Logans Run (1976)

 

Logan’s Run

Here’s a sci-fi film that I have been meaning to catch for a long time. Luckily TCM is doing the 31 days of Oscar films marathon so I can catch up on good stuff I’ve never seen. Sci-fi’s of the past decades are usually great because they are creative and high concept. I know this is based on a novel but I think the film was still pretty great regardless even though some of it was flawed. Logan’s Run is a sci fi film that takes place in a dystopian future and I’d have to say this film must have influenced many modern day films.

The film is set in a world where people only live until 30. Once they hit 30 they are exterminated.  A man known as Logan 5 goes on the run who becomes 30 after a medical procedure goes wrong. He goes on his run with a beautiful compatriot named Jessica 6. The film has futuristic gadgets and concepts and really felt slightly ahead of its time. I say slightly because we started getting a lot of the original sci-fi films around this time. Logan’s Run had a few themes I noticed and also a few similarities to some other sci-fi films of the time.

The film really reminded me of Soylent Green in the fact that it has a theme of population control through killing off human beings in a ritualistic/efficient way. The film also shared similarities with Planet of the Apes, mostly through the viewing of the desolate ruins of Washington DC. The effects are at times quite dated, which is understandable considering the time. The film does have a few memorable moments and enough romance going for it to keep you interesting.

I’d say the first half of the film has a lot going on but its quite interesting but its important to stay focused or get lost. The second half where Logan and Jessica go on the run doesn’t always engage but its mostly nice to see the connection between the two. Overall, its quite a fun film with some interesting viewpoints and issues addressed for its time. While effects are dated and the focus isn’t always perfect it’s a good experience.

7.5/10

The Secret Garden (1993)

 

The Secret Garden

I finally got an HBO subscription so now have many films at my disposal (I’ve seen most anyways but still). I also had this film on DVD lying around somewhere but finally decided to watch it. I wasn’t very clear on what the film was about beforehand but the premise sounded like the family friendly fantastical tale that could be worth the watch.

The Secret Garden is about a spoiled girl who lives in India until her parents untimely death. She is then relocated to her uncles mansion where she discovers she has a recluse cousin (who is hidden away) who is sealed off because he is ill and can’t walk. They both travel out to a secret garden which seems to improve his health mysteriously. Along the way, the two form a connection despite initially butting heads. The film is based off the novel of the same name.

The verdict is that this film makes for an enjoyable time. Its an older film so the film could use some digital enhancing to make some of the scenes more vibrant (ahem Blu-Ray treatment). The film has the charm of 90s children fantasy films that movies of today cannot really recreate. While thee child acting is not great and the accents (especially of the child maid) are horrible its forgivable when you think of the films market. The film’s fantastical elements are undertold as it relies on the magic of the garden and placing faith in its spiritual abilities without actually seeing much on screen, which is fine.

The film isn’t an absolute must watch by any sense, nor is it something that many people will have heard of. It is however, a harmless film that captures a bit of the essence of children’s films of the past while establishing inspiration amongst curious kids as they journey into something fantastical together. There’s plenty of cute animals and naturalistic shots for those who would appreciate that sort of thing anymore. Its not a film that would be successful today because of its simplistic presentation and understated visuals, but its solid.
7/10

Let The Right One In (2008)

Let The Right One In

Vampires in film have been so saturated these days so its nice to see an effective film. I’ve been meaning to watch this for a while. I saw the American remake a few years back and thought it was solid but now I can see the source material was very good. There’s a few moments where the film is uneven but overall the imagery and relationship between the protagonists really make this film work.

The film is about a young boy who is bullied at school, who befriends a mysterious little girl who is actually a vampire. While its easy to grasp whats going on with her character there’s still a longing to know exactly what her past was. I think the connection with the characters are great and is probably the strongest point of the film. This is a vampire film that revolves on a young friendship, this is not something that we see very often.

There are some real evil characters in the film (namely the bullies). Its balanced real well with a vampire who feeds on and kills other but shes actually a hero at the end.  You feel connected to Eli and Oskar because the filmmaker but their relationship first and the film really builds itself on that. There are horrific moments in the film that occur so quickly and suddenly, that it leaves a lasting impression. The film doesn’t focus too much on gore but what we see is done very well.

I don’t always watch foreign films unless they get rave but here’s one I’m glad I saw. Its definitely better than the American counterpart and I feel like this film is probably one of the best foreign depictions of vampire culture. If I ever get a chance I may check out more of Swedish cinema because I already loved the original Girl With The Dragon Tattoo (Millennium) trilogy. Sweden knocks another one out of the park.

7.5/10

Doctor Strange (2016)

Doctor Strange

 

Its no secret that Marvel is a money making machine. The Marvel Cinematic Universe has grossed billions of dollars and remains a force every year. Overall, I think the franchise has been very successful in bringing comic book heroes to life through origin stories and combining the heroes for action epics. Marvel's latest installment was introducing the masses to Doctor Strange. I wasn't very familiar with the character so I was cautiously optimistic going into this one.

The films stars Benedict Cumberbatch in the titular role. Benedict is a great performer and I think he's always remarkable in what he is in. Doctor Strange is about a arrogant but precisely successful neurosurgeon who gets in a life changing car crash that messes up hi hands. Strange searches far and wide for a way to get his hands working again. he travels to Nepal and is introduced to a fantastically magical world of sorcery where he can do more with his mind and alter reality, time, and the world from harnessing the power within.

First off, the effects in this film are great. Its immensely psychedelic and extremely graphically busy. The skyline is constantly shifting and worlds are bending and all of it looks up to par. It was reminiscent of some of the sequences seen in Inception. The fight scenes in the film also do not disappoint. Its got what it needs to keep thrill seekers engaged. Marvel also gathers a very talented cast to add to its never ending list of A-listers involved in the MCU. Mads Mikkelsen is a brilliant performer, although he's a bit of a shallow villain in this.

The film has too much going on in concepts. A person's soul? can come out of their body, there is a giant demon thing that's trying to destroy the world, there are shortcuts that lead to major cities, buildings can be moved, there is a mirror reality, a moving cape, fireballs, time can be put on a loop... its insane how many things happen in this film. Its not that its hard to follow, its just that the film becomes conceptually ugly the longer it goes. It doesn't feel like other Marvel films as the world that is created isn't very interesting and feels bland despite all the visuals involved. 

Cumberbatch plays a great Doctor Strange. He's an egotistical guy who becomes humbled and is yet witty and remains flawed. He's a welcome addition to the Marvel Universe, I assume he will be a part of the next Avengers film. Its just that this origin film doesn't really stand out as you are just thrown into the world of sorcery and just have to accept what is going on. Its an admirable effort but pales in comparison to some of the other heroes in the MCU. There is still room for improvement and I'm curious to see where this goes.

6.5/10

Billy Lynn's Long Halftime Walk (2016)

 

Billy Lynn's Long Halftime Walk

Ang Lee takes four years to bring forth his followup to Life of Pi. I thought Life of Pi was phenomenal. it was a stunning visual experience and through creative storytelling we got a really memorable film. When I saw the trailer for Billy Lynn's Long Halftime Walk I wasn't very impressed because I couldn't really discern what the film was about. The film just sort of got lost in the shuffle at the end of the year, and now having seen it I am glad it did just disappear from the awards mix.

The film is about a group of soldiers who are being honored at the halftime show at a Thanksgiving Dallas Cowboys football game. The film is portrayed through the perspective of one of those soldiers, Billy Lynn. The entire film takes place during this game and is littered with flashbacks of the war and events with family all seen through Billy's eyes. The film sounds decent on paper but the delivery was off and the film ended up being a long and uninteresting cliched film that is one of Ang Lee's weakest efforts in  recent memory.

The film set the record for having the highest frame rate and I was thinking why? Ang Lee is fairly innovative and his cinematography can be remarkable. However going for the high frame rate for a drama like this with little action made no sense. The characters pop out at you and look too lively and it just comes off really weird. It should have been saved for a different film. There are moments where characters dialogue right into the camera and it's just odd. Some scenes do pop out at you, especially the actual depiction of the halftime show but its not enough to be a saving grace for the film.

The film stereotypes American soldiers and some aren't portrayed favorably. The war time scenes and relating depiction of PTSD doesn't really break any new ground or ever really touch you emotionally. In fact, its disconnecting. The film tries to cram in a ridiculous love story with a cheerleader for the sake of having a relationship in the film. The dialogue is cheesy and feels artificial as its too sudden and unrealistic. The films flashback format really hurts the film as while some of the flashbacks are necessary and interesting, the return to the present reminds you of how dull and drab the present sequence is.

 I think this is a great debut for Joe Alwyn who portrays a stern-faced under pressure Billy Lynn very well. The film also has a solid Kristen Stewart and a rare appearance in film from Chris Tucker. Its a shame they are wasted in a film with nothing to really offer the talent that was gathered. Its just a disappointment that something as visionary and monumental as Life of Pi was followed up by a generic, flawed, undeserving disappointment of a film.

5/10

Allied (2016)

 

Allied

 

Robert Zemeckis is a good director who has been streaky as of late. He has some work that I really like but in recent years he's been forgettable. Judging by the trailers I wasn't very excited for this film. After viewing the film, I'll say that its better than I expected but could have been far better. Its still worth a watch and others may champion the picture more than I will.

Marion Cotillard. What more can I say? I am so glad this extremely talented French actress switched over to American cinema. She's fantastic and magnetic in this film (as she always is). Two Days, One Night is a stellar film in which she showcases her talents. She does everything right in this film as well. I think the film could have been written better, but her character is still full of a sexual mystique and you watch as her truth unfolds. Although mysterious, her character is fulfilled and her relationship with Pitt on screen is charming. Pitt is also great in the film, the acting wasn't ever going to be a let down with these two.

The plot progression is slow. I think once you get to the point where Marianne is accused of being a spy, the film picks up. Prior to that attention wanes, minds wander. There is action on the screen and the plot stays busy but feels lifeless at times. This is not a fault of the actors but seems like writing that doesn't provoke at large stages. This might have to do with the film focusing more on romance during wartime than being an espionage thriller. I think it could have used more of the latter to make for a more memorable experience. There are moments which are good but I felt like the film was uneven.

Characters come and go, outside of the two leads everyone else is fleeting, not memorable, or just there to advance the plot. There's talent there like Matthew Goode and Lizzy Caplan but you don't really care about them because they are not around for long enough. Stuff just happens and lots of the film just feels tame and not as gripping as you'd expect from a World War II spy film. The film needed more suspense to really captivate the viewers but goes off on some tangents. I'm not saying the actors were wasted as the film isn't bad, its just that with better writing everything would have thrived. This one doesn't stack up to Zemeckis' best but its stylish, well acted, and has costumes and set pieces that take your eyes into a setting from WWII, although your mind is left to wander.

6/10

Moana (2016)

Moana

 

If you know me well enough you would know that I'm very critical of animated films. I think a lot of them miss the mark and can only remain interesting for children. A good animated feature is inclusive of a widespread audience and can remain smart and engaging will offering fun and crafty animation. Moana is not something I was looking forward to, as on paper it didn't look like it was going to leave much of an impression on me. It's safe to say that I'm surprised that this film was honestly pretty good.

The first thing that I think deserves praise is the music. Nearly every song is excellent, catchy, and just so full of life. It's hard not to sing along to the music. This isn't exactly something I can say for a lot of animated films. The more technical aspect of the film is great. The colors are very vibrant and the animation is vivid and expansive (just like the vast ocean the heroes sail). Some of the action is eye-popping and very striking, especially the battle with the lava demon, Te Ka. Auli'i Cravalho is a relative newcomer who does a very good job of bringing Moana to life. She will probably have many more voice acting roles in the future.

I also think the film is a good look into a culture that many people won't be familiar with. I've noticed that Disney is really trying to focus on some minority groups in the past few years and this is perfectly good for fresh inspiration. In the case of Moana, this provided for an interesting and unfamiliar setting and story, which adds to the films overall appeal. I'm well aware of the cultural criticisms this film received for the portrayal of Maui and the lack of heroine goddesses. However, its good to leave some criticisms at the door. If you look hard enough a criticism can be found for anything and its unnecessary for a film that means well.

The film has its typical Disney cliches. You have the "chosen" hero who is unsure of themselves. You have the relationship with a buddy that is at first strained but then leads to the characters liking each other. There is a falling out and reunion with the hero discovering their ability. The film treads familiar Disney ground. Its not a terrible thing and kids won't really give a damn about it. Its not a flawless film, at its core its a familiar formula but I think the cultural aspect and imaginative visuals put a good balance.

I think Kubo and the Two Strings was far and away the best animated film of the year and proved why Laika are ahead of the curve. I'd say Moana is better than some of its animated counterparts in the year, such as Zootopia and Finding Dory. I still long for the days of 90s Disney films but this effort shows that they are still trying at least. If for nothing else, sit back and enjoy the excellent music and visuals in the film.

7.5/10

Underworld: Blood Wars

Underworld: Blood Wars

My first experience of film from 2017 happens to be the latest installment in a series that I am extremely mixed on. I love the original Underworld. I loved the universe created and thought it was a well crafted action film with a good balance of both style and substance. Unfortunately, none of the sequels were close in quality to the original and a few of the films kind of just faded into the background. I wasn’t overly excited for Blood Wars but all I really wanted was a decent film that is at least better than some of the sequels.

The film starts off explaining some of the key events of the previous in the franchise (which I really needed as a refresher). It takes a while for the film to really get going. We see a few new characters, all with their own motivations. You really wonder who is doing what and it takes time to really frame the story. I felt uninterested through the first act. The film does get better once we see more of Tobias Menzies’ villainous character. I think with so many films in the franchise its easy to forget characters and all about the vampire/werewolf hybrids and what the Lycans are really after.

Kate Beckinsale is gorgeous as always in the film. Her Selene character always kicks ass and looks incredibly sexy in a black leather suit. I also dug remodeling her character with the blondish locks in her hair. The dark blue hue of the film is back once again but its cool because the film looks really stylish and the gothic feel of the Underworld universe is ever present. There’s more than enough action and bloody violence to keep the moviegoer entertained. Its important to remember that these films are gearing more towards popcorn entertainment than something that can be take seriously  as a cinematic work.

I think the introduction of Tobias Menzies’ is such a strong point. The man plays one of the most despicable villains I have ever seen on television in Outlander. Just channeling a fraction of the hate in that character is enough for you to get invested in the hate for his character. Some of the other characters kind of fade away and feel incomplete but there’s enough fun going on to allow you to forgive some of the film’s shortcomings.

I think with Blood Wars we get the film series’ most satisfying sequel despite being flawed. The film is still as stylish as ever and a stronger third act keeps the fuel in the machine. I wouldn’t mind if the series ended soon but I think we may have to go through a film or two before the series is at its conclusion. Overall, its nothing special but still better than what I had expected.

6.5/10

Hacksaw Ridge (2016)

Mel Gibson is a director who comes back every few years or so and just blows me away. In 2006, I was amazed by Apocalypto. I still watch that film from time to time because its so riveting, damning, and beautiful. When Hacksaw Ridge was announced I was excited. I tend to get very drawn into well made war films. I knew with Mel, I'd likely see and experience something that would be very worth the watch.

The film is about the real life story of Desmond T. Doss, an army medic who refused to hold a gun or fight the opposition during World War II in the Battle of Okinawa. His bravery, resolve, and willpower to save his fellow comrades makes for such an inspiring story, if projected successfully onto the screen. Andrew Garfield has had one hell of a year. To go from the lead in the atrocious Amazing Spider-Man films to starring in a Scorsese and Mel Gibson epic; its one hell of a leap. He's faultless in this. Doss is a kind hearted simple man whose passion is to help those who are in dire need of help. 

We are first subjected to young Doss growing up in a rather abusive household. We get to see how Doss had become a pacifist and how he met the love of his life. There is nothing with what is seen here. Its arguably slow, however its sweet and takes you back to a love story from WWII. Its good stuff. The film just keeps getting better from here. We then see Doss during training and how his lifestyle causes his infantry to turn on him in hate and disgust. He overcomes adversity and finally gets to the Battle of Okinawa. 

Let me just tell you that Mel Gibson is an excellent visionary when it comes to depicting visceral action. Its completely necessary to show how a war truly is. Nothing is held back. Blood comes from everywhere, limbs fly off, guts are hanging out, heads are being blown off. Its intense but phenomenally shot. You are in the trenches experiencing the nightmare as it happens. Its the best show wartime action since Saving Private Ryan. I'm not going to lie, I came here for good war action sequences and was very impressed with what I saw. 

Here's a film with a few many characters and honestly they are developed decently. This is Doss' story through and through but you love the connections with the people in his unit and how they all come around on him. Doss is a hero in its finest form. Its wonderful to witness his bravery and courage through a wonderfully shot, gripping, war epic. Mel Gibson hits the mark yet again.

8/10

Moonlight (2016)

 

Moonlight

Oscar buzz is always something that garners excitement. I'm always enthralled to see a critically acclaimed award worthy film to see what the hype is about myself. Moonlight is a film about a man named Chiron. He is a gay black male growing up around bullying, hate, and an uncaring and unresponsive mother. Chiron's life is told in three phases: as a little boy, as a teenager in high school, and as an adult. Three actors portray Chiron and all of them are impressive. The subject matter is heavy and delivered with an unhinged feeling of reality.

Young Chiron has to deal with a mother who is inattentive and is addicted to drugs. He seeks help and comfort from a caring couple played by Mahershala Ali and Janelle Monae. The second segment is probably the toughest to watch as teenage Chiron in his quiet and withdrawn nature has to deal with his first experience of homosexuality and all that comes with it. What comes with it? Bullying, which is intense. He gets picked on and suffers emotional and physical abuse. This causes him to snap and violently attack his bully which leads to his arrest. The third segment, Chiron is an adult and a drug dealer, however this is the most satisfying segment as Chiron gets closure on a lot of relationships and problems that previously plagued his life.

The cinematography in the film is excellent. There are times where the camerawork is personal, such as in the school fight. The camera takes a first person view in this instance, which allows you to be in the fight and experience the blows firsthand. This also happens a few times when portraying Chiron's drug addicted mother. The score is also fantastic at points and becomes touching towards the end. The film looks crisp and refined behind the lens of the still relative newcomer, Barry Jenkins.

The films authenticity makes it so powerful. Chiron could be any real disadvantaged kid growing up in a shady area filled with fighting and drugs. Chiron can't help that he was born into this ugly life, and no matter how hard he tries to get away from it, something pulls him in. In spite of his disadvantaged circumstances Chiron tries to find solace and inner peace with the problems and relationships in his life. It does not always have to be bleak, the past is the past the future is what you make of it.

The performances from just about everyone is great. There are a few newcomer performances all of which work very well. I especially liked Naomie Harris as Chiron's drug addicted mother. The final scene with adult Chiron and older Harris is tense but relieving. Overall, its a strong film by Barry Jenkins, one that is loaded with very beautiful scenes and some really harrowing moments. Its a very solid effort one that you will think about long after seeing the film. We could have a strong award season contender here.

7.5/10

Fantastic Beasts and Where To Find Them (2016)

 

Fantastic Beasts and Where to Find Them

I’m a huge fan of the Harry Potter franchise. I read the books as a teenager and was enamored with the wizarding world that JK Rowling managed to create. The films aren’t without flaws but they were very enjoyable for the book lovers and casual movie fans alike. The films were enjoyable for adults and children alike. Initially, I didn’t care for a spinoff or prequel to the Harry Potter franchise; I didn’t need anything in that magical universe anymore. I was of the opinion that Rowling should have closed that chapter of her life and focus on a more unique project. However, I still decided to check it out as I heard many people enjoyed this film.

I’m sad to say that I did not like it anywhere near as much as the Harry Potter films. The first hour of this film seemed so inconsequential and bland. There’s an overabundance of CGI usage to depict some of the beasts. While some scenes with the beasts look great, others looked so reliant on CG that it was distracting and takes you out of the picture. The first hour of the film focuses on introducing the beasts that escaped Newt Scamander’s briefcase. I quit the film an hour in because I was sorely disappointed with what I saw.

After getting back to the film, I’d say the film gets stronger in the second phase. Once the severity of the Obscurus is revealed the film becomes a bit darker and engages the audience more. There are still questions to be asked and I expect them to be answered in the trilogy (I’m not very fond of the idea of sequels to an unnecessary film). While the film gets better,  it still carries none of the charm and fun that made the Harry Potter films so special. The HP films had a purpose and you knew that everything was well thought out, I can’t say the same for a very uneven FBAWTFT.

I’m not the biggest Eddie Redmayne fan. He can put in a tremendous performance but isn’t in many films that I really like. He was a considerably weak leading man. Its hard to get invested in his character who is just there and becomes second to whoever else he is on screen with. Katherine Waterston is committed to her role and was one of the best features of this film. There seems to be other characters who are kind of thrown into the film to serve the plot. There are also a few easy way outs in this film. Something big gets solved by a convenient circumstance that gets explained on the spot.

This film failed to make a good impression. It has prolonged action sequences and an introduction of many new types of beasts, however outside of a few references to the HP universe the film just feels like it doesn’t need to exist. I don’t have a lot of faith in the expected trilogy but its going to exist and I pray that it is better. Right now this film is what The Hobbit was to the Lord of the Rings trilogy. LOTR was great and we absolutely did not need The Hobbit trilogy. These beasts and this films concept do not need finding.

6/10

Hidden Figures (2016)

 

Hidden Figures

Here comes a film about three women who were crucial to the American space race and not many know about this story. I certainly did not. I’d say these types of biopics are necessary as awareness for people who have contributed so much in the past and shaped our lives in a better way. The film is about three black women who try to overcome segregation and unequal work rights in the workplace. One of these women (a mathematician), calculates the trajectory for Project Mercury and the 1969 Apollo 11 flight to the Moon.

This film is one that’s built on its performances, especially a typically strong one from Taraji P. Henson. She’s almost always great in her roles. Hidden Figures required to be a sort of mousy, quiet worker. However, the prejudice against her because of her race/gender get to her and then she becomes impassioned. Katherine Goble Johnson (who is played by Henson) is a brilliant person and is able to snide it in a few situations to people who doubted her. I also liked Janelle Monae in this and hope to see her in more in the future.

As I stated earlier this is a story that not many people know about. I know of John Glenn and his accomplishments but not of the women behind what he did. The film is powerful in the fact that it shows how unexpected people can be responsible for great things. The film also carries a message of moving on from segregation and moving towards something great (as a result of being united). The messages are very important and the film is very safe in its exploration of discrimination, which should please general moviegoers.

I wasn’t a big fan of Theodore Melfi’s St. Vincent. The film had a remarkable performance from Bill Murray but really failed to be memorable as a whole. With Hidden Figures I think there is an improvement in presenting a story and staying in a successful storytelling structure. Its a pleasant film that does not do a whole lot wrong.

7/10

20th Century Women (2016)

 20th Century Women

Elle Fanning uggh yes. Okay, now that that's out of the way lets get to this film. This seemed like an unconventional coming of age film and that is basically what this was. Its not a mindblowingly amazing film and has some flaws. However, what I thought was a flaw may have worked for another viewer. What I can say though, is that the film left a better impression on me than I thought it would.

The performances of this film are great, particularly that of Greta Gerwig and Annette Bening. Gerwig is such a real character who is pained but absolutely does what she wants to do in life. She has a hard time finding love but her very open nature makes her identifiable. Bening is tremendous in the best role I've seen from her. She's an easygoing mother who is worried about her son and how he deals with life. Remarkably cool but nuanced. Also, Elle Fanning good lord I love her. Okay, I had to get that out of my system again. All of the characters have substantial depth and you do not leave the film feeling like a character's story was underdeveloped. The main core of characters are all in close proximity with each other and through their interactions you get to see their turmoils, struggles, and comfortable nature with each other.

The stories of the characters of the film are at times told by themselves and they seem to be telling the story from a future time, where they have experienced the entirety of their lives. I liked this technique of expansive storytelling. However, there are other things in the film that don't work as well. The slideshow of images of the culture of the 70's seemed gimmicky and didn't exactly add to the film's narrative. It seemed like an attempt to be able to grab viewers but wasn't exactly necessary. There are also times where the scenes have a "psychedelic effect" where the car races off in the highway in a dreamy haze, full with the colors of the rainbow emanating from the car. Again, I thought this was quite gimmicky and trying to harden the fact that this film was supposed to be set in the 70s.

I think one of the things that worked with the film was its humor. There is a lot of it, and while its not always subtle and funny a good amount of it works to make you chuckle or really laugh. Its not something I was expecting but is definitely something that made the film more memorable. There are some scenes that really, really work and help you really want to live in the frame of the characters. The film really focuses on women at the time and a teenage boy trying to navigate in a sea of women in his life. While its not always accurate about men, I think its doing a pleasant job of trying to connect the two while showing some of the plights experienced when men and women try to understand each other. What you get here is a well acted, humorous films that works to entertain.

7/10

Patriots Day (2016)

 

Patriots Day

Peter Berg returned very soon after Deepwater Horizon, with yet another film based on a true event. Patriots Day is a film based on the 2013 Boston marathon bombings by the Tsarnaev brothers. Interestingly, this film also circles around a fictional cop (played by Mark Wahlberg) so we've got a mix of fiction with reality. I'm not the biggest fan of Berg's films but there is no denying he can do tense action scenes very well.

The film is a mixed bag but I'm leaning more on the positive side. The film's depictions of the violence and gore minutes after the attack, do not hold back. You don't expect it to either, especially if you are aware of Berg's track record. The sheer brutality of the event is captured, much like the war violence captured in Lone Survivor. Some of the chase and gunfights is absolutely enthralling as well. The final showdown between the older Tsarnaev and the police is very well done. It is gripping and remarkably captivating. I understand the original account of the events is a haze but the encounter must have been intense, going by the films depiction.

Getting back to the mixed bag bit here are the few things that detract from the film. The film starts out introducing a bunch of characters who are impacted in one way or the other by the event. This is necessarily not a bad thing in and of it self but it takes away from the films focus and too many characters equates for not enough weight given to each other. Some characters are purely devices to elicit an emotional response. The film also suffers from a long run time, condensing the film would have led to a more focused effort. The film seems to be a mishmash at times. The director must have wanted to just include all the scenes filmed, which impacts the narrative element of the film.

I was also not sure about the film being made. The events are very fresh and must still be really shocking for a lot of people impacted by the event. I can see why people would find this film to be exploitative. But on the other hand, films are a good way of educating people on the events of a true story. I assume the film was fairly accurate, so even I was able to learn a lot about the events. Also, Alex Wolff seemed like a dead ringer for the younger bomber.

It's just about what you expect from Peter Berg. A film that does action very well, but a film that suffers from  bloated length and could have used a better approach to telling the story. The film isn't absolutely necessary however its quite enjoyable and will provide for an entertaining, emotional, and enjoyable time for its viewers. I guess at the end of the day that's what you want from your media.

7/10

Christine (2016)

Christine

 

No, not the John Carpenter classic. The minute I heard about this film I was very excited to see this film. For those who are not familiar with the story, this film is based on the suicide of Christine Chubbuck. Christine was a depressed reporter who was going through troubling issues in her private and professional life culminating with her live on air suicide in 1974. Its a touchy, eerie and fairly disturbing subject, yet the film needed to not shy away from what happened and recreate the life of Christine Chubbuck, while not shying away from the gruesome event.

I've got to say, I was very impressed with this film. You cannot look away from this film at all. Its captivating all the way through even the hard to watch bits. Christine Chubbuck's pain, anguish, and disillusionment is portrayed perfectly by Rebecca Hall. I've never seen a more convincing performance from her. She seems to completely embody the character especially during the uncomfortable bits. A shout out to Tracy Letts as the hot tempered Michael. There are so many great moments from Hall including a volatile argument with Letts (and a similar one with her on screen mother). Wish Hall was getting more buzz for her performance, it may be up there with the best I've seen all year.

The film feels like something set in the 70s. There's plenty of shadows in the picture quality and the color is somewhat muted. It helps add to a dark and foreboding atmosphere. The little things really add to the experience of the film. Hall is in almost every frame as we witness her dark character study. Her health problems impinge her, the pressures of her work keep suffocating her, her love life never pans out, any attempt to move up in life goes down in flames.. we witness it all. You can't help but feel sorry for Chrstine; you can tell she is going through a hard time and a lot of it is unjust. We stand in anticipation as everything culminates to her death and the payoff is good.

This film does a good job of being unabashedly scary at times. There are few glimmering glimpses for Christine, but these moments fade just as soon as they come. Hope quickly turns to hopelessness. The negative aspects weigh up and bring you down and its inescapable. Its scary to think about how a lot of people have so much going on in their life and how people around them fail to notice what they are thinking. Support services are really important. 

Before rambling too much, the final moments are great. Christine seems resolved and at a stage of acceptance with everything around her. I guess this would have made the final events even more shocking in real life. The sudden and shocking nature of the suicide is caught quite well. I do wish the film ended with her shooting herself and her dropping to the floor, would have been more powerful. While the film meanders a bit and doesn't always seem focused, I am more than impressed with the end result.

7.5/10

Dracula 3D (2012)

Dracula 3D

 

If someone was interested in checking out the work of Dario Argento and they started with Dracula 3D, they probably would never come back to check out the rest of his filmography. I'm no Argento expert. However, I have seen Suspiria and Phenomena and think both are absolutely excellent. I especially love Phenomena. Argento is a master at making his films pop with colors and lights. His brand of horror also portrays beautiful cinematography amidst gruesome scenes. The BLOOD usually looks excellent. Naturally, I wanted to check Dracula 3D out. It just seemed like a good cheesefest; a film that looked like it would be "so bad that its actually good."

I'm quite disappointed to say that I was wrong. This film is not very fun at all. I like the way the film looks. The images and scenes look crystal clear, colorful, and lively. Its all that I would expect from Argento, very indicative of his craft. From there I really struggle to find any other positives. Okay maybe one more, there are beautiful girls on display. This had the feel of a B rate film that offers a few scenes of erotic nature and this did not disappoint in that department. Okay, now I'm certain that that is where the positives of the film ends.

The effects good lord, they look like something you would see in a SyFy channel movie, maybe even worse. I don't know if its from the 3d conversion but it looks like the worst type of B movie effects.
 Normally I wouldn't mind that, but it was distractedly bad. Just pay attention to the scenes where a vampire turns into dust, it looks ridiculous. The dialogue and general acting is the next thing here. it goes from over the top and hammy to uninterested characters just reading lines. All kinds of scenery chewing present from the actors (most of who I have not heard of apart from Asia Argento).
The above negatives may sound good to someone who would think "this movie sounds like its bad but in a way where you can find cheesy enjoyment out of it." That is not true. The plot is another retelling of the story of Dracula, which is fine because Bram Stoker's Dracula is a great story and I welcome different interpretations of the tale. This variation is mind-numbing  and incredibly dull.

You get no enjoyment in what happens and just pray for the end of the torture. I need to see more of Argento's later work to make a full assessment but its likely the magic of his earlier films is completely gone. I don't think I'll even bother with the later work and check out the stuff from his glory days because I'm sure its exceptional.

4/10

High Anxiety (1977)

High Anxiety

 

The satirical comedy is a real hit or miss genre, more so miss in recent years. When the humor is constant and a mix of ridiculous and witty, we can end up with something brilliant like Airplane! However, some of the modern satirical films that spoof popular films can crash and burn easily because of not having anything funny or original to offer. I have seen most of Mel Brooks' films and knew that I had to see this for  number of reasons. I loved Young Frankenstein; it was a brilliant humorous take on the classic Frankenstein film and Gene Wilder is phenomenal in it. I mostly enjoyed other films like Silent Movie and The History of the World Part 1 but there are lapses in comedy in both films. As a matter of fact I'd say Brook's brand of humor isn't always consistent (and somewhat dated) but there are enough laughs to make for a good time.

Another reason I had to check out High Anxiety is because Alfred Hitchcock is one of my favorite filmmakers ever and I had to see Brooks' take on some of Hitchcock's most famous work. I definitely enjoyed being able to spot some of the references to Psycho, The Birds, Rear Window, Dial M for Murder, and of course, Vertigo. Some of the film's humor may have been funny for an earlier generation. I think the best comedic moments come when Brooks pays his tribute to Hitchcock. The most memorable scene in the film is when the lobby boy 'stabs' Brooks with the newspaper in the shower and the smudged ink of the paper circles the drain (akin to the blood in the shower scene in Psycho). Some of the Hitchcockian references are smart, others feel tacked on. None of it really takes away from experience though.

I did enjoy some of the characters and their outrageous natures in the film. Lilloman is a fun character and the moments he and Brooks spend together on the scene bring for a delightful patient-doctor experience. I'd say the best is stiff and pale Nurse Diesel. She plays a memorable villain in her own right, despite the villain being spoofed off of a previous incarnation of something Hitchcock devised. Much like Silent Movie and History of the World Part 1, there are passages in the film that just kind of pass through without really eliciting a response. I guess its dependent on the viewer and their brand of humor, as I'd expect people would react differently to the comedic situations.

I'm not the biggest Mel Brooks fan but I have no problem admitting he's an icon in the satirical comedy genre. I don't think this film touches something like Young Frankenstein or The Producers but its a fun little ode to the master of suspenseful cinema. Its dated but enjoyable. Honestly I didn't expect anything more from this film so I am satisfied with what I saw.

6.5/10

Jack Reacher: Never Go Back (2016)

 

Jack Reacher: Never Go Back

 

I'm not going to lie, I enjoyed Jack Reacher in 2012. It had a nice complex-ish story mixed in nicely with good action and style. This made it an enjoyable popcorn flick. You can't ask for more from a film like this (and something with Tom Cruise). With all that in mind, I can't say the trailer for its sequel brought much excitement. Jack Reacher was always going to be a film series, it just seemed marketed that way. Its just a bit of a shame that the sequel does not live up to or succeed its predecessor in anyway.

Jack is back, and this time he and Major Turner are on the run after being framed for espionage. While they try to clear their name a wise cracking 15 year old teen is thrown into the mix. Not very exciting. This film seems like a step backwards for  a franchise that had a promising start. The original had a better cast, fight scenes, and was written in a way where you couldn't exactly tell what was going to happen (or maybe I just wasn't smart enough to figure it out). That's not the case here. This film treads ground that is all too familiar. You know exactly what's going to happen. The film seemed like The Fugitive but worse. I like Cobie Smulders, but her and Cruise weren't a great pairing; its a step down from Rosamund Pike.

The film has a not very memorable, prototypical villain who strikes the same chords of generic spy films of the past. You can't get behind loathing this guy and that's a problem. If a film isn't allowing you to connect with its main characters you just go through the motions of the film without really feeling anything. That's basically how this film felt for me. Everything about this film just screams average. There are a few moments where the dialogue is just so bland, you wonder how it was written and approved into the script.

It may sound like I'm complaining a lot but it really is the case that this was such a step down from the first film. The more infuriating bit is that its an Edward Zwick film and he brought us two pretty sensational films in The Last Samurai and Blood Diamond. There's real raw emotion in the latter, something that's completely lacking in the new Reacher. Its just another sequel that got churned out into the mix and I think it clouds the quality of the future films. I may 'never go back' to Jack Reacher after this effort.
5.5/10

The Girl on the Train (2016)

 

The Girl on the Train

 

Ninety percent of the time, I have not read the book that the film is based on. This happens to be one of those instances. The film boasts a good cast (Haley Bennett is a rising star for sure) a mysteriously intriguing premise, and solid trailers. How could anything go wrong? Sad to say I think a lot of things did go wrong here. This was quite a messy film in all honesty and a big disappointment. The film may resonate well with fans of the book, so my review is from the eyes of a film watcher solely.

The film is about an extremely disheveled woman (who also happens to be a blithering drunk) who watches a seemingly perfect couple in a house outside where her daily train stops. She is envious of Megan Hipwell, the woman who lives in that house. Oddly enough that woman lives in the house next to her former boyfriend (who has started a new family with another woman). In her drunken states she makes unwanted calls and visits to her ex's house. One day, Megan Hipwell disappears and the cause of her disappearance leads back to one of the people who are introduced in the film. But who is it? Sound confusing? It kind of is when you have to keep thinking of what is happening where. Like the protagonist, this film is a mess.

Flashbacks are okay if done in a clean and coherent manner. This film keeps doing messy flashbacks to different stages, that it becomes a chore to keep up with the different storylines of the characters. Speaking of the characters, they are all unlikable. The protagonist is not someone I can identify with and she becomes a tiring figure as the film goes by. After a while, I got sick of seeing her character in the same zoomed in shot with a confused crying face. You can't connect with Megan Hipwell because she's having relationships with multiple people. Not judging her character but she's so fleeting and doesn't connect or commit to anyone, so not sure why we would to her. Other characters just come into play as a plot device (Lisa Kudrow's character) and others just fade away completely (Laura Prepon).

I'm not sure how the book was written but I sure hope the twists and reveals were written better than they are adapted onto the screen. All of the thrills feel cheap and the film becomes a task to keep up with for a while, that you find it hard to care after a while. I think the main character is also a bit of an idiot at a certain point of this film but its hard to go into that without spoiling the film. I have to say, I was greatly disappointed by this film because I was expecting a decent thriller. You just wish Emily Blunt had her eyes closed on the train the whole time, thus avoiding everything that happens in the film.

5.5/10

Somewhere (2010)

Somewhere

Sofia Coppola is basically Hollywood royalty. The daughter of directing legend Francis Ford Coppola, has proved to be an excellent filmmaker in her own right. Lost in Translation is a rather phenomenal film about two lonely people bonding in a hotel in Tokyo. There is also a theme of loneliness in this film and the exploration of the character who experiences it. I'll get to that in a bit. Sofia's films are definitely not for everybody but I think if you love film you can really appreciate what she sets to accomplish with her pictures. Her films are not always plot heavy but we are usually guaranteed a riveting look into the life of a pained character.

To put it simply, the film is about an actor named Johnny Marco and how lonely he is in a world where he seems to have it all. He seems to be a newly famed Hollywood actor who feels a deprived sense of emotion and pleasure even though he has money, cars, a nice house, attractive women etc. He has a bond with his 10 year old daughter (played by Elle Fanning) which grows as he spends more and more time with her. First off, Dorff and Elle are great. I'm a big fan of Elle Fanning and know that she is in the now and will become huge. Even 6 years ago you can see how she has a natural knack for the screen. The film is shown in a way where the viewer just kind of sits back and experiences whats going on, almost as if you are taking a cut and seeing a real life as it unfolds (see seen with Johnny and the mask makeup).

Coppola's film has a story to tell, however its unconventional. The film isn't always dialogue heavy and you will experience a repetitive nature to some of the activities the protagonist grows through. Themes of a well off person experiencing loneliness are present once again in her film. Johnny seems to experience real happiness the more he sees his daughter. He finally seems to have a real emotional breakdown when she goes off to camp and he makes a call to his ex wife. I think that even though many of us are not in the wealthy situation of the protagonist, we can identify with how isolated he feels with everything going on around him.The magic of Coppola's films is their ability to just speak to you on an existential level.

The film is littered with gorgeous shots of hotels, people, location and such to mimic the glamorous life of Hollywood royalty. The soundtrack is chill and in the moment with what you see on screen. Seeing the pole dancers synchronizing to "My Hero" and Elle Fanning ice skate to Gwen Stefani's "Cool" help put you in the atmosphere of the world of the film. You are Johnny as he watches things happen on a day to day basis. Long story short, Coppola brings forth yet another enjoyable effort. I'm very excited about her pairing with Elle Fanning again in 2017.

7.5/10