This is my 25th Annual Listing of movies I’ve seen each year. The headline for me of this year in movies was the rise and fall of MoviePass. I bought a MoviePass in January and as a result saw more movies in theaters than I have in recent years. Since I could see a movie each day at no charge, I was more inclined to catch movies I might have waited for to appear on DVD, HBO or Netflix. On the other hand, even though they would be free – I didn’t feel inclined to see every movie released in theaters — my time is more valuable to me that that, and the theatre experience is often mixed. I’m still not happy with the reserved seat with online booking (at a fee) phenomena.
It was unfortunate that by mid-year the MoviePass model began to fall apart and the availability of theaters and movies dwindled significantly. Moviepass ran into financial problems, and kept changing their rules and model. They tried limiting the number of films, extra charges for some movies, and the theaters and studios fought back – limiting access. During the last three months of the year – there was a rarely a day when MoviePass offered a movie I could see in a theatre near by. Their customer support was terrible, and they moved from a bunch of apologies, to stony silence. The experiment failed, and there is no way I’ll renew in 2019.
Interestingly, other theatre chains have moved to a subscription model (notably AMC), and I may consider a different type of subscription in 2019 (I did like the idea of being able to go to the movies whenever I wanted to, without concerns about pricing based on time of day, etc.) Interestingly, as the year came to a close, more and more films I was interested in seeing actually appeared on Netflix, either simultaneously, or instead of, in the theaters. As more and more film- makers get financed by Netflix (as well as Amazon and Apple and others entering the game) – we may see the need for going to cinemas become less and less important. I generally have a better movie-experience on my home TV, than in the theatre which are now doubling as restaurants and serve food and settle charges during the movie!
Anyway – though things slowed down for me in the second half of the year, I saw a decent number of films one way or the other. Here’s what I saw this year and how I’ve rated ’em! (As usual, some of the award-nominated films for this year won’t be available in local theaters until 2019 — and you’ll find a number of late 2017 films in this year’s list as well, since I didn’t see ’em until January or February 2018. Here’s this year’s viewing in order of cinematic bang for the buck!
1. **** Mission Impossible: Fallout — As action popcorn movies go – you couldn’t find anything better this year than this 6th entry in Tom Cruise’s Mission Impossible movies. While the complex plot was nearly impossible (no pun intended) to follow — you mostly don’t try to understand the details of the various double, triple and quadruple crosses that occur throughout the film, and instead just enjoy the familiar machinations of the series:hoax scenarios to trick bad guys into confessions, ‘rubber masks’ that enable the MIF team to mimic anyone, and digital countdowns to Armageddon What’s great here is how effective the many action scenes are. These are touch notch stunts and you get a generous dose of one scene-topper after another, from great bathroom brawls, to amazing aerial chases. In each, the amount of effort and punishment inflected is included – and Tom Cruise shows the effort, rather than appearing like a super-hero. It stretches action reality to just the right point – while delivering jaw-dropping thrills.
Unfortunately, while I had a lot more detail when I originally wrote my reaction to this movie – the content somehow got deleted and I’m not able to recover it. (What happened to my elaborate backup schema?). So a more detailed account of what worked (and didn’t) in this movie has been lost to my memory . I first noticed the review was incomplete about 5 months after I originally wrote it).
Nonetheless – I do recall that this was the best action film I’ve seen in a long time, and I had little to quibble about it. This was everything an action film should be and tops everything else that was released this year for pure, cheap, movie pleasure. It’s rare to see that a sequel can still stay on top of its game, and improve on a winning formula instead of just offering a tired retread. In a year in which no film deeply touched me emotionally, I think a fully successful thrill ride like this was my purest cinematic pleasure. 2.
****Paddington 2 – That rare thing – a family film with just the right style to delight all ages. Rather than the cheeky, rude, cynical tone so many ‘family’ movies take to try to reach kids and adults – this film is positive and strikes just the right balance, appearing neither snarky nor saccharine. Once you get over the initial orientation period of seeing a digitized bear and get used to the English dialects – you’re quickly drawn into this cleverly told story of Paddington’s adventures. It helps tremendously that the animation and integration into live action is seamless – and the camera work and the inventiveness of the animation styles is fascinating and visually enjoyable. The general design and colorful world fits well with the seamlessly modulated tone and style of the acting. A sequence set inside a pop-up book is one of the most stylish pieces of animation I’ve seen in a long time. The storyline is engaging and I just can’t think of anything bad to say about this film. A wonderful cast featuring some of Britain’s best — coupled with good storytelling and assured direction. Reminiscent on some levels of the great “Babe” films of years past. A film for all ages and a model of what an all-age accessible film should be! I had no particular interest in seeing a film about a British Bear, and hadn’t seen the original or read the books, so I nearly passed on seeing this. Thank goodness enough critics touted it as one of the year’s best that I gave it a watch.
3. **** The Favourite – Director Yorgos Lanthimos follows up his strange, captivating film “The Lobster” with this more accessible tale of power cloaked in Masterpiece Theatre dressing. While I’m normally disinterested in ‘royal’ settings, the window-dressing of elaborate costumes, wigs, and palaces did not distract me once the film’s central characters dominate the screen. It’s a story about the shifting winds of power, and how politics are easily dominated by the personal agendas of the powermongers behind the scenes.
The sickly, childish, and tantrum-prone Queen Anne, (in a terrific, vanity-free performance by Olivia Colman and a fresh way of portraying a royal), is disinterested in governing and strategizing the long-running war with France. She is more focused on her own infirmities, her 17 pet bunnies (each representing one of her children lost in childbirth), and trying to enjoy food she can no longer successfully keep down due to her weak stomach. She passively is content to let her closest confidante, Lady Sarah Churchill (Rachel Wiesz) make the decisions for her. Churchill is a no-nonsense, outspoken and ruthless person who takes full advantage of the power her relationship with the Queen affords her, and uses it to advance her political agenda of keeping England in power, no matter the toll it takes on the country’s subjects or her own husband. She is blunt and harsh with the Queen in ways we wouldn’t expect from one of the Queen’s subjects, telling her truths that she says only a true friend can tell. She tells the queen she looks like a badger and treats her like a child that must be minded.
Into this situation arrives a lady fallen from grace, Abigail Masham (Emma Stone), kicked far down the social ladder, and literally covered with mud upon her arrival, who uses her charm and sweet personality to secure a position in the royal household. She endears herself to Lady Churchill, and quickly makes her way up the the social order, going from kitchen duty to becoming Churchill’s maidservant. She then uses this friendship as leverage to get into bed (figuratively and literally) with the Queen.
The battle that emerges between the queen’s two closest companions, to maintain a position of power within court, is the heart of the movie. What’s fresh to see here through two powerful performances, are the strongest female characters seen on the screen in ages. They are both smart, articulate and strategic. They use their sexuality ruthlessly, and are utterly and absolutely aware of the threat they pose to one another. There is no naivety or victimization on display here. These are strong, self-assured women, no matter where they are placed in society. Lanthimos uses the camera to look deep into the minds and hearts (cold as they may be) of these two forces of nature – using long lingering close-ups that peer through their expressive eyes and into their innermost thoughts. At the same time, his cinematography makes the world of the court every bit as other-worldly as the oddball society he created in ‘the lobster’. The camera focuses on the absurdity of the clothing, wigs, and makeup styles of the era, offering strange fish-eyed views of the world of the court. The soundtrack is both traditionally period, and at times unnervingly fractured. The film concludes with an sequence as off-putting, confusing and head-scratching as any in recent memory – forcing one to think past the plot, and into the darker themes of the limits and futility of power. This is definitely a ‘let’s talk about what that all meant” movie.
No stuffy historical piece, but rather, an assured character piece with distinctive style and bite – it’s a ferocious portrait of female empowerment within a society that usually reduces women to objects. (“Did you come to seduce me or rape me?”). These are women who bite back (again, literally) despite living in a constrained society in which power is always relative and fickle.
4. **** Eighth Grade – a freshly contemporary ‘coming of age’ film, that feels far more accurate than most films of its ilk. An equisively vulnerable performance by young Elsie Fisher captures the complexities of a shy person trying to navigate the social pressures of the transition from middle school to high school. What’s fresh here is its depiction of the role social media plays in the life of someone who hasn’t found a place of comfort in the real world. The filmmaker, Bo Burnham makes interesting use of music and sound to amplify the anxiety that accompanies first crushes and the fears around the emergence of one’s sexuality. The first two-thirds of the film feels spot on – filled with the awkwardness and contradictory behavior of that awkward age. And unlike most Hollywood films, the eighth graders here feel like real eighth graders (and the high school students like high school students). The film gets a bit diluted in its latter third, as the Dad is suddenly given a lengthy speech about how he feels, and the film grapples a bit on where it wants to go and end.
Films like this – which focus primarily on character and relationships, are far more satisfying to me than those driven by a plot. Its a relief that Kayla just struggles with the challenges of everyday growing up, and the plot doesn’t result in a suicide attempt, or a massive confrontation related to her being raised without a Mom. The impact of accidentally breaking the screen on her cell phone, and having to view her world’s lifeline through a cracked screen is vividly on-point. The film beautifully captures the pressures of a 13-year old trying to find a place to fit in, with as little Hollywood excess as possible.
5. **** Roma – Given the critical hype surrounding this film, some calling it the best movie they’d ever seen – I was already at a disadvantage of overinflated expectations when I saw this art-house-film-not-seen-in-an-art-house-but-on-Netflix. The movie is so confident in its design and style, written and directed and with astonishing black and white cinematography by Alfonso Cuaron, that is proceeds with an unhurried pace we’re not used to in films. The opening shot, nearly devoid of sound, is a tiled floor, that slowly is washed over with soapy water that goes in and out like the tide (just as the tide figures prominently in the gripping climactic scene of the film).
The film is very sparse plot-wise, and yet so many things happen around the life of housekeeper and family child-care domestic Cleo, played by first time performer Yalitza Aparicio who delivers a performance so subdued, that one feels like you’re watching a documentary rather than a performance. Unlike so many movies about the gap between upper middle class families, and the servants they employ — there is no spite or cruel behavior here, no lessons doled out to the audience about class injustice. Instead, we are witness to the day to day life of Cleo, who remains quietly unruffled by the chaos that surrounds her which include a number of startling events including an earthquake, fires, a student uprising, and startling emotional developments in the home she lives in and cares for.
The film exudes love and tolerance, and is almost startling in its refusal to deliver a Hollywood-like message. I was gripped by the beauty and detail of many of its scenes, yet kept trying to figure out what the film was ‘about’. And while I was at first startled by its lack of messaging — as I slowly marinated on the film and its many images and metaphors (like the jets that fly overhead or are reflected from the ground), it feels more indelible. I don’t know that there are any universal messages to be found here – but Cuaron has lovingly compiled images and reflections of his own childhood, given us a character of strength, dignity and compassion, and found great beauty via his unhurried camerawork and lightning showing us the past in a vivid way.
6. *** 1/2 Isle of Dogs – Wes Anderson is an original, and his persnickety attention to detail and style make his movies featuring live actors seem distant and fable-like. But like his earlier stop- motion film “The Fantastic Mr. Fox” – Anderson’s quirkiness works wonderfully when he has complete control over the ‘performers’ as he does here since, as stop-motion animated figures, he can get the exact timing and expressions to fit his sensibility. The all-star voice cast perfectly creates the low-key humor necessary to bring this sad but uplifting story of man’s best friend in exile to life. Its political overtones of a corrupt government, and young people heroically challenging the status quo makes this an apt fable for our times. But what really works is the tiny detail of dog life and inner thoughts. Any dog lover will immediately recognize the behavior and attitudes of this pack of dogs. The design and stop-motion animation are outstanding, and the film’s droll humor ultimately becomes very winning in avoiding the broad comedy and action that are often part of animated films. Bryan Cranston is the voice standout as Chief, the stray dog who admits he has no idea why he bites the hands that feed him. In a year of endless sequels and genre look-alike – Anderson remains a breath of fresh air.
7. *** ½ Leave No Trace — Debra Granik, who wrote 2010’s excellent “Winter’s Bone” which brought a young Jennifer Lawrence to the screen, directs and co-authors this interesting, subtle take on the effects of Post Traumatic Stress Disorder and homelessness, which features very strong performances from young Thomasin McKenzie (another real discovery) and a particularly haunting Ben Foster. It explores the complexities of the bond between father and daughter, the challenges of social workers trying to break the cycle of homelessness, and pulls the veil back on why some people choose to remain homeless, because they don’t feel traditional society has a place for them anymore.
Its reminiscent of past ‘counter-culture-family” films like “Captain Fantastic” which explore family dynamics when a parent chooses to live outside a traditional life style – but is far subtler and nuanced. The exact circumstances of what is going on and why are slowly peeled back bit by bit, and never fully articulated, leaving the viewer to do much of the work of determining what is going on, instead of spoon-feeding the story. Its a deeply felt portrait of the bond that exists between parent and child, and how circumstances can push that bond to its limits. It’s touching, heartfelt, and unpredictable as to where the story will take us. 8.
*** ½ The Incredibles 2 – It’s reassuring to see a sequel that isn’t rushed into production just to capitalize on its predecessor’s success. The talented Brad Bird, writer and director of the original “The Incredibles” movie bided his time in revisiting these characters. (Has it really been 14 years since we first met this family of Supers?) In that time, Incredibles has gone from being one of the first films to tell us about the personal lives of superheroes – to the latest in a long, long line of super-hero movies which now comprise the lion’s share of all Hollywood produced films. The good news here is that Bird has a fresh chapter to tell in the story of these now-illegal heroes – one that maintains both the fun, humanity, and technical prowess of the original. By now, the Pixar animation is so good that it makes you forget you’re watching a ‘cartoon’ and the backgrounds and effects are first-rate. The story is considerably more engaging than 90% of current super hero movies, and has a great sense of fun, propelled by a great score and top notch voices. All in all, this stands among the best Pixar movies, entertaining and touching the heart at the same time. Good rollicking fun and action!
9. *** 1/2 Tully- Arriving early in the year, this was a welcome change to the many sequels, pre- marketed properties, and adaptations that dominate the cinema. A genuine, original screenplay, an increasing rarity, to see an ‘adult’ movie with an original story and a thematic point of view.
This re-teaming of director Jason Reitman (who has made a number of interesting films about ‘adult’ topics), and screenwriter Diablo Cody, brings aboard the talented and uncompromising Charlize Theron in a hard to predict journey into the dark realities of motherhood. What’s engaging about the film is one can’t tell where the story is going to go – as its about as genre free as movies get these days. While billed as a comedy, it unfolds as a bit of a nightmare on the stress and strain of raising children and infants. While I’ve personally never given birth or raised an infant, the realities shown here put me very much on edge, and the unexpected turns in the story that emerge with the arrival of a cheerful fairy of a night nurse, Tully, kept me guessing on the film’s dramatic arc. Briskly paced, and with good performances throughout, this was one of the few films I’ve seen this year where I wasn’t looking at my watch and nodding along with the by- the-book plotting.
10. *** ½ The Avengers – Infinity War — The titles of these Marvel movies are increasingly misleading – as the best of the Avengers movies so far was actually “Captain America: Civil War” – which despite its name was really an Avengers movie. This film, “The Avengers – Infinity War” has many more Marvel characters than the actual members of the Avengers…. a lot of the lead characters are actually members of Guardians of the Galaxy! OK — so let’s face it — what’s really happening is that the Marvel Cinematic Universe is really just one long epic, in which the characters in different films appear in a variety of films and continue to advance chronologically the saga of the Marvel Universe. Infinity War is the largest scale Marvel movie to date – and includes not just most of the so-called Avengers, but newly introduced Marvel characters Black Panther and Dr. Strange, and all the Guardians of the Galaxy. (Oddly, one Avenger, “Hawkeye” doesn’t appear in the film, and Ant Man — well I don’t recall if he is or isn’t an Avenger technically, but does any of that really matter?
So what have we got here – besides the biggest box-office opening ever? A very successful blending of many, many characters, and a deep, deep roster of talent. The screenwriters and directors did a great job at juggling multiple story lines and groupings of characters — and while one can’t get very deep into the character-driven stuff — they do manage to juggle a lot of sub- plots. All of it is centered around a major threat to the Universe – Thanos. What makes this perhaps the most successful of the Marvel Universe movies so far is the fact that Thanos turns out to be an interesting character — particularly for a villain. Josh Brolin does a great job under all that makeup and CGI and presents a villain with deep philosophical underpinnings — he really believes that destroying half of the universe’s population is crucial to its salvation.
The most interesting moment in the film occurred at its ending (spoiler alert). When the movie reached its unexpected and grim conclusion – not a single person in the showing I attended stood up and left during the credits. Everyone now was aware that there would be at least ‘one more scene’ coming after the credits — and people were so stunned by the events in the film’s last 15 minutes, that they felt further explanation was needed. It showed the high degree of investment people had in knowing what was going to happen next… and more or less ensures that the 2nd half of Infinity War is a must see for 2019. A year-long wait to understand what the consequences of all this will be? Unprecedented? Its not even clear which characters are truly dead, or maybe temporarily dead. It sure provides a good way for actors who have been in these films for longer than they want to be – have a way to get retired. Meanwhile, the Marvel Universe continues to expand, dominate the box office, and expand the dramatic possibilities of the comic- book genre.
Overall, I prefer my Super Hero movies to be more playful and fun, and to be less cosmic and more down to earth — but as this sort of thing goes, this is done as well as it can be done. Its like a great buffet of super-stuff. Plenty to chew on. Not enough room to focus on your favorites. But an embarrassment of riches. You’ve really got to hand it to Marvel’s team — they’ve created ‘must-see’ movies with more consequence and continuity than any other film series out there. Much more depth than in the Star Wars saga – the only thing even remotely close. And top notch production values, effects, and talent. (something that Star Wars movies have never had — talent). This movie is worth seeing if only for the banter between Robert Downey Jr’s Tony Stark, and Benedict Cumberbatch’s Dr. Strange. 11.
*** ½ BlacKkKlansman – Spike Lee’s latest “joint” is one of his best in recent years. He eschews most of the satire and excess he sometimes relies on, and establishers the more traditional tone of a police procedural. Perhaps he feels he can do this because the ‘true’ story being told here has a rather crazy premise — a black undercover policeman in Colorado successfully infiltrates and becomes a member of the ku klux klan.
John David Washington gives a grounded, solid performance as an African American who aspires to become a policeman and has the initiative and drive to quickly rise up the ranks. He takes it upon himself to investigate an ad in the local paper for the kkk — by phoning in, adopting a white voice (much more effectively than in another film this year ‘Sorry to Bother You”, and convinces the kkk that he wants to become a member. Of course, he can’t show up in person, so he enlists another officer, a non-practicing jew played by the ever-present Adam Driver, to be him in face to face meetings.
From these unlikely (but ostensibly true) events, Lee creates a sense of danger and risk, while portraying the kkk as a collection of bigots, drunken fools, and dangerous terrorists. In parallel to the storyline of the kkk, Lee shows us the rise of the black power movement. The institutionalized racism, intolerance and empowerment of both the white power and the black power movements is sharply paralleled. Washington, as officer Stallworth struggles to fulfill his identity as both an enforcer of law and order, and his identity as a black man. And the tone of the movie, comic as it sometimes is, forces us to take ignorant bigots seriously. It also shines a light on the prejudices which find a home in law enforcement.
What makes this story compelling is the way Lee subtly at first, and explicitly in the final scenes, shows that the fears that drove both sides in the 70s were not resolved by the civil rights movement, but are still with us, perhaps more prevalent than ever. The fear that ‘someone like David Duke” may someday rise to a position of power, seems all too plausible as presented here.
12 *** ½ Upgrade – A clever sci-fi action film in the B+movie tradition of RoboCop, Total Recall and others sci-fi grindhouse. Directed and written by Leigh Wannell, who generally traffics in torturous horror films, the script is set in a not too future world of self-driving cars and computer implants in human bodies. Grey Trace is witness to a brutal mugging in which his wife is killed and he is left paralyzed. He is given the opportunity to have an artificial intelligence implanted in his spine that allows him to walk again – and so much more. The A/I talks to him in his head, and when given permission, takes over his body completely, given him ninja like fighting skills and speed. There’s an interesting dichotomy between the human he is, and the body and second intelligence which has no compunction about killing. What results is a great revenge fantasy scenario – and unexpected consequences. The no-star cast does a great job and the effects are quite good for a lower budget movie. It’s good, ingenious and brutal action – with some of the kind of drama that great computer-driven sci-fi pictures of the past used to provide. It’s nice to see an original story, that extends the genre of thoughtful, fun and action driven speculative sci-fi. A drive-in movie delight of a film.
13 *** ½ The Ballad of Buster Scruggs – The Cohen Brothers turn to an anthology format here, combining six short films demythologizing the American West, using the device of an old- fashioned storybook complete with old color plates. The unifying theme of the six stories is death, as there are a number of deaths in each story — sometimes the hero and main character, sometimes death dealt out to others. The opener, the eponymous “Ballad of Buster Scruggs” is the most fun … with Tim Blake Nelson as a folksy singing cowboy who is a wonder with a pistol. He is in great spirits as he decimates his challengers, sings songs, and confidently executes trick shots. Even after he meets his match and goes to heaven – his attitude is upbeat. It’s a fast, fun, and funny piece. The third story, “Meal Ticket” is the darkest. With a message about the realities of show biz. The most touching is the fifth, “The Gal who Got Rattled”, with a sad romance set on the Oregon Trail. Its the only one that touches you emotionally, and has the loveliest performances. The weakest is the second – about a bank robber who runs into rotten luck and faces death several times. Its too disjointed and doesn’t add up too much. Spread throughout is some gorgeous cinematography (the West has never looked more beautiful than in “All Gold Canyon”, and the sixth story “The Mortal Remains” has a twist that metaphorically ties the film together.
This is certainly not the Cohen’s strongest film – but even lesser Cohen Bros. is more than most. Clever dialog, great editing and cinematography, and their usual impeccable control of style (with each story having its own tone). They tell stories that gnaw and entertain.
14 *** Three Identical Strangers – A fascinating documentary about how three twins, separated at birth, found one another, and become media sensations. The film follows the public story of how they found one another and were reunited, and then becomes a dark mystery as the circumstances under which they became separated are slowly revealed. What was found out (and what yet remains to be revealed), raises a lot of food of thought — though the latter third of the film starts to bog down a bit. Still, an incredible story, and far stranger than fiction.
15. *** Won’t You Be My Neighbor – I did not grow up watching Mr. Roger’s Neighborhood and so knew little about the man or his show before seeing this revealing and interesting documentary. I was more familiar with the parodies and ridicule sometimes placed on his low-key attitude, slow paced style, and low-budget production. So, I was greatly surprised to find out more about this man who was far more than a TV children’s show host – but a man with a very specific mission and attitude about child development. The documentary doesn’t have a strong narrative arc to justify its length – but like Mr. R’s neighborhood itself – it takes its time to make a case for the importance and goodness of this man – and raises very good points about the way we choose to raise children. A far more worthy subject for a documentary than I would have guessed.
16. *** Black Panther – The super hero movie that became a cultural phenomena in 2018. Why? It struck a chord with its thoughtful and positive depiction of Africans. It combines the action of the super hero genre, with some thoughtful reflections on social responsibility. It also blended high-tech with traditional African tribal culture. Personally, I found it a bit over-serious and dignified at the expense of providing the ‘fun’ I like to see in action / super-hero movies. It takes itself very seriously (which of course is why it has impressed so many people – as it’s a topic and a culture that hasn’t been taken seriously enough. Its the polar opposite of the blaxploitation movie with its drug dealers, pimps and low-life. Here we see kings, queens, warrior women, and issues of honor and responsibility.
Still, I was disappointed in the action sequences (which were very frantic, hand held camera mixed with CGI, so that you weren’t always sure exactly what was going on.). I much prefer a static, mano-on-mano brawl than rapid-fire editing that blurs the action and would have preferred a bit more fun overall. On the other hand, I thought the design and costumes were terrific.
17. *** Crazy Rich Asians – a perfectly acceptable romantic comedy – with an all-Asian take on the Cinderella story. Freshly, the heroine is likable but not naive, and has sufficient contemporary spunk. The fun of the movie is in its sheer excess of what the super-rich life in Singapore is like. Great costumes, great settings, and a good glossy veneer and sense of humor about it all. That said, the story feels like pure fantasy, and despite some darker moments of conflict brought on by Michele Yeoh as the imperious mother, the story takes a fast u-turn at the end to happily ever after. The reversal seemingly came out of nowhere, and now everyone who was jealous of Nick’s American girlfriend suddenly embrace her. All ends in happiness and applause. Well – what else might one suspect from a feel-good rom-com? The all-star, all-Asian cast is a welcome change, even if it seems like every Asian actor on television was given a role in the movie. I kept looking for Lucy Liu however, and she was nowhere to be seen That said – its great to see former Bond girl Michelle Yeoh continue to appear on the screen in better and better roles. And Singapore is a great location and used to great advantage in the film. If you succumb to the fantasy of it all – the movie ultimately is easy-going fun.
18. *** First Man – It can’t be easy to be director Damien Chazelle, whose first two features “Whiplash” and “La La Land” both were critical and awards-season successes. How do you follow up? Well, his latest film First Man is quite different than either — and falls more in the traditional ‘bio-picture’ mode — showing the events that lead up to the moon landing through the singular prism of Neil Armstrong’s life and family. Its the antithesis of the ‘astronaut as daring hero’ point of view of previous space movies “The Right Stuff” and “Apollo 13” because Armstrong is depicted as a silent, even sullen, withdrawn man haunted by the death of his daughter. The family scenes take up a lot of the movie, and they are the less interesting ones. But the details of the dangers and risks and ‘realities’ of early NASA missions are quite compelling. The sound design here is particularly interesting – as these rockets and capsules rattle and shake and seem amazingly fragile.
The film succeeds in giving you an intimate look at how difficult and unlikely getting a man on the moon actually was. And the capsule point of view, and the intimacy of those first steps on the lunar service are quite stunning. On the other hand, great portions of the movie are shot in extreme closeup with hand-held camera which eventually really wears you down as a viewer. Perhaps it energizes the family scenes, or makes them feel more intimate – but I was too overly aware of the shaky style. A solid film though – even if it doesn’t pack the wallop of Chazelle’s last two films. Ryan Gosling turns off his charm completely to try to capture this non-charismatic portrait of Armstrong.
19. *** Solo, A Star Wars Story – I wasn’t particularly eager to see yet another Star Wars spinoff movie and went in with low expectations, having not much enjoyed the recent films being mass produced for the sake of the franchise. But this turned out to be more agreeable than expected in that it actually has a number of spiffy action sequences and moves along at a good clip. Yes, its filled with moments to fill the gaps and expectations of those invested in the mythology (How Han met Chewbacca, how they acquired the Millennium Falcon, etc..) but it happily skips the over-earnest tone of cosmic importance a lot of the films have had. It just wants to have fun. The original directors (who did the Lego Movie) are probably responsible for this – but they were removed from the film (probably because they were making it too much fun), so Ron Howard was called in to complete directing the movie and smoothed things out enough to keep it from deviating too much stylistically from the rest of the franchise. One misses the wry charm of Harrison Ford, but Alden Ehrenreich grows on you as the film goes on. Woody Harrelson was an odd choice to play his not-so-trustworthy-or-is-he mentor in the ways of robbery – and he doesn’t quite pull it off. But Donald Glover as a young Lando Calrissian nails the tone and comes off very nicely. All in all, this held together and was more entertaining than any of the recent franchise spinoffs.
20 ***Ant Man and the Wasp – in a welcome respite from the dire seriousness of the Avengers Infinity War movie, the Marvel Universe returns to the goofy charm of the previous Ant Man movie and doubles the silliness, in a good way. While this is a lightweight super hero movie, it has lots of good visual jokes, and the charming Paul Rudd keeps the more frenetic action of the movie from overpowering the tone. (Michael Douglas for some reason still seems to be in another movie, with a dour seriousness… but I guess that just provides the appropriate foil for the goofy, size changing Ant Man.). While adding the Wonderful Wasp to the mix doubles the action opportunities, what makes the film really work is the size-changing fun — especially the introduction of (though no mention of by name) Ant Man’s alter-ego Giant Man. When things get super large the visual fun is really ramped up. The second half of the film has a fast, breathless pace, and the intercutting between story lines works well without exhausting or confusing the audience. Most of the corny silly jokes land well, and it was a good summer beach movie Forgettable once you left the theatre, but fun in the air-conditioned experience!
21 *** Vice – Adam McKay’s follow-up to his wonderful film “The Big Short” uses many of the same techniques (breaking the fourth wall, Ironic intrusions on traditional story-telling, social satire), as that earlier film. But unlike The Big Short, which told the story of the economic collapse as a kind of comic jaw-dropping absurdity that nonetheless was true, Vice, a sort of biopic of Dick Cheney is a much grimmer story with a different agenda — it wants to lay the blame for much of America’s problems, war in the Middle East, the formation of Isis, the loss of thousands of American lives, at the hands of this virtually anonymous man pulling the strings of American government bureaucracy.
The problem with the film though is that Cheney himself is a rather uninteresting character. He is a man of few words, who keeps himself out of the limelight, and simply seizes the vacuum of power in the churning Washington political scene. While he is shown to be a loving and dutiful husband to his outspoken and smart wife, Lynn (Amy Adams once again switch-hitting from sweet to ruthless as she was in “the Master”), and protective of his family, he doesn’t seem to care about anyone else.
Christian Bale inhabits the prosthetics to accurately portray Cheney — but Cheney is simply too much a cypher for the performance to have any weight (despite the many pounds Bale put on to look more like the rotund Cheney). The always reliable Sam Rockwell appears as amiable dolt George W. Bush, more than happy to have Cheney run the government for him. But the film is hardly about Bush and the representation here is pretty one-dimensional.
The film does it best to show the level of conspiracy and legal tomfoolery that established Executive Priveledge as the override to governmental checks and balances — but it basically just wants to stir the animosity of a liberal audience and introduce them to a conservative villain. Granted – the film self-referentially calls itself on this in an amusing focus-group scene, in which the film itself is reviewed and criticized for its political bias, but ultimately the film just isn’t as entertaining and eye-opening as The Big Short was. Clearly McKay had a soft spot for the audacity of economic swindlers, but no patience with ruthless politicians.
The film is smart and informative, but too pat in condemning Cheney and his cohorts. There’s no character growth or arc to make the film more interesting. Its best device is the ironic use of visual metaphors (fishing and fish lures), and the narrative device that provides the film’s one true surprise.
22 *** A Star is Born — its not clear exactly why another remake of Star is Born was needed, but its clearly a project close to the heart of star and first-time director Bradley Cooper. He and co-star Lady Gaga wrote many of the songs here, and both give strong musical performances. Their performances, both musical and as their characters, are very strong and compelling, and the secondary cast is also top-notch, particularly Sam Elliot as Cooper’s father. Cooper really transforms himself as an actor, adopting a much deeper voice, and playing a hugely popular country-rock singer not too different from Kris Kristofferson in the Streisand version. It works as believable melodrama – though the storyline of the star going down the drain due to drinking and pills, is as predictable and old as the hills. We’ve seen every bit of this before – but I guess its nice to see it again with solid performances, contemporary music that works well, and a fresh coat of paint. I expect that at least one of its songs will get nominated for (and even win) the Best Song category at the Oscar’s this year (because let’s face it, the competition in this category is usually very thin). At least here the songs are part of the fabric of the movie (and not just something played over the end-credits).
23 *** Ocean’s Eight – I’ve lost count on how many Ocean’s movies there have been (is it eight? Or is that just the number of people involved in the gang? There was the original rat pack version(s), and the Soderbergh/Clooney remakes, and now this, the inevitable “let’s do it with all women this time” version. Still, a complicated, twisty heist film is always fun, even though the ‘plan’ here is more than a bit of a stretch. Sandra Bullock is fun however as a refreshingly amoral scam artist and master planner and the rag-tag crew of femme larsonists are enjoyable enough. Mindy Kaling seems wasted and inconsequential here however, but Helena Bonham Carter and Awkwafina shine. The high fashion stuff gives the movie a fresh visual zing as opposed to the usual casino robbery, and though the contrivances eventually don’t add up – it’s still a fun romp. Hardly a classic, but it doesn’t disgrace the franchise.
24 *** RBG – This documentary about the achievements and inspiring persona of Ruth Bader Ginsberg seems to have struck a note among liberals looking for inspiration in the wake of the current Presidency. It’s hard though to not feel inspired by the spirit of this 84-year old Supreme Court Justice – who has become an outspoken dissenting judge on many recent decisions. It’s unquestionably a puff piece as it fawns over all the positive aspects of her impressive career. I was unaware of how many important cases related to women’s rights that Ms. Ginsberg played a critical part of. And viewed from our current point of view, it is interesting to see how many legal decisions have been involved to address gender equality. The high points of this warm documentary include a look at her remarkable marriage (her husband has a delightful sense of humor), her enjoyment of Kate McKinnon’s Saturday Night Live parody of her, her ease and friendship with conservative judges on the court, and her exercise regimen —most impressive for an 84 year old. My only gripe with this documentary is that it doesn’t present any negatives or interview anyone who questions her decisions and point of view. It’s pro-Ginsberg 100% – presenting her as a rock star and savior. A little balance might have made a more probing documentary than this fan club presentation. Still – she’s a remarkable woman with a remarkable career.
25 *** A Quiet Place – As a high concept piece of sci-fi / horror, A Quiet Place sets a difficult task for itself. As you must know by now, the only way to survive this alien attack is to be dead quiet – otherwise, you’re just dead. Director and Star John Krasinski, does a great job delivering the story through its mostly wordless script, and keeps the suspense ratcheted up throughout. That said, I did find it a bit slow-moving, despite its 90 minute running time, and found the plotting got a bit convuluted before it was over. Any number of unanswered questions remained. But grafting a story of family love and survival, onto the alien attack genre felt original and more deeply realized that most films of this sort. The impending threat and promise of childbirth adds an urgency to the film that created real drama and suspense. Emily Blunt is very good here, and that one scene on the stairway about sent me through the roof!
26 *** Mama Mia – Here We Go Again – It’s hard to understand the overall success of Mama Mia the stage musical and the first movie version, so its difficult to say why a second Mama Mia was needed. And yet! Given that this is silly, goofy, and written like a bad soap opera – Mama Mia 2 (Here we Go Again) greatly improves on the first film. There is a better plot (told primarily in Flashbacks showing us how it happened that this girl wound up on a Greek Island and three possible fathers), and considerably more heartfelt than the earlier film. While a little confusing at first with its present / past structure – once you figure out we’re seeing the story of two different generations of this family, and that we’re seeing characters both in their present age (as reflected in the first film and here with most of the same actors), as well as back in the 70s (with actors assuming the ‘younger’ versions of all the characters), it zips right along while finding excuses to add those earworm, irresistibly catchy candy-sweet Abba tunes throughout. Bringing in yet another generation at the end of the film, by way of Cher, who can actually sing (unlike many of the fine actors who do their best), the thing does become somewhat irresistible. I found myself enjoying this far more than I should have – but also realize that in a different mood on a different day I might have been appalled by this. At its best, a guilty pleasure, and I found myself tickled in the way a good silly musical ought to be tickling me. Two days later – those darn tunes were still rolling around in my head.
27 ** 1/2 Ready Player One – This hyper-busy video game of a movie seems like something Steven Spielberg might choose to produce, but not like something he’d choose to direct. It’s no wonder he moved on to an old-fashioned film like “The Post” while this film was still in a lengthy post-production. It’s visually almost overwhelming – and the first movie I’ve seen in recent years where I regret not seeing it in 3-D. While 3-D in movies always tends to make things look artificial to some extent — most of this film is set in a visually dense cgi-created world — so why not enhance that effect? The film is overstuffed with fun, nostalgic references both visually and musically to 80s pop culture. Throughout the time I was watching this (and its quite long, too long, but perhaps that’s partially due to the endless credits, with the longest assemblage of digital artists ever seen on one film)…. but as I was watching, I was almost distracted at how much time each frame must have taken to compose. So many figures, so many fleeting visual jokes, a veritable ‘Where’s Waldo’ of can you spot them references to popular films, characters, comics, cartoons, advertising, and who knows what else. Surely someone will produce a book of stills and label all the visual touchstones.
Despite its visual excitement, the film itself suffers from a dose of generic ho-hum. The plotting is basic fairy tale, video game quest — solve the puzzles, get the rings, get the prize. But the puzzles are not satisfying to solve. There is no ‘aha’ moment for the audience when they are solved. Similarly, the characters themselves are thinly drawn. We aren’t invested in them in any deep way. The blossoming young love between the protagonist and his “you wouldn’t be attracted to me in real life” virtual obsession contains none of the awkwardness one would expect to see from someone who has had little real-world social contact. I was expecting that when we met the girl she’d be incredibly plain, or overweight… but no, she’s a rather ‘hot’ girl who simply has a birthmark that she isn’t comfortable with. And when people actually die in the real world, as does Wade’s aunt, we (and he) barely feel a moment of grief. The real world stakes seem to matter no more than those in the virtual world.
I was expecting something cleverer, or with more emotional or intellectual heft from Spielberg — but instead it’s exactly as advertised — a rompin’ video game of a movie with great visual pizazz. But a week later I found little from the film stuck in my imagination or interest.
28 ** ½ Bohemian Rhapsody – Unfortunately, this was a run-of-the-mill biopic – focused on the personal rise and fall of Freddie Mercury of the rock band Queen. I was eager to see the film, as I’ve always loved Queen’s music and wondered a lot about what went into creating it — but this was not the film’s agenda. Instead, it focused primarily on Mercury’s relationships with his family, the ‘love of his life’, Mary Austin – and of the awakening of his ‘bi-sexuality’ which led to his many relationships with men which ultimately and sadly led him to an early death by AIDs related pneumonia.
On the positive side, the music in the film is terrific. And Rami Malek does a great job of lip- synching and capturing the extraordinary stage presence of Mercury the performer. So one does get to see a number of great Queen tunes – including a climax of their final performance at Live Aid. What’s disappointing though, is how little the film cares about the other members of Queen. Yes, Mercury the front man is part of what made the band so successful – but Brian May’s contribution as guitarist is quite unique and extraordinary – and we never find out anything at all about why and how he developed his unique guitar sound and style. We learn little of their personal lives, and not a lot about their collaborative process. We really don’t learn much about the band – other than the hurdles they overcome to defy record label expectations and develop their unique sound and risk-taking combination of metal and operatic style.
As much as I enjoyed the music – I found trudging through the story of Mercury’s personal life very superficial and not terribly well-written. There’s a lot of complex stuff here that would have been worth exploring – but instead we’re just given a general story arc that ends tragically like so many other rock star stories we’ve seen. I was certainly hoping for something deeper and more interesting — but it came closer to a “Behind the Music” special on MTV (if they still have those) – then a movie with a fresh thing to say. On the other hand – those great songs are still ringing in my head.
29 ** 1/2 Annihilation – I’m usually always excited by intelligent Science Fiction, and Writer/director Alex Garland did a great job with Ex Machina. But this one, an adaption of a difficult novel I’m told, left me scratching my head. Its structure is a bit confusing, with flash- backs, forwards, etc, and the mystery of exactly what is going on in the area known as ‘the shimmer” never completely made sense. There are some very interesting visual effects — and also some rather strangely CGI like ones for the giant beasts they encounter. It’s refreshing to see the ‘adventure’ being tackled by a team of women instead of men, and there is a strong and interesting cast including Natalie Portman, Jennifer Jason Leigh, and Gina Rodriguez. The always strong Oscar Isaac has a lesser role here, but he’s always a welcome presence. There’s a lot to engage you in this film, and it has its share of creepy suspense — but ultimately, thought provoking works best when you know what you should be thinking about when its over. I can’t fault the film’s desire though to return sci-fi to mentally challenging ideas, and I’d rather see this than another pile of Star War adventure rip-offs which has no science or psychology at all :-). Critics were very bullish on this film, but it didn’t grab me at all.
30 ** 1/2 Sorry to Bother You – this first film by director / writer Boots Riley got great reviews, but left me feeling it was a bit slapdash. It starts out as a social satire, in which a black telemarketer becomes successful by employing his ‘white voice’, but becomes broader and broader as it goes, moving into a surreal plot line having to do with corporate oppression, a plot to turn minimum wage workers into slaves, and yes, converting people into half horses.
At its heart is the compromise that a man might make to rise in rank, social status, and salary — but it all feels like a Saturday Night Live sketch gone off the track. Often vulgar and ugly – it’s just one too many motherfuckers for me. While I appreciated the sheer originality of the script and its raucous visual style — I just didn’t find it funny. This may be one of the cases where guerilla style african-american filmmaking isn’t something that appeals to me. I imagine for the right audience, there might be sufficient empowerment and entertainment — but I felt entirely disconnected from the broad style. Even the ‘white voice’ used felt dubbed rather than something coming from the actor. It reminded me of some of the less successful satires like Bubba Ho-Tep and Spike Lee’s “School Daze”. It lacked the sheen and focus of last year’s “Get Out”, which neatly found a parallel to a traditional horror film as a way to make its social statement.
31 ** ½ Skyscraper – Duane “The Rock” Johnson is one of the last men standing trying to keep the ‘action hero’ model alive in movies. If only this charismatic and buff wrestler turned actor could find better material. Skyscraper is a B movie masquerading as a summer blockbuster, and while I give it credit for being the only major non-sequel of the summer, it is actually a hybrid of a number of previous action movies, most notably “Diehard” and “The Towering Inferno”. The movie’s plot is beyond implausible and even the physical layout of its fictional ‘tallest building in the world’ seems to defy physics and common sense. But the movie does pile on the thrills, implausible as they are. Scenes of Johnson smashing through windows, and jumping and climbing 100 stories up clinging only with duct tape are appropriately tense and vertigo-inducing, if nowhere near the convincing effects seen when Tom Cruise did much the same thing in one of the Mission Impossible movies. And its only marginally less believable than the Fast and Furious building-jumping by car. Most unfortunate is the less than stellar European styled villain – he’s most generic and doesn’t provide a suitably formidable foe like Alan Rickman provided for Bruce Willis. But as popcorn summer entertainment goes – its not bad. Johnson is a welcome presence in an action film, and in a nod to the times (though pretty much unlikely given her backstory), Neve Campbell as Johnson’s wife kicks ass as well.
32 ** ½ Early Man – Nick Parks and the folks at Aardman never fail to be entertaining – and one is always impressed by the amazing clay animation. Like the Wallace and Gromit films and shorts, there is plenty of cleverness here — but this one is a trifle too British to touch the right chords here in America. It essentially uses Stone Age men to give us the story of the origins of Soccer – and to touch upon the British obsession with Soccer Clubs. Not in the same class as a Pixar animated film – but for those who like clay animation – its clever and charming enough to be worth a watch.
33 ** 1/2 Rampage – while I’d like to say some harsh things about this video-game pushed into a movie, I have to admit it is good cheesy fun. The effects are rudimentary, the acting pushes well beyond hammy (especially Jake Lacy who literally mugs at every moment, even when he’s in the background), and the dialog is so corny its groan-worthy. But how can you not like a film at some level that has a giant gorilla, a giant flying wolf, and a massive mutant alligator destroying Chicago and each other? Its certainly more fun than any of the over-serious Transformer films. Reminds me of childhood pleasures like Godzilla vs Mother vs the Smog Monster. On that level – (and if you’re in that type of mood), this may fill the bill. But if you’re looking for real action- adventure or sci-fi, you’ll be greatly disappointed. This is a slightly upscale B minus movie closer in tone to the Sharknado series.
34 ** 1/2 Deadpool 2 – While the original Deadpool was a fresh reinvention of the superhero genre, episode 2 suffers from the same problem that plagued Guardians of the Galaxy 2. Originality and surprises are just not on the agenda in a sequel made for commercial franchise. The reason for making the sequel is to try to cash in on the elements that made the first film such a success. But you can’t recreate fresh and original, you can only clone it and it’s no longer fresh nor original.
That said, Deadpool 2 doubles down on the cheeky irreverent self-referential snarkiness established by the character and Ryan Reynold’s winning performance as the character. How much you’ll enjoy it depends on how much satisfaction you get with an amped up dose of CGI mayhem, and how many of the X-men and Marvel in-jokes tickle your funny bone. I got the majority of the jokes, but they felt too labored to bring a smile to my face. And at some point, the sheer vulgarity of the movie, reveling in its R-rated freedom, made me a bit uncomfortable. The vulgar lyrics of the films final song in the end-credits, wrapped in an angelic choir arrangement was the final blow in souring me to the film a bit. That said – before my patience wore out, there was much CGI action and the most car-crashes, explosions and gratuitous violence I’ve seen in a film in a long time. Thrilling at times, but eventually too much. Sometimes enough is enough. Josh Brolin, in his second super villain turn this summer, takes a major step down from the complex, interesting performance in the Avengers movie – and seems wasted here. And the attempt to set up yet another super-hero group, X-Force, from the sorry remnants of the X-Men franchise that 20th century fox controls the rights to, feels a bit desperate. Only Reynolds brings enough charisma to this motley crew of 2nd-class heroes.
35 ** ½ Book Club – the premise here seems downright silly, centered around the effects the reading of ’50 shades of grey’ has on four older women friends. I was hoping for a bit more from the talents of Jane Fonda, Candice Bergman, Diane Keaton and Mary Steenburgen – but the script and direction reduces them to stereotypes and you can almost sense these talented actors straining to try to dodge the stereotypes they’ve been cast into. Still, its light romantic fun and its refreshing to see a movie even address sex amongst the 50+ set. A beach read of a movie, inconsequential and unmemorable, if not unpleasant during the viewing.
36 ** Jurassic Park: Fallen Kingdom — I doubt anyone remembers the title (or subtitle) of this film – but I guess they wanted to avoid calling it Jurrasic Park 5, because it might hint that we’ve seen all this before. A sequel of a relaunch it has little reason to exist other than people will go to see more Dinosaurs and bloodless terror. Its sad to see this concept so strung out, and the minimal plot of this movie (“immoral people wanting to make millions of dollars exploiting dinosaurs by weaponizing them and selling them to the highest evil foreign power” is such a stretch that it strains credibility beyond the breaking point. Other than Chris Pratt, who remains charming as always, there is little talent on display here (other than the Visual Effects folks who give us an exploding volcano, and the usual array of giant reptiles), and its hard to muster up much enthusiasm beyond a ‘been here, seen that” yawn.
*** 1/2 Okja – This clever, subversive satire is a hybrid of a ‘beloved pet’ film (think ‘My Friend Flicka’ or ‘Black Beauty’) and a dark expose of evil corporations and in particular, the food production industry. The increasingly accomplished director Bong Joon Ho, has created a clever entertainment full of spoonfulls of sugar to leaven out the dark medicine message it eventually leaves viewers with. It deals with the relationship between a Korean teen Mija, and her 10-year friendship with a “Super Pig” she has successfully raised. Okja, the pig, is her best friend and an adorable, giant CGI creation that is fun to watch throughout. Their idyllic relationship is interrupted when the corporate interests that created Okja (with an eye to producing the ultimate food product) reclaims the pig to use in a marketing campaign. The corporation is presented in wonderful satiric form, headed by a hilarious Tilda Swinson, who wants to lull the public with their ‘humane’ practices while mass producing tons of genetically mutated food.
Complications are piled on as Mija, in a great young performance by Seo-hyeon Ahn, pushes past all obstacles in her quest to get Okja back. Along the way, she intersects the rival agenda of a gang of animal activists, the Animal Liberation Front, who are treated with the same satiric intensity Ho thrusts on the corporation. Its a great mix of action, humor, and fantasy – and would be a terrific family picture except both the language and the ultimate depiction of what happens to farm animals is far too disturbing for children. But as an adult picture – it touches all the right buttons. Its nicely paced, engaging, surprising, and ultimately disturbing. Its strongly voiced message about the food industry never feels self-righteous or polemic. Overall – this is a fresh, original story told with great verve. Heart-warming and Heart-rending.
*** 1/2 Roman J. Israel, Esq – a surprisingly interesting film about the legal justice system with an outstanding and unexpected performance by Denzel Washington. Washington plays a back- office attorney with a savant-like mind and deep ideals from his days as a civil rights activist back in the 70s. Despite his steel-trap legal mind, he is inexperienced in working within the actual legal system, and does not know how (or desire to) work within the legal system of plea bargains and busy courtrooms. He is unprepared when circumstances thrust him into the role of a practicing attorney and blunders in a number of ways. Washington makes some very interesting acting choices, choosing to play Israel as someone along the autism spectrum, socially ill-equipped to deal with working directly in a public setting. We are so used to seeing Washington play strong, powerful, intelligent and persuasive characters, that seeing him physically transform himself into this shuffling, stammering innocent is quite a surprise. It shows what a gifted actor he is. Though the movie didn’t find an audience or much critical success, Washington was justly given an Oscar nomination for his performance here.
The script by Dan Gilroy, who also directed, is an interesting one — and one that doesn’t tip its hand as to where the story will go. It examines the ethics of the law profession, and presents an interesting fresh character confronting an ethical crisis. Its great to see a movie that focuses on both character and ideas, rather than the typical action-driven plot so common in legal dramas. While far from perfect, I found this movie far more engaging than many things I’ve seen in the last year, and Washington’s performance will stick with me for a long time.
*** Jumanji – Welcome to the Jungle – The second, (or perhaps third film in the Jumanji series (if you count Jon Favreau’s spiritual successor to Jumanji, “Zathura” (2005)) is a sequel to 1995’s original Jumanji. The script adds a clever wrinkle to the earlier films, by broadening its “living inside a game” adventure trappings, by the clever device of having its four personality- specific teens playing game characters that couldn’t be less like their regular selves. This affords the charismatic cast the opportunity to play characters quite unlike their normal personas and roles. Duane Johnson lends his rippling physique to the nerd character – and its fun to see “the Rock” struggling with insecurity and shyness. Kevin Hart plays a jock who finds himself in Hart’s diminutive form and with unexpected smarts. And in the most clever and challenging performance, Jack Black is embodied with a vain, attractive, snobbish girl. The relatively unknown but charismatic Karen Gillan has her Lara Croft like body embodied by a shy, social misfit girl. The fun here is watching each character learn to adapt to their Avatar’s strengths, physicality and, in the case of Bethany – having the body of a middle aged man.
The performances are winning, the lush scenery is attractive, and director Jake Kasdan keeps things moving at a merry pace. The adventure’s villain, played by Bobby Canavale is strangely indistinct, but this doesn’t detract from the overall fun and adventure of this lively adventure film with a heart.
*** Saving Vincent – This animated film is a feast for the eyes. The amount of work that went into painting and then animating actual oil paintings that captured the subjects and style of Van Gogh’s paintings is staggering and shows on the screen. If you love Van Gogh’s paintings (as I do), and are familiar with many of them – you’ll be startled and delighted to see them brought to life in such vivid fashion. I could watch this endlessly (with the sound off), just to see the beautiful images dancing on the screen. On the other hand, the story being told here, unraveling the mystery behind Van Gogh’s suicide, a year after it occurred, is somewhat disappointing. Its rather stock film noir, the dialog is stiff, and the ‘mystery’ is not terribly compelling. The reason for this film to exist is its bold choice to animate these great paintings and bring them to life, and on that level it is stunning. Given the deep labor of love that went into this – its a shame they couldn’t find a better narrative structure and story to hang this artistry on. Nonetheless – if you love Van Gogh – you will be richly rewarded by this film. If you don’t know his paintings at all – you can skip this.
***The Florida Project – a depressing, yet sympathetic portrait of life as it exists below the poverty line ironically placed in a slum, welfare hotel – one of the once popular Florida tourist motels located not far from the upscale properties of Disney World. William Dafoe was nominated for an Oscar for best supporting actor for his sympathetic potrait of the hotel manager who balances his job with his protective instincts for the badly raised and neglected children living with their often irresponsible and troubled single parents. The candy colored, kitschy world of this abandoned tourist world, richly juxtaposes the desperate conditions of the people who now reside here. The situation is not over-melodramatized and paints almost a documentary like picture of American poverty.
*** American Made – This shaggy dog tale, ‘based on actual events”, is a fun ride through the alleged adventures of a TWA pilot turned CIA spy and errand boy, who also mixes himself up with the Columbian Drug cartels. In this sense it’s a bit like “Breaking Bad”, in which an unlikely person gets more deeply entangled than planned and ends up with more money than he even can figure out how to handle. Tom Cruise plays against his normal type a bit — as usual he’s cocky and charming, but here he’s also a bit naive and dim-witted instead of razor sharp smart. It succeeds in confirming your worst fears about American international interference and the CIA, but overall its an entertaining journey through an increasingly dense series of complications for its ‘what the hell’ hero.
*** Phantom Thread – I tend to be far more interested in the intellectual, iconoclastic, often puzzling filmmaking of Paul Thomas Anderson, but nonetheless I found his latest film to be lengthy and unsatisfying. Exactly what its central theme or message is remains elusive, though its reminiscent of another of his studies of complex personalities, ‘The Master”. Here, Daniel Day Lewis gives his usual densely rich performance, playing a fussy, self-centered dress designer (i.e. an ‘artist’) who cares deeply about his vision for dresses, and even goes so far as to sew secret messages and hidden meaning into the lining of the garment. He also can’t bear the thought of his clothing being worn by people not worthy of them. He creates because he must satisfy his vision, and he is not concerned about the trends towards ‘chic’ that may signal the end of his vaulted career. But ultimately the film in a perverse variation on Pygmalion, in which he discards one muse for another, and his latest muse, a vaguely European woman named Alma, somehow inspires and captivates him. He takes her into his ‘house’ of design as his model, muse and one presumes, lover… something his longtime partner, his sister (in an icy and strong performance by Leslie Manville) has seen happen before. What results is a strangely emotionally detached menage a trois – and the battle between self-identity and the possibility of a real emotional relationship. What ultimately happens as Alma exerts himself and defies his rigid lifestyle is increasingly strained and strange. Anderson’s usual final ‘twist’ in the film, is a bit hard to believe or understand, and seems drawn out to boot.
This is a slow, uneventful film, seemingly more interested in displaying the detail of the insular, elegant world its set in. The beautiful interior of the home is shot in a foggy light, making it look all the more like fabric. The process of designing, sewing and fitting the gorgeous gowns is lingered over. Its a quiet film, with a lovely score, and the antithesis of an action film or even a film with a plot. Things move slowly and in a sort of creepy atmosphere of something about to erupt — but it never quite does. Nor do the relationships at its core. Its an icy, though enticing film, that never delivers on its long build up.
*** Logan – This Marvel Comic movie actually got a nomination for its screenplay, which of course piqued my interest. It was quite interesting and unusual but in order to say why — I have to put in a ‘spoiler’ alert. Read no further if you don’t want to know important plot points. OK? Have you stopped reading? Then let’s discuss. What’s quite unusual about this rather somber, dark, and ultra-violent film is the seriousness with which it takes its subject matter. It is a disconcerting parable about experimenting on children. It takes the central X-Men metaphor, that of mutants with special powers, and shows them being bred and disposed of as ‘test subjects’. The film returns Patrick Stewart to the role of Professor X, but now he’s in his dotage, experiencing a sort of mutant Alzheimer’s and is helpless and out of control. Wolverine too, is losing some of his powers and rotting away from the inside. He is no longer healing. The extraordinary thing here is both these central, iconic characters die before the film’s end. Very unusually grim and rather unsentimental about it. Professor Xavier’s passing is handled with minimum sentiment and we don’t even really see his final death scene. Just his burial. This is dark stuff indeed, and quite unusual for the super-hero genre , and even more so for a movie franchise. I guess Hugh Jackman and Patrick Stewart have no plans to play these roles ever again (except perhaps in movies set it earlier time periods — though we know there is a younger version of each character played by different actors)
In any case, the film is unsettling and disturbing, and the violence in it is bloodier and more visceral than one normally sees. Lots of blood, beheadings, and slashing. Scary stuff indeed. And handled with a dark, confident and troubling tone by writer/director James Mangold and strong, rich performances by Jackman and Stewart. A very different type of ‘super-hero’ movie that earns its emotional impact without pandering sentimentality.
*** Wonderstruck – Todd Haynes brings his distinctive touch to adapting this novel to the screen – and its no easy feat given that a lot of it occurs in the world of the deaf. Visually, its quite striking. Two parallel stories are presented and jumped back and forth between. The first, set in 1977, tells the story of a boy who, by way of an accident, becomes deaf, and based on clues he finds among his deceased mother’s things, sets off to New York to find the father he never knew. His adventure leads him to the Museum of Natural History in NY. The second, set in 1927, tells the story of a deaf girl, who travels to New York to see an actress she is infatuated with, and eventually finds her brother who works at the museum of Natural oHistory, 50 years prior to the other story. This second story, is told entirely in black and white, and presented as a silent film. It has no dialog.
The production design is very interesting, and elements of the story-telling are presented as dioramas with cardboard figures. Very interesting, and compelling to watch to figure out how the two stories are related — but the resolution and explanation can be a bit difficult to follow. This movie requires a fair amount of attention and patience (something most movie-goers are in short supply of) – but for those looking for a unique and distinctive film, made with style and verve — this is a worthwhile watch!
*** Icarus – This netflix documentary starts out when the filmmaker decides to try, Morgon Spurlock style, to document his effort to test the effects of sports-doping on himself, so he can perform better in a tour-de-france like Bicycle event. His path towards accomplishing this inadvertently leads him in meeting, and befriending, a Russian Scientist who works in the anti- doping testing laboratories in Russia. What emerges in real-life plays out like a cold-war spy film as the filmmaker discovers evidence that Russia has been running a state-sanctioned doping program for all its athletes. This leads to the eventual banning (and then rescinding the ban) of Russian athletes for the 2016 Olympics.
While its a bit hard to follow the complex web of lies, spies and dangers at play here, one is left with imposing evidence of several things: 1) There is a significant amount of drug-enhancing at play in Sports, both in Russia and the U.S. (and seemingly everywhere!), and 2) Governments and committees like those associated with the Olympics, regularly make bold-faced lies with straight faces. They all categorically state they are not involved in ‘illegal’ activities – and yet the evidence overwhelmingly shows that they are. A depressing look at how little we can trust those in charge of our well-being. If you’ve been skeptical about Putin up to now – this will clinch it for you!
*** Call Me By Your Name – Despite its great critical acclaim for its social relevance, and its fulfillment of the promise of more representation for traditionally underrepresented characters reflecting society, what we have here is a contemporary version of a Harlequin Romance. This is a sumptuous, sun-drenched story of sexual awakening that borders on being liberal soft core porn. Now, I don’t mean that in a bad way — but the movie is all about the long tease, leading to the fulfillment of a love that, in 1983 when the film was set, was not supposed to speak its name. We’ve seen this same European summer romance film told many times before with heterosexual lovers. Here, its freshened because of the increased stakes of acting on sexual yearnings between two men.
So at the risk of sounding insensitive — here’s what bothered me about the film. 1) The filmmaker made sure that the two beautiful, adonis-like bodies of the leads were always as exposed as possible — they rarely wore more than shorts. No problem of course, but that’s what gave it the soft core porn sheen for me. 2) For a circumstance set around a summer internship, it seemed as if Oliver never worked. He was always lying around, sunbathing, and/or swimming. This had people in the water more than any movie of recent memory (including ‘the shape of water’). 3) Elio himself had no job, no employment, and did nothing but laze around all summer. In what idyllic, rich person’s world does a 17-year old not have a summer job? This world seemed completely detached from reality, other than the gauze-like world of harlequin romance. 4) Elio has the most understanding and loving parents in the world. This was a family unit with no sign of conflict, just love and harmony. They are also the most tolerant parents a world has ever seen. (Now granted, the third act ‘twist’, in the father’s final monologue is what gives the film its greatest social insight, but still… its all too unbelievably loving and tolerant.) 5) Speaking of which: Have any parents ever been more happy to see their 17-year old become sexualized? They all but encourage him to become sexually active. What an open-minded family. 6) Not that I’m in any way a prude, but I was disturbed by the double standard here. Had this been a movie about an older man and a 17-year old girl – we’d be lining up to fire the older man. Is ‘underage’ not a factor when its between men? I thought that as a culture, we now were considering sex with a minor to be predatory – so why here is it considered romantic?
Despite all these misgivings, I found the film to be sensual and touching. But I’ve never been that susceptible to romances that seem so far removed from reality. This is beautiful people acting beautifully.
*** The Greatest Showman – this over-romanticized story of the life of P.T. Barnum has more cloying, romanticized elements than a fairy tale. Barnum’s wife is a loving, smiling Stepford like princess, his two adorable children are always laughing and playing (and never age despite the time span the film covers), and every song seems to have the word “Dream” in it endlessly. And yet, this syrup-filled musical still has its winning moments and, at the theatre where I saw it, the audience applauded at the film’s end. So there is definitely a crowd-pleaser for those who like old-fashioned feel-good musicals. I did find a lot of the music to be quite enjoyable. The lyrics were mawkish but the tunes, harmonies, and performances sound good to contemporary ears. Ultimately, I was uncomfortable with the film’s sunny disposition and totally unbelievable story line. It turned Barnum’s true-life hucksterism into a parable of and empowerment and a plea for an end to intolerance for people with disabilities (i.e. the ‘freaks’ in his museum and circus), as well as people of color. The storyline is quite hard to swallow — but boy those circus folks sure sing and dance well! Ultimately I enjoyed this more than I felt I should have.
*** Only the Brave – Another movie pulled from the “real-life drama’ playbook of moviemakers like Peter Berg – Only the Brave sets out to tell the backstory of the Arizona based ‘hotshots’ who live to battle forest fires and the tragic end met by the Granite Hill Hotshots, It benefits from an outstanding cast including Josh Brolin, Jeff Bridges and an almost unrecognizable Miles Teller – as well as emotional turns from the women involved with these work-obsessed firefighters, including Jennifer Connelly. The movie wisely spends a lot of time establishing the emotional back-story and stakes for these macho men, and the toll their devotion to duty takes on their personal and family lives. It also provides a surprising amount of detail into the training and rigors of this dangerous profession.
Its all a bit too macho-cowboy for my tastes (does everyone in Arizona wear cowboy hats and swagger?), but makes a good story about a difficult lifestyle come to life – and grants a sobering reality to the large group of men who lost their lives in a devastating on-the-job tragedy.
** 1/2 It – This second adaption of Stephen King’s horror novel (the first was a 1990 TV mini- series), is a compressed telling of the same story, this time with a scarier clown. It’s actually more spooky than scary, and the scariest stuff is not the clown, killer teeth, run-of-the-mill undead sorts and so on — but the cruelties of adolescence that many of us have seen or experienced in our own lives. The nostalgia here for those early teen years (riding bicycles, having adventures with your friends, and the innocence of first love) grounds the story in familiarity and comfort, while juxtaposing it against the nasty stuff of the real world: Cruel older teens, abusive parents, etc. The fact that King’s Derry, Maine also has an evil force that reappears every 27 years, just ratchets up the psychological horrors into something more fantastic.
The story seems a bit overfamiliar, and the band of outcast nerds banding together against evil has been seen in a number of other vehicles, “Stand by Me” and “Stranger Things” immediately come to mind. But this is a watchable bit of suspense with a nice sense of dread, and without unnecessarily sadistic horror elements. The young cast is good, and the clown is certainly creepy (though more credit has been given to the actor, and not enough to the CGI effects that make the clown a good scary manifestation.)
** 1/2 Suburbicon – George Cooney misses the boat directing this Coen Brothers script showing the dark underbelly of suburban America. Somehow the tone is off and it doesn’t succeed in blending the evil with the dark humor. The result is very uneven. Matt Damon and Julianne Moore just can’t seem to find the style the movie is searching for, and they come off oddly as a weird cross of passionate murderers and victims of their crime. Juxtaposed against this murder gone wrong plot is a more effective look at the plight of a black family moving into this white neighborhood. It escalates effectively and finally erupts in insane violence. But altogether the movie only works in its final scene as we see the two innocent boys who are both trapped by the dark doings in this 50s America ‘paradise’.
** 1/2 Battle of the Sexes – This is not the best work of either Emma Stone or Steve Carrell who seem to struggle to populate the two iconic characters Billy Jean King and Bobby Riggs. The film doesn’t seem to know if it just wants to depict this particular event (the tennis match between a man and a woman) and its place in the early days of feminism, or if it wants to focus on the private lives of its two main characters. The conflict that King feels in embracing her sexual identity is interesting enough (though something we’ve seen in other films about men and women coming to terms with their repressed sexual preferences — but equal weight is given to Bobby Riggs story — which is clearly less of interest. He is depicted as a degenerate gambler, but that doesn’t jibe equally with his need to place himself into the limelight — a huckster with the soul of Barnum. His wife decides to leave him because of his inability to stop gambling – though we’re told in the end credits that she came back to him and they remained married. But we get no explanation of why that would have occurred.
The personal drama feels a bit forced — and we’ve little insight into why King’s husband both instantly realizes she is sleeping with a woman (he figures this out in seconds and leaves hurt and upset), and yet remains her tennis supporter. His feelings about the matter are glossed over. It all feels a bit perfunctory.
What DOES work however is the tennis match itself. Finally we get to see the two characters in the same scene (they are literally separate stories for 2/3rds of the movie), and the match and its outcome are exciting to watch, the way a good sports movie would normally be. Of course, there’s a lot riding on the outcome of the match — no less than the honor of women everywhere! And we’re glad to see the buffoon (as well as the onlooking male chauvinists who watch in stereotypical misery) put in their places. Actually – the most interesting encounters are the ones between King and the head of the Tennis Association — who somewhat realistically shows the attitude men like him had about women athletes. Ultimately, that conflict is the most interesting one in the movie. This film joins the rest of the 2017 crop of movies themed around sexual awakening and equal rights for women. Its not the subtlest or most nuanced of the emerging genre — but it fits firmly into the emerging canon.
** ½ Film Stars Don’t Die in Liverpool — I’m not generally a fan of the sad bio-pic — especially when its focus (and the book its based on) is someone who had a close relationship with a celebrity. Here, the celebrity is an older, lesser-known film star, Gloria Grahame, who won a best supporting actress, and was, based on the portrayal in this film, a sort of lesser Marilyn Monroe — flirty, sexy, appealing. In the movie, we see her in her later years, wrestling with the familiar problem of ingenues as they mature and no longer can be cast (since Hollywood does not make movies with older woman, especially in the late 70s / early 80s the film is set. Its based on the memoir of Peter Turner, and focuses solely on the years the much younger man had a love affair with Grahame. It jumps back and forth between their meeting and early years, and three years later, when they are reunited as Grahame grows close to death due to her undisclosed illness – cancer. Annette Bening is terrific as the aging, insecure and imperious celeb, and makes the sexuality and appetite of this woman both sympathetic and vulnerable (as opposed to coming off as a cougar preying on the younger man). Despite her strong and appealing performance, movies that focus on death and dying and their stages of acceptance, and its affect on those round them, feel all too familiar and nothing new can be said here. Without Bening’s insightful and interesting performance, this would qualify as a lifetime movie-of-the-week.
** 1/2 The Lego Batman Movie – Some cheeky fun, and a good gentle spirited poke at the whole super-hero milieu. This is a spinoff off the surprising success of the first “Lego” movie – and as such, there is less original about this film. Yes, it mirrors the originals peculiar not-quite- animated style of bringing Lego Figures to life. But now it appears there are countless lego characters to be found. The animation isn’t particularly inspired, but the heart of the film, the loneliness of being a lone crusader, and the peculiar relationships that exist around Superhero life gives a bit of heft to the quip-filled snarkiness of the film. Its good for an easy laugh though certainly not a film for the ages.
** 1/2 Wonder Wheel – Woody Allen once again indulges his admiration for the plays of Tennessee Williams and fascination with the archetype of the tragic, delusional, Blanche-Dubois- like character. In this case, its Kate Winslet donning a tortured face, a New York accent, and a tortured past, unhappy marriage, and unrealistic dream of escaping with a younger man. Sadly, its hard to tell whether this turgid melodrama is an homage to Tennessee William, or a shallow parody of classic plays like Streetcar Named Desire and Glass Menagerie (the latter of which employs a young, ‘artistic’, narrator who is also part of the stories action. In this case, the narrator is Justin Timberlake, in a dramatic role as a young swain lightguard, who has an affair with Winslett’s older, married woman, while becoming attracted to her younger, attractive step- daughter. In a strange piece of casting, Jim Belushi, normally known for comic roles, plays the husband and his performance stylistically pushes the work beyond the realm of believability and ever so slightly into the comic melodrama. Its so difficult to make this sort of tragic storyline heartfelt and touching, and combined with Allen’s often awkwardly theatrical dialog, the film elicits more groans than tears. The candy-colored world of Coney Island does not help us feel the needed sense of realism, and the clich casting of two Sopranos regulars as the two gangsters further distances us from believing or empathizing with the characters and their circumstances. While never boring, and despite Winslet’s earnest performance, if this hadn’t been directed by Woody Allen, this movie would be deemed an amateurish failure.
** 1/2 I Tonya – the real mystery here is why this film was classified as a comedy for the 2017 Golden Globes. It’s in no way comic, unless you find its portrayal of abusive, uneducated, selfish white trash a source of amusement. For me, I felt nothing but pity and general repulsion at the abusive mother and abusive husband of Tonya Harding. Perhaps we are supposed to feel sympathetic for her because she was such a victim of her upbringing and environment, but the fact that she lacked the character to break away from all this, and stood idly by while her ex- husband planned to handicap her skating competition, makes her far from an innocent here. Unlike the tough Mom in “LadyBird” — Allison Jamey’s critically acclaimed performance here as Harding’s Mom has no ambivalence. She’s just a horrible parent. Whatever shading Jamey is able to bring to the role has little impact in rounding out this flat character. I found little to root for here, and little to laugh at. To me, its a sad story indeed, and the director’s attempts to make the film ironic in any way, just didn’t seem to work.
** Murder on the Orient Express – A lot of talented actors are given little to do other than adopt an accent and a haughty demeanor in this handsome rehash of a classic Agatha Christie mystery. Kenneth Branagh stars and directs, and he is a worthy Hercule Poirot — but the whole thing seems rather tired and pointless. Scenery is quite lovely though!
* Justice League of America — the greatest threat to superheroes across the world is director / writer Zack Snyder. Extending the dour mood, and using the less than overwhelming Ben Affleck as Batman from his Batman vs Superman film — Snyder has now created the dullest of all super- hero movies. Its unfortunate, as the JLA was my favorite comic book as a kid — but this film captures none of its original spirit and excitement at the partnering of so many great DC super- heroes. In fact, other than Batman, Wonder Woman (who was so much better in her solo film), and the “is he truly dead” Superman, the rest of the JLA is unrecognizable. Flash’s character is completely reinvented as comic relief for the teen crowd, Aquaman is turned into another character altogether, a sort of Superman of the Sea (in preparation for his end of year feature film, which I’ve not seen as this year comes to a close), and a more recent cyborg character (again, more teenage superhero) are added to the mix. Together, they exhibit zero-chemistry, the villain is just evil incarnate without any sense of character, and its just one big bore. I never thought I’d see a superhero film that was near-unwatchable — but this one deserves that classification. What a terrible shame. (And how terribly it stacks up against the success, pathos, and ingenuity of the 2018 Avengers film). Warner Bros / D.C. needs to sorely rethink who is managing their superhero franchise.
*** Hunt for the Wilderpeople (2016) – The fact that I was so struck last year by the directorial finesse of director Taika Waititi (Thor: Ragnarok), made me curious to see what other films he had directed. I had enjoyed his vampire parody “What we do in Shadows” and neglected to notice he directed the awful “Green Lantern” film in 2011 — but noticed this obscure little indy from 2016 and decided to give it a watch. It turns out to have been a nice little discovery, as its a charming little film which is fun, takes a few unexpected turns, and ultimately rather touching. Its the story of a troubled city kid with no parents who has been shuffled from one foster home to another, until he winds up with an unusually open and embracing foster mom and a disinterested, gruff foster father in the New Zealand countryside, on the edge of the bush. Its a classic sort of ‘love wins over all’ story which can often be offputting and sentimental – but it brings a wry sense of humor to its adventure in which Ricky and his anti-social foster dad become the subject of a national manhunt. This is an easy to like story with both heart and laughs, and a nice travelogue for the beauty and wildness of the New Zealand countryside.
*** Personal Shopper (2017) – This was lingering on my Netflix queue and I finally got round to seeing it this year. It’s a very ‘art house’ psychological thriller with an ambitious and vexing script. It holds your attention because of the suspense generated by its quiet and mysterious circumstances, but its agenda is more ambitious (and hard to grasp) than a standard horror movie or Hitchcockian thriller. Kristin Stewart plays a rather unique character – an American personal shopper living in Paris who also happens to have a connection to the ‘spirit world’ and is asked to find out if the mansion owned by her dead brother’s lover is ‘free of spirits’ and can be sold. Yup, happens all the time, right? Needless to say spirits are hovering and figure in the proceedings, though the most interesting scenes center around Stewart’s Maureen receiving and sending texts to an unknown person who appears to be stalking her. Lots of points for originality, but the lines that are crossed (whether or not she should try on and wear the expensive clothing she buys as personal shopper for her employer, are tougher to understand. The themes seem to be about the ‘material’ world and the ‘spiritual’ world but they remain fuzzy, much like the spirits in the movie. Still, intriguing stuff, and rather original.
Comments
Nothing yet. Say the first thing.
Sign in to join the conversation.