During her interview he shows her his room of wishes and tells her that most will never be granted. Including her own grandfather’s wish, because it is too vague and could, in some way, be dangerous. She asks why he keeps the wishes if he knows most will never be granted, why not give them back? The King is insulted by that question and Asha does not get the gig. While out in the woods with her goat companion Valentino she sings a song about wishes and stars and a little star (a super cute little anime-ish character that will make great plush to sell) comes down and grants animals and trees the ability to talk. Even Valentino, now voiced by Alan Tudyk. Asha and “Star” decide that the people would be happier if they got their wishes back, at least they could pursue that dream on their own if they chose. Asha, Star, Valentino, and Asha’s 7 friends (who will seem slightly familiar) go about liberating the wishes. King Maginifico, who is a little selfish and has a short temper, uses a book of magic, that he himself said was too dangerous to use, to stop Asha’s plan. He’s right about the book. It turns him into a nasty, nasty guy. Now Asha and her band of friends have to stop the now crazed King and free the citizens of Rosas.

     Okay, so, here’s my takeaway. Before Asha ticked off the King, who was a little self-absorbed and had a bit of a temper, things seemed to be going great on the island. The people, the King, and his Queen were all happy, AND a few people got their wishes granted from time to time. The King wasn’t a bad guy. He wasn’t taking advantage of or keeping the people down. The only oddly off putting thing was that a person forgot their wish when it was given to the wizard king. If Asha had just kept her eye on the prize of being his assistant and not gotten hung up on why most wishes will not be granted (I mean, the King had a point about vague wishes that could go south if granted) everyone would still be happy and content with their lives. Once the Star showed up she just decided that the King was wrong and “she” was going to fix it. Are you getting that I wasn’t totally “Team Asha”? Once the king lost his s&@t he had to be stopped, but he wouldn’t have turned to that book and discovered that he could absorb the wishes and gain power from them if not for that girl. It was all Asha. At least that’s my opinion.

     The art style is an interesting choice. The backgrounds and even the clothes worn by the characters look like they are drawn with chalk. It’s a cool visual style that I had no problem with. It seemed odd though that everything was in that, sort of, medium except for the skin of the characters, which look a bit like plastic, like most CG animated movies. Just an observation. The voice cast is full of talented people, Ariana DeBose, Chris Pine (who knew he could sing??), Alan Tudyk, Victor Garber, Harvey Guillen, and Evan Peters to name a few. Unfortunately, I don’t think the script was all that clever. None of the gags really land. Some are big swings too. A huge chicken production number? Maybe it could have worked, but it brought to mind Home on the Range, in my opinion, the worst Disney Animated feature ever and the one that killed traditional animation. The supporting songs are not very memorable. Just ok. I had to look up the two folks who wrote the songs- Julia Michaels and Benjamin Rice. Both seem to come from the pop world, and both worked on songs in the recent remake of A Star is Born. The directors of this film are, first time director, Fawn Veerasunthorn and veteran Chris Buck. Buck was a co-director on the Frozen movies and 1999’s Tarzan. I would imagine that the company figured pairing a first time director with a pretty established one would work best. It does sound like a good plan, but in this case something didn’t quite work out. Everything seemed to unfold and turn serious really fast and I was never that invested in our lead characters to take that leap of faith in them so quickly.

     Going into this movie we were told, seeing as it’s the 100^th anniversary of the Disney company animated release, that there would be homages and nods to Disney features of the past, and there are. Some a bit more clever than others. A big one being Asha’s 7 friends. Can you think of a classic Disney animated film featuring a group of 7 characters? You can figure it out. My daughter actually caught that one before I did, but she was right. There are a few others here and there. Again, some a little clever while others were just too “in your face’. At least for me. Maybe a little more time could have been spent on the story being told than trying to figure out where to put in these little “nods” would have been good for this project. As the company’s big 100^th anniversary release you think that a movie featuring so much magic would have had more of it’s own magic than Wish does.

Trolls Band Together

     It should come as no surprise to anyone but Trolls Band Together is more of what you got from the first two Trolls movies, and I actually mean that as a compliment. By this point you’d know if this franchise is something you’ve enjoyed. For me, when the first Trolls movie came out in 2016, I thought; “here comes a train wreck.” My kids were young and wanted to see it, so we did… and I enjoyed the heck out of it. In spite of myself. When the follow up, Trolls World Tour was released 4 years later, I found myself enjoying it too. So, even though my kids are now 17 and 14, we all headed to the cineplex to see this latest entry. Guess what? It’s sweet and charming and I did find myself tapping my toes to the music and laughing out loud a few times. Are these Trolls movies great cinema? Of course not, but they deliver on what they promise they will be.
     Here, Poppy (Anna Kendrick) learns that Branch (Justin Timberlake) has 4 brothers, and they were at one time a boy band called “BroZone”. Unable to make the perfect family harmony they disbanded and went their separate ways when Branch was very young. Now one of the brothers has been abducted by a brother and sister pop act- Velvet (Amy Schumer) and Veneer (Andrew Rannells), who have been siphoning his talent out for them to use to become a super popular music group. The more of his talent they remove the closer he comes to death. Now Branch and Poppy have to round up the other brothers to rescue him because he’s being held in a diamond bottle and the only way to break diamond is with the “perfect family harmony”. Just go with it. Along the way Poppy also discovers a long lost sister of her own, Viva (Camila Cabello). Once they have the “band back together” they have to rescue the dying brother before all his talent is removed.
     Again, if you were in for the first two Trolls movies, you’ll be in for this one. All the characters are charming and the music, for the most part, is toe tapping and fun. This time out we really only follow Poppy, Branch, and Tiny Diamond (Kenan Thompson), who just came along for the ride to prove he’s a grown up and not a baby. By the way, this is the first time I found Thompson’s Tiny Diamond very funny. He was kind of annoying to me in the other movies. This time, he’s the source of much of the funny. A few other characters from the other movies appear like Zooey Descheanel’s Bridget and Christopher Mintz-Plasse’ King Gristle but the majority of the cast is made up of new characters. Branches brothers, voiced by Eric Andre’, Kid Cudi, Daveed Diggs, and Troye Sivan, along with Poppy’s sister Viva, and the baddies Velvet and Veneer. They all add to the mix of bubble-gum surrealism that has served this franchise well since the first movie. The dialogue occasionally goes just to the edge of “mature” humor before backing off, just to keep the adult's attention, which I appreciate, and is otherwise pretty clever. If you can keep up with the rapid-fire delivery by characters like easily excitable Kendrick’s Poppy, you’ll be rewarded.
     I’ve enjoyed myself with each of these movies, and even the holiday specials featuring the original cast. They are silly fun and there is usually a bit of “the feels” to feel along the way. If these movies don’t appeal to you, that’s fine. I get it. Don’t go see it. There are plenty of films I have no interest in, but if you like, sometimes downright clever, silly stuff, you might find yourself enjoying a Trolls movie. Watching this one I started to realize that the surreal aspect of these movies (they can get really trippy for no reason other than to just be trippy) is part of why I like them. To each his (or her) own, I guess.        

The Marvels

    The latest entry in the MCU films is The Marvels, which features not only Captain Marvel (Brie Larson) but Ms. Marvel (Iman Vellani) and Monica Rambeau (Teyonah Parris), last seen in the Marvel TV series’ Ms. Marvel and WandaVision. We learn what has happened to these three characters since their last appearances and now they have to work together to save the universe. Director Nia DaCosta, who had only directed 2 features films before this, one being the recent remake/continuation of the horror film Candyman. She turns in a tight, fun, comic book action movie with heart and some razzle/dazzle.

     When the leader of the Kree people, Dar-Benn (Zawe Ashton), uncovers the other wrist band, or “Bangle”, matching that worn by Kamala Khan aka Ms. Marvel, she uses it’s power to try to restore her planet after it was ravaged by a civil war. A civil war inadvertently started by Captain Marvel. So Dar-Benn also uses this as an excuse to execute revenge on Captain Marvel by destroying any world she may call home. In doing so the powers of Captain Marvel, Ms. Marvel, and Monica Rambeau become entangled so when their powers are used at the same time they physically switch places (as seen in the final scene of the Ms. Marvel series). Now this trio of marvels have to work together to stop Dar-Benn from her campaign of destruction.

     Let me put this right out there because there are people out there who are putting this movie down because they have decided everything from Marvel is now terrible. These people have not seen the same movie I did. Is The Marvels amazing? No, but amazing comes around only every once in a while. The Marvels is, however, terrific fun. Like many of the Marvel villains of the past Dar-Bell does have a legitimate gripe with Captain Marvel. As she promised at the end her own movie, Carol Danvers aka Captain Marvel goes to the Kree home world and destroys their AI leader. Unfortunately, it destabilizes their government thrusting them into civil war. During which they nearly destroy their atmosphere, water supply, and sun. Leaving their planet nearly uninhabitable. So...yea...Dar-Benn has a right to be upset, but, again like most Marvel villains, goes about it by seeking revenge at the cost of the innocent. There are moments though where you think, I see her point. Our returning heroes played by Larson, Vellani, and Parris, luckily, have great chemistry and the scenes they have together just work. Most of the backstories you would need to know who all these characters are is covered either in flashbacks or exposition delivered by one character or another. It’s done really well, so even if you didn’t see WandaVision or Ms. Marvel you will get their connections to Captain Marvel. I would say that some knowledge of Captain Marvel’s solo movie is fairly important, but I guess not required. I’m not sure why you’d go see this movie having not seen Captain Marvel, but I’m sure it has happened. The script takes care of filling in any blanks that need filling and keeps the story chugging along quite nicely. The tight 105 minute running time is a relief from some of the overly long superhero movies we’ve had in recent years. A long movie does not automatically equate to a great movie. I hope other writers and film makers get that soon. Many people complain of superhero fatigue, well I have a bit of “really long movie” fatigue. Sure, some work great- the Avatar movies and Avengers: Infinity War do. A 2hr 25 minute The Flash or 2hr 36 minute Eternals suffered because of it.

     I thought the special effects, and this is a mostly cosmic story, looked great. Even the, mainly, CG cat/Flerken “Goose” looked great. The production design really reminded me of the pages of Captain Marvel comics of the mid 2010’s. They even borrowed a couple of story points from the issues of that series. Including a planet where everyone sings (in the comics they just rhymed) and some Flerken craziness. Having read those I was very happy to see nods to the source material. I also loved seeing Ms. Marvel and Monica Rambeau in a big adventure on a big screen. I loved Kamala Khan and her family in the TV show and they are present in this film. More than I actually expected. Ms. Marvel is the heart of the team, and the movie. She wears her emotions right out in the open. She can’t hold back her feelings, whether they are joy, disgust, compassion, or sadness. Ms. Marvel is actress Iman Vellani’s first ever acting job and she kills it. Even more here than in the series, where she was super charming. Carol Danvers is the “brute force”, the blunt instrument of the team. She is the reason for the entire story and she has to deal with it, while forging a relationship with her two new partners. Monica Rambeau is the logical one. She brings structure and keeps everyone on task. I can’t imagine that this was written that way by chance. The screenwriters are smarter than you want to give them credit for. The Marvels was written by three woman-- director Nia DeCosta, Megan McDonnel (WandaVision), and Elissa Karasik (Loki). I said it before but they put together one of the tightest scripts of all the MCU movies. There’s no time for tangents, no matter how fun they might be. This is the way action is supposed to work on screen. Especially escapist fun action. If a scene doesn’t further the story, it’s probably not that important. I respect that.

     I know there are very few people who have the same opinion I do, but Captain America: The First Avenger is my favorite MCU movie. Because it gives me the same feelings I had reading Captain America comics as a kid. The movie makes me smile from beginning to end and The Marvels works on a similar level for me. It reminds me of that feeling of reading a good comic, with cosmic action and fun characters. What more do you want from a comic book movie? It’s in the name. Why make a comic book movie if the goal is not to have it feel like a comic book? Richard Donner proved in 1978 that these characters can be cinematic and still retain that feeling of joy you get from reading a great story. There have been a lot of comic book movies in recent years where the filmmakers have forgotten that. Not all characters are dark and brooding. There’s a small handful of those characters out there, but you have to bring the fun with them as well or you end up with The Dark Knight Rises (yes, I hated it. It’s not fun at all. And it’s TOO LONG!). The Marvels is breathe of fresh air. So check it out and just enjoy it. It’s not trying to be art, it’s trying to entertain and I believe it succeeds. By the way, there is no post credit scene, BUT the mid-credit scene is VERY important and I loved it!!

Butcher's Crossing

     Butcher’s Crossing finally got a wide release after its premier at the Toronto Film Festival in September of 2021. I love westerns and I will take any chance to see one on a big screen. I’m glad I did because I’m sure this one won’t be around very long. That’s not to say it’s bad, it just hasn’t received any real promotion, so most people won’t even know it’s playing. This is star Nicolas Cage’s second western, after last year’s The Old Way (which basically went right to VOD and Home Video) and while I did like The Old Way, this one is better.
     In this film we follow a young man, Will (Fred Hechinger from The White Lotus), in the 1870’s who has left college in the east to “experience the west”. Once there he seeks out adventure and finds one with a Buffalo Hunt, led by a man named Miller (Cage). This hunt will take them far into the mountains of Colorado, to a valley Miller had seen years ago, full of buffalo. This quest tests their group’s stamina and sanity when things, of course, don’t go as originally planned.
     Based on the 1960 book of the same name by John Williams, Butcher’s Crossing sticks pretty closely to the source material. With the young tenderfoot easterner with stars in his eyes confronted with the reality of “the west” and the people who populate it. There is a lot that is pretty standard western iconography here. A group of men have to survive nature and each other on their quest. This time it’s a buffalo hunt. We have the leader of the group in Nicolas Cage’s Miller, a grizzled old man who drives the wagon and cooks, and the wild card cowboy and skinner who’s just in it for the pay. Along with the naive Will they are a pretty standard cast of western characters. It’s during their time together, getting to the valley and shooting and skinning the buffalo, that we really get to see how the environment and their relationships with each other affects each man.
     The cast, led by Cage and Hechinger, are a talented group. Xander Berkely plays the old man and, while he is a stereotype, his performance never falls into being a cliche’. He’s a terrific character actor you’ve seen many times on TV and films, usually playing some slimy businessman or no-goodnick. He’s pretty likable here, which was a nice change of pace. Jeremy Bobb, another character actor you’ve seen before, is the “skinner” in it for the money. He talks too much and rubs everyone the wrong way, though as the film goes on you realize, while he’s not an easy person to like, he has a lot of common sense and you find yourself agreeing with him over Miller. These four characters are the core cast. 90% of the film is just those guys, so if any of them couldn’t have held their own the film would have fallen apart. Fred Hechinger does a nice job of being really naive and kindhearted as tenderfoot Will, but physically, I think, he was miscast. He’s a little too big physically though his babyface does help. Nicolas Cage’s performance is actually pretty subdued for the most part. With this performance he gets to slowly go a little mad as the film unfolds. He doesn’t have a “Nicolas Cage totally snaps” moment really. Well, sort of... at the end. He shaved his head for this role. I can’t say this is a fact, but I would bet that Cage chose to shave his head to make his character reminiscent of Brando’s Col. Kurtz in Apocalypse Now. He occasionally runs a straight razor over his scalp and sits with his head down while rubbing his it with his whole palm. All images that brought Kurtz to mind for me.
     As I go on with my thoughts may veer a bit into spoiler territory. You’ve been warned. Anyway… as the story unfolds the quartet reach the valley that is, in fact, full of buffalo. Now Miller is just killing and killing buffalo. As Will comments at one point; “they just stand there and let him shoot them.” As it should, it can be difficult to watch. After a while Miller takes on a sort of Captain Ahab vibe, only his quest seems to be to kill the entire herd. I think this is where Nicolas Cage was making the Kurtz connection in his mind. When they find themselves trapped in the valley for the winter because Miller won’t pack up and go, each member of the group is feeling their minds unravel. Again, it’s the unlikable skinner who, while still an asshole, is the voice of reason. When what’s left of the party finally do make it back to civilization, they are confronted by the fact that their ordeal was probably not worth what was lost.
     A high point of the film is its cinematography, but the Montana locations couldn’t have been that difficult to make look beautiful. Where the movie falls a bit short for me was its ecological message, which I didn’t pick up on until the very end. Yes, the slaughter of the buffalo was disturbing, especially when Miller just kept killing well after they had what they needed, but it never felt like it was the point of the story. I guess they were going for “in the end, it just wasn’t worth it”. Like the men’s epic hunting trip, the actual buffalo hunting that decimated the bison population between the 1860’s through the 1970’s and shrank the population from the 100’s of thousands to only a few hundred, in the end was not worth it. While I agree with this message 100%, it just never seemed to be what the movie was about to me. I was watching a story of an obsessed man and the three others caught in his wake. I don’t think Butcher’s Crossing is going to go down as a great film or even a great western. It’s good and I’ll probably revisit it in the future. If you’re a Nicolas Cage fan I think you’ll come away happy too. Keep in mind this film is not an action movie, there are no shoot outs or Indian attacks, that’s not what it’s about and that’s fine. It’s a slow burn that is satisfying enough.    

The Creator

      Filmmaker Gareth Edwards, who’s feature film debut was the surprisingly entertaining 2010 film Monsters and went on to direct, the also surprisingly entertaining Rogue One: A Star Wars Story, is back after a seven-year break with The Creator, which he wrote and directed. In the not-too-distant future A.I. and A.I. robots have become common place. Helping us with everything from unskilled labor to policing the streets but when they set off a nuclear bomb in Los Angeles the U.S. government bans A.I. and wages war on those nations that continue to encourage it. Specifically New Asia. John David Washington (Blackkklansman) plays Joshua who has been undercover trying to get close to the A.I. leader. While undercover he has fallen in love and married a human woman (Gemma Chan of Eternals) who had been raised by the A.I. robots. When an attack by the U.S. military prematurely puts an end to his mission and separates him from his wife, he goes into brooding retirement. Five years later two military leaders come to him for help in finding a weapon the A.I. have developed that can defeat their superweapon “NOMAD”. He agrees to help in hopes of finding his wife, but when he finds the weapon, it is in the form of an A.I. robot child.
     The Creator is a beautiful looking movie, visually striking. Shot mostly in real locations, mainly in Thailand. The SPFX by Industrial Lights and Magic are great. They had to create some structures, vehicles, and give everyone playing robots these holes in their heads and little mettle necks. It’s actually quite effective. The performances are all pretty good, led by John David Washington and newcomer Lí’ll Madeliene Yuna Voyles as the A.I. child. The scenes they have together are the highlight of the film and only get better as the movie progresses, until their final scene which is quite the gut wrencher. Gemma Chan actually doesn’t have a lot of screentime, for second billing, but is good. Allison Janney as an American Military Colonel and Ken Watanabe as, basically, her opposite for the A.I. also bring strong performances. Janney is sort of a cross between her character and I, Tanya and Stephen Lang’s Colonel Quaritch in the Avatar films.
      The story, while original, doesn’t always feel that fresh. For a lot of the movie you can predict just about every place the story goes. Most of the time I was hoping I was wrong. Our hero finds the “weapon” he’s supposed to destroy, but it’s in the form of a child. What do you do? He can’t just kill a kid, but at the same time he’s been saying all along that robots aren’t real. So, there is the ethical tug of war inside him. He also has his need to find his wife, which seems to trump any orders he had been given. I couldn’t really pinpoint the moment he finally picks a side. I just noticed that he stopped doing the things that would have worked against the other. While I liked Washington, I was never sure of where his character was going. Is that his fault, the directors, or was it just kind of messy on the page to begin with? I kept waiting for this really cool looking movie to do something or make me feel something new. Gareth Edwards is a talented guy and one to continue to watch in the future. For now, though he’s wearing his influences and style right out in the open. Sometimes for the best and sometimes not. The Creator is entertaining most of the time, and worth a look, but it’s not that new original idea we’ve all been hoping to see in this climate of remakes, sequels, and reboots.    

A Haunting in Venice

      A Haunting in Venice is Kenneth Branagh’s third outing as director and star, as Agatha Christie’s “little gray cells” using sleuth Hercule Poirot, and my personal favorite of the three. Not that the other films are bad, it’s just that those stories, Murder on the Orient Express and Death on the Nile, had already received a feature film treatment. Films that I, frankly, think are better, but...A Haunting in Venice, based on Christie’s story “Hallowe’en Party”, had never been produced, outside of an episode of the long running BBC Poirot TV series. So, this time out, I did not know “who done it”, which made the experience much more entertaining.
     It’s now 1947 and Poirot (Branagh) has retired to Venice where he wiles away the hours reading, enjoying pastries, and looking at the view, while his bodyguard (Riccardo Scamarcio of John Wick Chapter 2) fends off admirers and people who want the famous detective to help them. One day he is visited by an old mystery novelist friend of his (Tina Fey) who begs him to attend a séance with her to help debunk a Medium (Michelle Yeoh) that she just can’t catch cheating. He reluctantly agrees. The location is an old Venetian house where a young woman had lost her life about 6 months earlier. Her mother (Kelly Reilly of Yellowstone) requested the séance in hopes of contacting her daughter. Also in attendance are the girl’s doctor (Jamie Dornan of Belfast), his son (Jude Hill also of Belfast), the Medium’s two assistants (Ali Khan & Emma Laird), the Housekeeper (Camille Cottin), and the dead girl’s former fiancé’ (Kyle Allen of A Map of Tiny Perfect Things), along with Poirot’s aforementioned bodyguard. When another death occurs following the séance Poirot seals the entrance until he can deduce who the murderer is.
    This film doesn’t play like your stereotypical mystery film but does follow all the rules of the genre. Branagh plays much of the film like a horror story, with the occasional jump scare and the eerie possibility of the existence of something supernatural. He keeps you wondering if they are “going to go there” right up until the big reveal at the end when all the pieces are laid out for you to look back and wonder; “why didn’t I catch that?” He uses some interesting camera placement and odd lenses to keep the viewer a bit “off kilter” as the story unfolds. At first, I found his occasional use of a fish-eye-ish lens a little annoying but after a while just accepted it. The film is mostly dimly lit, as much of the source light is provided by candles or lanterns. I don’t recall any bright colors either. It’s a beautifully photographed film. Cinematographer Haris Zambarloukos worked with Branagh on many occasions, including his other Poirot films and his Oscar nominated Belfast. Production designer John Paul Kelly kept things creepy but didn’t over do it. Keeping the sets pretty simple. Michael Green returns to script his third Poirot story for Kenneth Branagh and while I liked a lot of Poirot’s dialogue in the other two films, I think he has even better lines here. Although there was no mention of the “little gray cells” which did disappoint me. The script is tight and never gives away too much, while laying the clues out to follow, never making them so obvious as to bring attention to them until Poirot lays them out at the end.
     Mr. Branagh has gathered a cast of performers that can do most of the work for him. I thought he was great as the detective. Jamie Dornan and his Belfast son Jude Hill again play father and son and I think that familiarity they had worked well for their relationship in this film. I’m always surprised when I hear Kelly Reilly speak with her natural English accent, since I’m so used to hearing her speak on Yellowstone. She turns in a terrific performance as the devastated, mourning mother. Michelle Yeoh doesn’t have as much to do as I had hoped but when she’s on screen she just takes over the scene. Tina Fey seems to be having a ball doing her best impression of Rosalind Russel in His Girl Friday, as the fast-talking American mystery writer. She occasionally drops out of it, but mainly keeps it up really well. While this is a dramatic role, she does provide many of the lighter moments in the film. The rest of this ensemble cast are just as good as the better-known players and help keep the tension high as the mystery unfolds.
     As I mentioned before this is probably my favorite of Kenneth Branagh’s Poirot films so far. I think it is a tighter film, there is very little that could be considered extraneous. Even his mustache is a bit more subdued this time. The film works well as a mystery and light horror, with some pretty effective scares in there. I do hope he gets to make more Poirot films and can resist the impulse to overload them with too much minutia. While I like Death on the Nile, it was too long and seemed to go off on tangents once in a while. A Haunting in Venice shows a film maker with a steady hand at the controls. I will gladly pay for more mysteries told with this much skill and class.

Blue Beetle

     I grew up reading The Blue Beetle comics in the late ‘70’s/early ‘80’s published by Charlton comics, later bought by DC where they integrated the character into their universe. This was the second iteration of the character (the first, created in late 1930’s was a bit before my time), millionaire tech genius Ted Kord, who used gadgets to fight crime. My favorite thing about the character was his flying Beetle shaped vehicle. When I first read Alan Moore’s Watchmen I thought Nite Owl’s vehicle was a total rip-off of Kord’s bug vehicle. It was much later that I learned Moore originally was going to use Blue Beetle and that’s why Nite Owl resembles BB so much. In 2006 DC comics introduced a third incarnation of Blue Beetle. This one’s powers came from a sentient alien technology, called “The Scarab” that chooses teenager Jaime Reyes as it’s host. Merging with him and giving Jaime incredible abilities. I was not very familiar with this Beetle until he was featured prominently in the animated TV series Young Justice. That’s where I learned to appreciate him. Now the Jaime Reyes Blue Beetle is featured in his own feature film and it’s not bad at all. Yes, it has its low points, and I’ll get to those, but overall, it’s a pretty entertaining ride.

     Through a series of events, new college graduate Jaime Reyes (Xolo Mariduena of Kobra Kai fame) finds himself “chosen” by The Scarab to be its host. Unfortunately, the villainous billionaire industrialist Victoria Kord (Susan Sarandon), who had possession of the scarab and was trying to tap into its power and to create military tech she calls OMAC (a concept borrowed from the Batman comics), wants it back. By any means necessary. It was her niece Jenny (Bruna Marquezine), while trying to stop her aunt, who is responsible for inadvertently putting it into Jaime Reyes’ hands. Jaime is with his family; Mother, Father, Sister, Grandmother, and Uncle when the Scarab violently attaches itself to him. Now Jaime, whether he likes it or not, has to stop Victoria Kord from getting the power of the scarab and creating her own super soldiers.

     Over the past 20 years or so there have been a lot of superhero movies. We’ve seen just about every type of comic character- aliens, super rich guys with gadgets, Gods, Sorcerers, people endowed with powers by mutations or infected by something…. My point it, it’s pretty tough for anything to feel original at this point. Blue Beetle has elements of Iron Man, Venom, and Spider-man in his DNA so this character covers ground we’ve sort of seen before. That’s true, but what makes this movie work in the end is the ensemble cast. The Reyes family play a much bigger part in Jaime’s origin and first adventure than we’ve seen in a superhero movie before. They are the secret sauce that keeps this film from totally feeling like “been there, done that”. Jaime’s family is made up of Mexican and Mexican American actors who all bring something to the mix. Damian Alcazar is Jaime’s father, Elpeida Carrillo (Yes, from freakin’ Predator!!) his mother, Beliss Escobedo his younger sister, Adriana Barraza (who more than once steals the movie) his grandmother, and actor/comedian George Lopez as his tech-savvy uncle Rudy. As in most Latin families, Familia is all important, and that is the driving message of this movie. Even the most powerful superhero still needs family.

     In addition to the Reyes family, I really enjoyed the addition of the element of Kord industries, and even though he is not actually present in the movie, the inclusion of Ted Kord in the story. The big bad, Victoria Kord, is his sister and Jenny his daughter. There are lots of Kord easter eggs AND the inclusion of his vehicle that I loved so much as a kid. There are also a few DC universe easter eggs around too. Like a Lex-corp building in the skyline. The fact that the Ted Kord character was so important to the story really made me happy and definitely added to my ability to enjoy it. You don’t have to be a member of the Latin community to get into this movie or its characters. I will say that the movie doesn’t really kick in until about the halfway mark. Except for introducing the members of the Reyes family there isn’t a lot of fun or excitement in that first half.

     I did enjoy this movie but that’s not to say I didn’t have a few issues with it. Again, the movie doesn’t have a lot of energy in the first half, so when it kicked in, I was relieved. The villain is a weak spot in the film. Susan Sarandon’s Victoria Kord is another power-hungry, mustache twirling, two-dimensional baddie. Sure, we learn that she ran the business with her father and when he died it was left to her brother Ted and not her. So, she’s bitter about that. Ok, I get it, but jeez... ”Over react much??” Her character is so stereotypical and her dialogue so cliche’ that it got a little annoying when she was on screen. Her, let's call them, Henchmen, the “homemade monster man” Carapax and Victoria’s head scientist (who she calls Dr. Sanchez, while he insists that is not his name) are fine, but not all that original either. Remember Yellowjacket from Ant-Man? The other is that scientist who finds himself working for the villain and slowly realizes he’s on the wrong side. George Lopez’ Uncle Rudy is fun but a little annoying at the same time. He’s loud, a bit of a conspiracy nut, and, conveniently, an inventor and tech guy. Which, later in the movie, is a just a little too convenient. Though I was having a good time by then and just forgave it. The feeling of covering superhero ground we’ve seen before is real and is very much present here. Through no fault of the character really, we’ve just seen a lot of stuff that is similar to this in recent years and that’s part of why the first half seems to drag.

     There is a sequence in the film where Victoria Kord has her armed forces storm the Reyes home looking for Jaime and I can imagine that this sequence could be very triggering to an immigrant family. I got emotional and have absolutely no instance of something like that happening in my family’s past or any likelihood of it ever happening. It’s a powerful sequence that packs an emotional punch on a level even outside its place in the story being told. This sequence is around the time the film hits its groove and where the family, as a unit, becomes a part of the action and not just background players. This is where Jaime’s Abuelita character really shines. Here’s something we had not seen in a superhero movie before-- a kick-ass Granny. You can’t not love her and wish she were your grandmother.

     I could go on but don’t want to get very far into spoiler territory. I enjoyed the movie, but if it had continued down the path the first half seemed to be taking us, it would have fallen apart. The integral inclusion of the Reyes family into the adventure saves the picture. I hadn’t really mentioned Xolo Mariduena who does a pretty commendable job of leading his first feature film. We’ve seen him for a few years on Kobra Kai but this is his first Hollywood feature film, and he has the title role! Talk about being dropped in the deep end. Meriduena does not embarrass himself. I enjoyed his performance. Blue Beetle is also the first big feature for director Angel Manuel Soto, probably best known to date for directing a docuseries about the boy band Menudo. He does a pretty decent job of juggling this big effects heavy movie. Yes, I have issues with the first half’s pacing and the uninspired villain, but in the end, he delivered an entertaining time at the movies. If you are already a fan of Blue Beetle, I think you’ll enjoy yourself. Keep in mind you have to get past the first half, but you’ll be rewarded. If you are feeling that Superhero burnout, and not familiar with the character, you can probably skip this one and catch it at later. I came out having had a good time. There is a mid-credit scene and a post credit scene. Be sure to stay for the mid credit scene but you can skip the post-credit one.  It’s pointless.

Barbie

    Greta Gerwig, director of Lady Bird and 2019’s Little Women, brings Mattel’s famous doll Barbie to life in this surreal, brightly colored (mostly pink) feature film starring Margot Robbie as the Barbie and Ryan Gosling as her friend-zoned Ken. I really liked the first twenty minutes or so of this movie, but the concept does start to run out of gas after a while.

    In the film Barbie is living her best Barbie-life in Barbieland when she begins to have something of an existential crisis, thoughts of mortality and cellulite take root in her mind. She is sent to “Weird Barbie”, played by the always terrific Kate McKinnon, who directs her to go to the “Real World” where she needs to seek out the girl who has been playing with her to find out what is happening. So, Barbie and Barbie obsessed Ken, who invites himself on the trip, leave for the real world. While there Barbie meets who she is looking for, while also setting the board of directors of Mattel on her trail, AND Ken realizes that men are obviously in charge of the real world and begins to question his, and all the other Kens, place in Barbieland society. All this leads to big changes and more complications to Barbie’s quest to set her life back to how it was.

    To set the record straight, I was never, and am currently not, a girl. I’m a middle-aged man, so I’m sure my experience watching this movie is very different from a female’s. For me, it started off as a very funny spoof of, and love letter to, the world of Barbie. It’s full of very funny gags that poke a bit of fun at the corporate symbol while expressing the writer’s obvious love of Barbie at the same time. When the action moves to the real world and we see Barbie and Ken interacting with real life, sort of, there are some nice “fish out of water” bits. When the story takes us back to Barbieland (sort of) along with some elements of the real world the film becomes more a statement movie about the “patriarchy”, toxic masculinity, and its effect on womankind and society as a whole. The movie still tries to toss in a few toy related gags but the special sauce that seemed to be there in the first half doesn’t seem to work as well at this point. Part of the issue is that the concept begins to grow a little tiresome, but I think the main reason is that, in my experience, the movie gets a little preachy. Not cleverly preachy, but “smack me over the head with it” preachy and I’m a pretty liberal guy. This is where I think the viewer’s gender may play a part in one's enjoyment of the movie. For me, that third act dragged, and this includes a pretty long production number by the Kens. This two-hour long movie started to feel a bit too long.

    Having aired my challenges with the film, there is enough clever and funny to still make it worth your while. The performances of its cast keep its reality from just being a cartoon, which is actually is. The fact that all the performers who play Barbieland characters play everything genuine and real are who sell the whole thing. Even in situations where they are showering with no actual water, or the when the Kens threaten to “beach each other off”. It works because they aren’t playing the comedy but the reality of that world. Margot Robbie shines, as usual, as Barbie. It’s a little sickening how she can be such a beauty and be so talented at the same time. They even remark on it in the film. The same goes for Ryan Gosling, who had to channel a bit of his comedic along with singing and dancing Mickey Mouse Club skills. The man is also gorgeous and can act, sing, dance, and be funny. It’s not fair I tells ya! Performers like Issa Rae, Kingsley Ben-Adir, Semu Liu, Michael Cera, and brand new Doctor Who- Ncuti Gatwa make up some of the Barbieland citizens and each bring at least one laugh. Michael Cera in particular, who plays Allen. Ken’s friend who’s biggest selling point was that he could fit in all of Ken’s clothes. Since there is just one Allen he, to paraphrase Rodney Dangerfield, gets no respect. Which plays great with Cera’s sad sack persona he perfected on the show Arrested Development.

    For me, the concept of Barbie-come-to-life got a little old after a while, and the “message” being a bit too in your face, wore on me. I’m a pretty big fan of Will Ferrell, but his Mattel CEO character is nothing we haven’t seen him do before. He even played a similar role in another toy movie not long ago- The Lego Movie. So, he didn’t bring anything new. I did like the production design and its attention to detail. It was nice to see a movie that wasn’t afraid to be colorful after a decade of things like the overly dark Snyderverse movies and the like. Barbie isn’t great, but it’s worth checking out. I just wish it could have maintained all the fun that it started out with.

Oppenheimer

    I am not a huge Christopher Nolan fan. I’ve enjoyed several of his movies but am far from one of those people who think he can do no wrong. Personally, after getting off to a great start with his Batman films with Batman Begins, he destroyed the whole concept of the character and his world in The Dark Knight Rises. I don’t think Interstellar is brilliant, I prefer Tenet to Inception, and sometimes think he peaked with Momento. Having said that...his latest, the 3hr examination of the man who became known as “The Father of the Atomic Bomb”, Oppenheimer is a good movie. A great movie? I don’t know about that, but it is quite good and full of very good performances. The cast is stacked-- Cillian Murphy as Robert Oppenheimer, Emily Blunt as his wife, Robert Downey Jr., Matt Damon, Tom Conti, Florence Pugh, Jack Quaid, Rami Malek, Casey Affleck, an unrecognizable David Krimholtz, Alden Ehrenreich, Jason Clarke, James Remar, Tony Goldwyn, Kenneth Branagh, Matthew Modine, and Gary Oldman!

    The film follows the career of theoretical physicist Robert Oppenheimer and his work that went into creating the atomic bomb. Along with his fall from grace by the government he helped win World War II. Cillian Murphy is great as Oppenheimer. He has become one of those chameleon actors. Who, without a lot of make-up or appliances, seems to be a totally different person in each film he appears. Like most Americans I first saw him in the 2002 zombie movie 28 Days Later. Then he popped up in a lot of stuff over the years, most recently in the very cool TV show Peaky Blinders and A Quiet Place II alongside his Oppenheimer wife, Emily Blunt. He had to carry this film. Oppenheimer is in the vast majority of the movie, there are very few scenes not featuring him, and Murphy does an amazing job of carrying this ambitious film. Each cast member seems to be bringing their “A games”, but it’s probably Murphy and Robert Downey Jr., who plays Lewis Strauss (according to the film the man who brought about Oppenheimer’s downfall), who have the most meat to chew on, as they say. While other standouts, like Emily Blunt and Matt Damon, get some nice moments, Murphy and Downey have a few chances to soar. More than once they could have taken things way over the top, and perhaps got away with it, but they didn’t. Their performances are real and keep this overly long film from getting bogged down in all its talk.

    Here is where Christopher Nolan shows off some of the lessons he’s learned from a few of his lesser successful really long movies of the past. He has not only cast the movie with actors who deliver the goods, but he chose to not tell this story in a totally linear fashion. He uses Downey’s character’s Cabinet Confirmation Hearings as the framing device of the story. The jumping around a bit from one era to another keeps you, the viewer, on your toes and paying attention. You have to do a little work to keep up and therefore it’s more difficult for your mind to wander or, because there are so many familiar faces in the film, for you to get caught up playing the “where have I seen this guy before” game in your head. He also co-wrote the screenplay, so he had control of the film from its “inception”. See what I did there? Anyway, in the hands of a less experienced filmmaker or just lesser filmmaker, this material could have been a big mess or just a run of the mill biopic, which this is not.

     I am not at all an expert on Robert Oppenheimer so I can’t tell you how historically accurate the film really is. I am aware of the historical broad strokes of the story, and they all seemed to be in place, but what the film got right and wrong about its subject...I don’t know. I can only judge it as a piece of cinema and entertainment. As such, I think it’s pretty good. Yes, it’s too long, but it’s not interminable. The three hours are used pretty well. The main reason to see it is for those two performances I mentioned before- Cillian Murphy and Robert Downey Jr. I got the feeling Emily Blunt might have shown brighter had she had just a little more to do. She does have one particularly terrific scene though. It wouldn’t surprise me at all if the film, Nolan, Murphy, and maybe Downey are all nominated for Oscars for this one. It is good.