Mighty Mike's Raging Reviews

Mighty Mike's Raging Reviews: The Bottom 10 List of 2017

2017-12-31T13:29:00.001-08:00

2017 was not a good year for movies. Sure, there were some great ones and a few surprises, but overall it was a year of shovelware. Most of the movies that came out were cash grabs made with so little creative desire that even their fanbases thought they sucked. Hollywood is facing some fierce competition in the movie-making business by online providers like Netflix and Amazon, and TV shows. If Hollywood wants to get movies back on top and fill in theater seats, they have to give audiences a compelling reason to go. That means dumping the old models, like superhero movies which consist of only special effects, fan service, and setting up the next film, and fully improvised "comedies." Taking the easy way out may give you cash up front, but it will cost you in the long run. The time when making movies consisted of checking off all your market bases is over.

Now that that's out of the way, let's get to the fun stuff: getting revenge on the 10 movies that were the most painful to sit through. I paid hard earned money and gave up about 12 hours of my life (give or take) to watch these monstrosities and got screwed in return. It's time to return the favor.

10. Logan Lucky. Like "Sleepless," which narrowly missed my list despite my prediction, this movie not only should have been great, it kind of had to be. Director: Steven Sodebergh. Cast: Channing Tatum, Adam Driver, Riley Keough, Katie Holmes, Daniel Craig, Sebastian Stan, Seth MacFarlane, Dwight Yoakam, Hilary Swank. A movie like that should be headed to the Oscars, not ending up in the discount DVD bin. The problem here is that Sodebergh doesn't know what he wants this movie to be: a heist movie or a parody of one. As a result, it's neither. Instead of a wacky, warped tale, it's a dreadful piece of garbage.

9. Rough Night. This is the first of many improvised, or what appears to be improvised, comedies on this list. But instead of starring stand-up comedians without a clue, it has the hottest female star in the world, Scarlett Johannson. What's she doing in this movie? Easily one of the smartest and most talented women working in the entertainment industry, what compelled her to sign on to this? Did she think it would be a way to get paid and have fun while doing so? A break from playing Black Widow? A way to broaden her appeal? Was the money too good to turn down? I don't know, but if I do meet her, I'll ask. Perhaps she was handed a funny, witty script before it was butchered by the screen mugging of her cast mates (specifically Jillian Bell, who manages to be more irritating here than in her other appearance on this list). Whatever the reason, the result is the same.

8. The House. Another improvised movie. Sense a recurring theme? The idea of two suburbanites forming an underground casino to pay for their daughter's college tuition is a little limiting, but it could be good with clever writing and acting. Unfortunately, it's another case of actors shooting their mouths off and mugging for the camera. My God, is this shit getting old. There's no thought or creative drive here. It's bottom of the barrel stuff in more ways than one. Thinking about it makes me wonder if I rated it too highly. Then again, compared to some of the other movies on this list, I suppose it's not that bad. That's not an endorsement in any way, shape or form. "The House" is a terrible movie.

7. Unforgettable. Take the first few letters off of this movie's title, and you'll get the idea of what this movie is like. It's a "stranger within" thriller (a genre of which I am very fond), but done without any intelligence, pacing or escalating tension. Part of the reason is that they cast has-been rom-com queen Katherine Heigl as the villain. Really? Compare her to what Jennifer Jason Leigh did in "Single White Female," and you'll have an idea of what was required for the role and how far Heigl missed the mark. Tessa is boring. Rosario Dawson gives it a game try, but there's no saving this trainwreck.

6. The Duelist. This movie fails because it's in the wrong genre. "The Duelist" is a black comedy that is under the mistaken belief that it's a serious and moving action movie. The problem is that it's impossible to take any of it seriously. It's just as impossible to sympathize with a bunch of bored, hypersensitive and self-absorbed aristocrats with a serious case of bloodlust as it is the drunk, brooding hero who thinks he's in a Martin Scorcese movie but really just wandered in out of some really bad "Twilight" fan fiction. The biggest mystery is why Columbia would have ponied up the dough to distribute this in the U.S. Is there an audience for Russian films about homicidal royalty that I'm unaware of?

5. Fist Fight. This movie was torture whose slim redemption comes from the fact that it did manage to land a few successful jokes. I recall one instance with a horse that got a big belly laugh from me. But that's a small concession for a movie born of arrogance, laziness, and yes, bad improv. But the real killer is that it rests on the shoulders of the incredibly irritating Charlie Day. I get that "It's Always Sunny in Philadelphia" is kind of a cult TV show (it doesn't do much for me personally), but that's a half-hour sitcom with commercials and "Horrible Bosses" was popular enough to make a sequel that no one saw. The idea this whiny loser could hold his own movie is absurd. No wonder Ice Cube looks so pissed off in this movie: he's stuck in a woeful would-be comedy with Charlie Day and the just as annoying Jillian Bell. After this movie, I hope he fired his agent.

4. The Little Hours. If this movie wasn't improvised from top to bottom, I'd be very surprised. It appears to have been shot on one take: actors are stiff, the shot selection is unsophisticated, and the timing is consistently off. Even respected funny actors like Molly Shannon and John C. Reilly are flat. It's not the idea of having a mute guy in a convent of horny, man-hating nuns that's the problem. It's that the screenplay is non-existent. When you have a riff on quiches in a sex comedy, you've got problems. If writer/director Jeff Baena actually gave his actors direction, it was to make them have a plot. Too bad it's one that would be too thin to sustain a skit on "SNL." This movie created a bit of controversy in the Catholic League when it was released. Normally I'd roll my eyes and groan since they bitch about any movie that doesn't play Catholic religious officials as anything but perfect, but in this case, it would be hard to blame them. If I was associated with this movie, even tangentially, I'd be pissed too.

3. War on Everyone. What's wrong with this comedy filled with up and coming stars? A better question would be what does it do right. The answer? Almost nothing. Everything about this movie is a complete disaster. The plot makes no sense. The acting is horrible. It's boring. It never wants to end. I suppose it's trying to be a black comedy/satire, but of what? The movie is so desperately trying to be hip and offbeat that becomes stupid and nonsensical. It's so bad that I couldn't tell whether they were trying to make jokes or not. You'd think a movie that stars talent like this would be good, but no. Everyone is buried alive in this movie. This movie is so pathetic that it name drops intellectuals and historical figures in an attempt to be quirky and smart. You know what? I'm not buying it. Unfortunately, I did buy a cheap Blu Ray copy of this movie, so I'm stuck with seeing a reminder of this piece of shit every time I go to my movie rack. Such is the life of a movie critic.

2. Annabelle: Creation. Admittedly, it's hard to walk into a movie that's a sequel to a mediocre spin-off of a popular movie with much enthusiasm. Still, I remained hopeful for at least a moderately interesting story or a few cheap thrills. Never in my darkest imagination did I think that it would be this atrocious. This movie sucked. Big time. It was saved from the #1 slot by some decent performances and one creepy scene. But boy oh boy was this movie boring! It moved with at a glacial pace with no dramatic tension whatsoever. It is slow to get started, slow to get going, and slow to end. A deliberate pace can be terrifying if done right, but director David F. Sandberg is definitely no Ti West. If slow-burn horror is your thing, check out "The Innkeepers." Leave this one to the dogs.

1. Split. Once upon a time, M. Night Shyamalan was the talk of Hollywood. With one hit after another, he was viewed as the next Spielberg. Then, he had a misfire. Then another. And another. Soon his career was in freefall, and with the two notorious duds "The Last Airbender" and "The Happening," the once first-class name had become a world-class joke. "Split" will not reverse that trend, despite the valiant attempts of James McAvoy to salvage this utterly hopeless movie. Or maybe it will, since it made enough money to earn a sequel that will tie into the cult hit "Unbreakable." Then again, that's not saying much, since "Neighbors 2" also made a profit. Believe it or not. You get what you pay for, I guess.

The Apostle

2017-12-28T00:59:00.003-08:00

1.5/4

Starring: Robert Duvall, John Beasley, Marie Richardson, Walton Goggins, Farrah Fawcett, June Carter Cash

Rated PG-13 for Thematic Elements and a Related Scene of Violence

For Robert Duvall, bringing "The Apostle" to the screen was a labor of love, if not an obsession. He wrote the screenplay, directed the film and, obviously, starred as the lead character. If that doesn't make plain enough his determination to put this story to film, he ended up funding the entire project (budgeted at $5 million) himself, although he was reimbursed by the distributors when it became a success. Unfortunately, Duvall doesn't find a way to successfully translate his passion into reality. The movie has some compelling characters and scenes of high energy, but overall it's a bore.

Sonny (Duvall) is an evangelist living in the Deep South. His love for God and gift for preaching has amassed him a sizable following of loyal parishioners. But his personal life is a mess. His wife Jessie (Fawcett) wants a divorce (presumably so she can marry her lover). Adding insult to injury, she takes away his church (how this happens isn't made clear). Tempers flare and Sonny commits an unforgivable sin. Fearing the consequences, he flees and burns all records of his past. Following God, he settles down in small-town Louisiana, where he eventually finds another church and starts to rebuild. But Sonny realizes that he can only run from his past for so long before it catches up with him.

The central problem with the film is easy to identify: Sonny is not an interesting character. For a character study, Duvall has given him surprisingly little depth. He's a charismatic preacher, but that's it. There's nothing to him other than that. I understand that his devotion to God is absolute and all-consuming, but other aspects of his personality have to be fleshed out in order for him to be a fully realized individual. As a result, Sonny is the least interesting character on screen.

Duvall gives it his all, but he's done himself a great disservice with this thin screenplay. Much more interesting are the other characters he meets on his journey to redemption. John Beasley, a character actor of some note, is in fine form as a kindly ex-preacher who gives him his old church. Marie Richardson is a scene stealer as a secretary that Sonny pursues, although her subplot is not tied up in a satisfactory way. Walton Goggins, Farrah Fawcett, and a barely recognizable Billy Bob Thornton have small roles. Country singer June Carter Cash has a cameo as Sonny's mother.

Behind the camera, Duvall doesn't have much better luck. For such a subtle movie, it sure seems to be all about the excess. Whether it's Sonny talking to God or preaching, he rarely shuts up. Even when he's away from the pulpit, he's still in preacher mode. This makes him one-dimensional and boring. His sermons have a certain amount of energy, but the run on far longer than needed to make their point. There's also a subplot with Thornton, who plays a bitter racist, that's awkwardly handled. And there's virtually no real plot.

"The Apostle" has some nice moments (such as Duvall's scenes with Richardson) and while it's a religious movie where people insert Bible verses into conversation, it's at least done with context, unlike many of today's Christian films (yes, I'm talking to you, creators of the "God's Not Dead" movies). But it's just not worth the slog that compromises the majority of the film to get to the mildly good stuff.

Father Figures

2017-12-26T20:42:00.002-08:00

1.5/4

Starring: Ed Helms, Owen Wilson, Glenn Close, Terry Bradshaw, J.K. Simmons, Christopher Walken, Harry Shearer

Rated R for Language and Sexual References Throughout

"Father Figures" is a one-joke movie, and it's a joke that sounds better in concept than it plays out on the big screen. I mean, repeated riffs on a quest for two losers trying to find their birth father can make a great trailer, but it would take much more talent and invention than newbie director Lawrence Sher or screenwriter Justin Malen have to keep things fresh for 90 minutes. There are a few cheap laughs and some of the sentimental scenes work, but beyond that is a lifeless comedy that is more calculated than creative.

Tightly wound cynic Peter (Helms) is on his way back to Ohio to celebrate his mother Helen's (Close) wedding to a Barry Madoff look-alike named Gene (Shearer). Also at the wedding is Kyle (Wilson), his charismatic layabout of a brother who has had everything come easy (he made a fortune by pure luck when he was randomly asked to model on a bottle of barbeque sauce). While there, Helen drops a bombshell that the long-dead man they thought was their father wasn't (either he was someone else or a fantasy...the movie never makes this clear). Thus begins their search to find their real father.

"Father Figures" is a movie where marketing considerations took precedence over creative ones every step of the way. That the script was sold 36 hours after it was pitched doesn't surprise me. It's the kind of story that studios love: potential for lots of big stars and locations, a high concept that is easy to tell in a single sentence, two leads who are polar opposites, and most importantly, it fills two of the four key marketing quadrants (young/old and male/female). The problem is that all thought went into covering all the bases to make it sell, while apparently, no one cared to check and see if the script was any good. It's not. Everything in this movie is so calculated and safe that there's precious little that we haven't seen in other, better movies.

Ed Helms and Owen Wilson can be funny actors (at least Wilson can when he's not working with his good buddy Wes Anderson). So the only reason I can imagine drew them to something this insipid the paycheck. Neither one is stretching their range, and more importantly, they're not trying. Both are coasting through on their reputations and charisma. And is Glenn Close so hard up for work that she has to appear in something this awful to stave off boredom (and replenish her bank account)? Granted, there is a certain amount of humor to be had listening to her toss off some f-bombs and have people talk about her saucy reputation 40 years ago, but it gets old fast. Her male co-stars appear on screen long enough to get paid and do what they do best. Terry Bradshaw plays Terry Bradshaw, J.K. Simmons acts like a borderline nutcase, and Christopher Walken has to act weird. "Daring" will not be a word that anyone uses to describe this movie. Or any part of it.

Ultimately, "Father Figures" is good for a few cheap laughs and that's it. Well, not entirely. Glenn Close has a scene at the end that is actually moving, until you realize that it's just that Glenn Close can do anything and that scene makes the entire movie totally pointless. It won't end up on my Bottom Ten list at the end of the year, but I recommend you give this one a wide berth.

Jumanji: Welcome to the Jungle

2017-12-23T21:08:00.001-08:00

3.5/4

Starring: Dwayne Johnson, Karen Gillan, Kevin Hart, Jack Black, Nick Jonas, Bobby Cannevale, Alex Wolff, Morgan Turner, Ser'Darius Blain, Madison Iseman

Rated PG-13 for Adventure Action, Suggestive Content and Some Language

Oh God...another sequel/reboot/reimagining/whatever they're calling it now of a hit from 20 years ago with a brand name and a significant uptick in action and special effects to appeal to the world audience and what not. That's what I was thinking, so it was not a movie I was eager to see. However, I do occasionally get surprised on this job when a movie turns out to be better than I expected. This is one of those occasions.

For various reasons, Spencer (Wolff), Fridge (Blain), Bethany (Iseman) and Martha (Turner) have found themselves in detention tearing out staples in magazines so they can be recycled. There, they find a mysterious game console with a game titled "Jumanji" in it. Bored, they all decide to play it. The trouble starts when they get sucked into the game and get turned into the characters they're playing as. So nerdy Spencer becomes a burly adventurer (Johnson), shy Martha becomes a sex bomb who could give Lara Croft a run for her money (Gillan), and giant football player Fridge shrinks to play a tiny sidekick. Poor Bethany fares the worst: the, like, totally vain popular girl becomes a pudgy scientist (Black). They have to find a way to make it to the end of the game before they get trapped in it forever. Or worse, die permanently.

"Jumanj: Welcome to the Jungle" is one long rip into 90's era video games. If there's a trope from games like "Tomb Raider" that the movie doesn't skewer, I must have been laughing too hard to notice. Multiple lives, character stats and the like are used and lampooned in clever, and hilarious, ways. It also has a lot of fun with the body switching aspect of it, with the stars playing their "real" personalities. This leads to some uproarious scenes such as The Rock being shy around girls or Jack Black giving tips on seduction to Karen Gillan. Black is front and center for the film's most outrageous bits involving penis envy that are funny enough to be worth the price of admission alone. The male anatomy hasn't made me laugh this hard since "Scouts Guide to the Zombie Apocalypse."

What makes this film work is that no one is phoning it in. Everyone from the screenwriters to the actors is giving it their all. The actors, in particular, are worth praising since all the big stars are willing to sacrifice all semblance of dignity to play world class goofballs. In addition to keeping the audience in stitches, it adds a bit of sweetness to the film as well. In addition to being a laugh riot, it's likable too.

The only elements that don't hold up are the action scenes and the villain. The gunfights and stunts are rather pedestrian, although there is a scene with a helicopter that reminded me of the bridge scene in "Speed" (I'm dead serious). The villain is also lacking. Bobby Cannevale chews the scenery with gusto and certainly isn't above looking like a complete doofus, but he's miscast. If Jason Isaacs parodied his Lucius Malfoy character, it would have worked. As it is, his few scenes fall flat.

Columbia is apparently making the same mistake that Warner Bros. made with "In the Heart of the Sea." They're releasing it in tandem with "Star Wars: The Last Jedi." I'm seeing it on Christmas Day with my family (hence the lack of review), but this "Jumanji" is worth seeking out on its own terms. I had a ball with this movie.

Internal Affairs

2017-12-22T00:35:00.000-08:00

2/4

Starring: Andy Garcia, Richard Gere, Laurie Metcalf, Nancy Travis, William Baldwin, Michael Beach

Rated R for Strong Sexuality, Nudity, Language and Some Violence

"Internal Affairs" has a promising idea at its core: a psychological mano-a-mano between a corrupt cop and the Internal Affairs officer intent on bringing him down. What's interesting about this movie is that this is about the mind games they play with each other. Or more specifically, the corrupt cop plays on the man tailing him. The line between predator and prey quickly becomes blurred.

Raymond Avila (Garcia) has just started his job at Internal Affairs at the LAPD. His first assignment is to investigate a beat cop named Van Stretch (Baldwin), whom Avila knows from the police academy. Stretch is your typical nightmare cop: he's a cokehead with a habit of excessive force and beating up his girlfriend. But just as he and his partner Amy Wallace (Metcalf) make headway, Avila soon realizes that the real bad guy is Stretch's partner, Dennis Peck (Gere). But getting him off the streets won't be easy. Peck has a flawless reputation and the respect of everyone at the precinct. But Avila doggedly pursues him, which Peck will make him regret in the most painful ways possible.

It goes without saying that this is all about Garcia and Gere. The tension between the two is palpable, perhaps because the actors hated working with each other on set. As characters, they're evenly matched: Avila is an incorruptible man on and off duty while Peck is a pure psychopath. The problem is that this doesn't translate well on film. The screenplay doesn't flesh out the characters well enough for this to work, the editing is shoddy and one of the lead performers isn't able to deliver what is required of him.

Gere is surprisingly good. Known primarily as a pretty boy in romantic comedies during the 90's, Gere can actually act, and he's quite effective as a conscienceless monster. Peck is only looking out for himself and will manipulate anyone to make sure he gets away with whatever unsavory activity he is involved in. His co-star is less impressive. By design, Avila is less colorful and more low-key since he's a stand-in for the audience. But Garcia brings so little to the role that he blends into the background. The actor doesn't have great range, and putting him up against a stronger performer like Gere is a mistake. Had his role been switched with Laurie Metcalf, who is quite good as his partner, the film would have been on firmer ground. The rest of the cast, which includes William Baldwin (also cast against type), Nancy Travis, and Michael Beach.

I suspect that the screenplay was unfinished. The set-up is effective, if uninspired, but the longer it goes on, the less sense it makes. The mental jousting between Avila and Peck is not effectively realized; because their characters are so flat, we can see their moves and motivations. Compounding the error is the editing, which is so bad that the film has become completely incoherent by the 90-minute mark. The ending, which should have crackled with tension, is lifeless.

People frequently ask why all the good movies are remade rather than the bad ones. Sure, there are movies that were never going to be any good ("Neighbors 2" and "Belly" come to mind). But there are those like "Internal Affairs" that have a lot of potential and with the right treatment it could be a real winner. The pieces are there.

War on Everyone

2017-12-19T00:34:00.000-08:00

1/4

Starring: Michael Pena, Alexander Skarsgaard, Tessa Thompson, Theo James, Caleb Landry Jones, Paul Reiser, David Wilmot, Malcolm Barrett

Rated R for Violence, Sexuality/Nudity, Drug Use and Pervasive Language

"War on Everyone" is bad in ways few movies are. In addition to being tedious and unfunny, its attempts at being quirky and offbeat just make it surreal. That doesn't make the film any better, but there you have it. It's like bad Quentin Tarantino mixed with bad David Lynch. Oh, and it's also pretentious and nonsensical, too. The movie is nothing but inclusive when it comes to adjectives that describe its poor quality.

This movie has virtually no plot. It's a dead zone. If you are paying attention (and don't cause your brain to spontaneously combust in the process), there's something about two gleefully corrupt cops named Terry Monroe (Skarsgaard) and Bob Bolano (Pena) investigating a robbery involving a British businessman named Lord James Mangan (James), his androgynous right-hand man/woman Russell Birdwell (Jones), a sexpot named Jackie Hollis (Thompson) whose involvement is never made clear, and a pair of snitches (Wilmot and Barrett).

If anyone unfortunate enough to sit through this utter failure of a black comedy understood more about the plot than this, I extend my heartiest congratulations. Either you "got" what director John Michael McDonagh was going for, or you're lying and saying you did to get some intellectual cred. Since everyone knows how much I despise such wannabe cineastes and bash them every chance I can get in my reviews, my guess is that such people don't read anything I write which leaves only option number one.

The film boasts a strong cast of character actors and rising stars, but I would suggest to them that they leave this title off their resumes. They certainly don't have anything to be proud of in this movie. Michael Pena appears to be doing a Wes Anderson version of Seth Rogen, which is all that needs to be said. Alexander Skarsgaard looks like a deer caught in the headlights. Tessa Thompson brings the same kind of worldliness that makes Lisa Bonet so interesting, but she has nothing to do. Theo James is uneven. And Caleb Landry Jones wins hands down the competition for the most irritating performance of 2017.

There's a lot of dialogue in this movie and a bit of slapstick and gratuitous violence for good measure. They make passes for quirky and funny, but it doesn't succeed as either. Okay, so there are a handful of clever one-liners,l and I did like the opening scene with a drug-dealing mime, but all told there are about two minutes of decent material in this movie, and it's 100 minutes long. That leaves 88 minutes of utter boredom.

McDonagh tries to be hip and smart by having a running gag (a term I use with purpose) revolving around famous quotes by famous people and other "philosophical" conversations, but rather than being funny or illuminating, they're pretentious and pathetic. Name dropping Simone de Beauvoir and Aeneas doesn't make the movie any smarter. Just desperate to appeal to the arthouse crowd in a movie that shouldn't have bothered.

So "War on Everyone" is stupid, pretentious, badly acted and boring. I forgot to mention that it's also almost completely incoherent and totally pointless. I think that covers it.

Solace

2017-12-14T12:25:00.000-08:00

2/4

Starring: Anthony Hopkins, Jeffrey Dean Morgan, Abbie Cornish, Colin Farrell

Rated R for Violence and Bloody Images Throughout, Sexuality, Nudity and Language

When it comes to "Solace," I'll give credit where credit is due: it seeks to be more than just your average run-of-the-mill serial killer movie. It has a few ideas that put it above the pack. The problem is that it uses an underwritten screenplay, flat performances and directorial flourishes that give new meaning to the term "self-indulgent" to explore them.

FBI agent Joe Merriwether (Morgan) and his partner Katherine Cowles (Cornish) are on the trail of a brutal serial killer. With no evidence and no leads, Joe is forced to enlist the help of his old friend, John Clancy (Hopkins), a psychic. Unlike Theresa Capruto or any other snake oil peddler, John doesn't just practice cold reading: he really is psychic. The three of them must team up to stop the killer.

Taking the use of psychic abilities in a police procedural is a neat idea, but there's a catch. In order for it to work, there has to be a set of rules of what the psychic can or can't do. Otherwise, the psychic can do his trick and immediately solve everything. In other words, it will make up everything as it goes along. Putting obstacles in his path, as "Solace" does, is like evading the question while still keeping the ability to use it as a crutch. This results in a distinct lack of tension in the film. To be fair, this movie was never going to be the second coming of "Seven," even though it was written as a sequel to that classic. But a decent yarn wouldn't have been out of the question.

Another strike against it is the quality of the performances. Or more specifically, the lack thereof. The four actors with any significant screen time have considerable talent, but you wouldn't know it from this movie. Anthony Hopkins is phoning it in; it's obvious that he's there simply to replenish his bank account. That said, his charisma keeps things from getting dull. Jeffrey Dean Morgan is flat to the point where he blends in with the beige wallpaper. Only during his last scene do we gain any measure of sympathy for Joe. Abbie Cornish is miscast; the Aussie beauty is usually such a delight to watch, but she is clearly not cut out for the role of a tough-as-nails cop. The only bright spot is Colin Farrell as the killer, but he's only on screen for the final 20 minutes. He's consistently on his game and captures the complexities of his character.

Director Afonso Poyart approaches this material as a mixture of David Fincher and Tarsem. Unfortunately, he has neither of their talents. Or restraint. To get us inside John's head, he uses a lot of surreal (and bloody) images and visual gimmicks. But there's rarely a reason for doing so, and it quickly becomes annoying rather than interesting. Had he used them less and with more purpose, it might have worked better.

"Solace" isn't a bad movie. I did not get irritated at the people who made it and mad at myself for wasting a couple bucks buying it on Blu Ray. But I don't reccomend it.

Fair Game (2010)

2017-12-13T00:36:00.001-08:00

3/4

Starring: Naomi Watts, Sean Penn, David Andrews, Michael Kelly, Noah Emmerich, Bruce McGill, Sam Shepard, Liraz Charhi

Rated PG-13 for Some Language

Not to be confused with the 1995 film starring William Baldwin and Cindy Crawford

At least in general terms, everyone knows the story of the Valerie Plame affair. It goes like this: the Bush administration wanted a war with Iraq and tried to find evidence to justify it. When they couldn't find any, they made it up and we went to war. Ex-Ambassador Joe Wilson called them out on it, and to discredit him (and perhaps for revenge), Chief of Staff to then-VP Dick Cheney leaked the information that his wife Valerie Plame was an undercover spy. That's when all hell broke loose.

Like many biopics of famous events or people, "Fair Game" seeks to tell the story behind the story. In other words, fill us in on the juicy details that weren't available in the papers or from talk show pundits. On that level, "Fair Game" is a success. I admit that I wasn't exactly tuned in as the story unfolded (in my defense, I was still in high school, so most of my energy was focused on homework and getting into college). But Doug Liman's film tells exactly what happened to Joe and Valerie Plame, what they knew, and what they did.

Valerie Plame (Watts) seems like a normal person. She's a devoted wife and mother, a hard worker and socially vivacious. For all anyone knows, she could be just another soccer mom down the street. But what her friends at her dinner parties don't know is that she is a CIA spy, one who has operations going on all over the world. Her boss (Emmerich) alerts her that Iraq is acquiring aluminum tubes to create centrifuges used to make nuclear weapons. She's sent in to find out if that's true, and how close Saddam Hussein is to creating WMDs. He also tells her that Iraq has bought 500 tons of yellowcake uranium, and asks her if she can get her husband Joe Wilson (Penn) to verify if the claims are true. Both of them discover that the rumors are false, but to their horror, the Bush administration nevertheless claims that they are true. When war breaks out, Joe writes his now-infamous column, and life changes radically for the both of them. Valerie is disavowed by the CIA and hung out to dry, Joe loses clients, both of them are hounded by journalists and death threats, and both of them are humiliated constantly on the news. Joe wants to fight back but Valerie just wants it to go away. But how far can they go without losing everything?

This movie has the drive of newspaper drama like "Spotlight" and a spy thriller from John le Carre. I mention le Carre for a reason. His stories are densely plotted and filled with double-talk where the dialogue and motives of the characters are rarely what they seem. "Fair Game" is like that; this is not a movie where you can turn off your brain. It demands absolute concentration. In fact, it's so compressed that a little more breathing room would have made the film longer. I admit to getting confused a few times during this movie.

Is this movie political? Certainly. How could it not be? It was based on the books by Plame and Wilson and paints the Bush administration as deceptive and vindictive warmongerers. Used as a stand-in for the entire team is Scooter Libby, who is played by David Andrews with such oiliness that you want to smash his face in. Preferably with a sledgehammer. So yeah, devout Bush supporters (are there still such people?) probably won't like this movie.

But that's irrelevant. The real question is how does "Fair Game" fare as a movie? Quite well, in fact. It's by no means perfect; all the double-talk and legalese can get confusing, although it's unlikely that those who are paying attention will get lost for more than a moment or two. The first half of the film is both fascinating and disturbing. It also moves at a quick enough pace that the suspense level remains high. However, once Joe publishes the article and faces the music, the movie shifts gears and focuses on the domestic troubles between Joe and Valerie. While realities of having a spy for a wife are intriguing and it's understandable that all the attention would put a strain on their marriage, the film lingers too much on this material. Director Doug Liman's focus in the first half of the film was so hyperfocused on the plot that there was no room for character development. As a result, this material gets old. And just when it's resolved with a decent scene featuring an unbilled Sam Shepard as Valerie's father, it starts to build up to something really interesting. Unfortunately, that's when Liman chooses to end the film, with just a few bits of text detailing the aftermath and showing footage of the real Valerie's testimony. It feels like a rip-off. There's also the subplot of a doctor (Charhi) who becomes a spy for Valerie that isn't resolved in a satisfactory way.

Is it worth seeing, nearly twenty years after these events took place? I think so. The story is fascinating, and it's well told by Doug Liman. And one can always count on Naomi Watts and Sean Penn to turn in compelling performances. Neither role is especially difficult or flashy, but they work hard to create a believable, if complicated, marriage between two intelligent people. If nothing else, it highlights the importance of seeking the truth even when it hurts. And it shows how two people with a lot of guts changed the world.

Just Getting Started

2017-12-10T20:46:00.002-08:00

1.5/4

Starring: Morgan Freeman, Tommy Lee Jones, Rene Russo, Joe Pantoliano, Jane Seymour

Rated PG-13 for Language, Suggestive Material and Brief Violence

"Just Getting Started" is one of the most inane, brain-dead comedies of the year. There were worse comedies to come out this year ("These Little Hours" comes to mind), but they actually inflamed me with passion. This stinker is simply dull. I wish I had fallen asleep.

Duke (Freeman) is a freewheeling charmer who runs a senior community in Arizona. He's the boss but acts like one of the residents. Which is to say, he gets drunk, sleeps around, and generally acts like he's on Spring Break for senior citizens. One day, Leo (Jones) comes to town and soon he's wooing the attention of the girls, especially Suzie (Russo), who is making sure that Duke is doing his job. Soon its a turf war between Duke and Leo, with Suzie as the prize. But there's something in Duke's past that neither Suzie or Leo are aware of, and his demons are coming back to haunt him.

Watching this movie, a question kept running through my head: who was this movie made for? I mean, who wants to watch a bunch of old people who are constantly drunk and randier than a character from a Judd Apatow movie? Not many, I guess, but I think Ron Shelton, the god of sports movies, is targeting older, more conservative viewers. That's fine, but he plays it so safe that the only way someone could possibly laugh in this movie is if they're stuck in a time warp where "I Love Lucy" is cutting edge.

I was also wondering what drew Freeman, Jones, and Russo to the script. These are three smart and talented actors, but anyone could, and should, have seen that this script could only be a disaster. My guess is that they didn't bother reading it because the money was too good to turn down. I get that actors need to eat, but really? They couldn't have made better use of their talents than appear in this crapfest? It's not like they're trying. Rene Russo is phoning it in, Tommy Lee Jones looks like he's there under the threat of death (he's constantly wearing a similar expression to Tom Skerrit in his cameo in "Ted"). Only Morgan Freeman is consistently successful as the charmer, but he's so talented that he would make an effort to be bad, as he apparently did in "Dreamcatcher."

Ron Shelton has made some good movies in the past, like "Tin Cup" and the intriguing misfire "Cobb." Maybe the reason Jones and Russo signed on is that they had good experiences in the past working with him. Regardless, lightning doesn't strike twice here. This movie is a complete bore. AndEven worse, it never wants to end. Rarely has 90 minutes ever seemed so long.

This is a movie that no one wanted to see and no one could make a quality movie out of. Just stay away from it!

Ran

2017-12-07T22:23:00.001-08:00

2.5/4

Starring: Tatsuya Nakadai, Akira Terao, Jinpachi Nezu, Daisuke Ryu, Mieko Harada, Pita

Rated R (probably for Graphic Violence)

There comes a time in everyone's life where they have to decide whether to be safe and go with popular opinion or open yourself to criticism by going against the grain. For a film critic, it's difficult to be honest when you didn't like a movie that is universally considered a classic. I mean, would anyone take me seriously if I said that "Casablanca" is an overblown bore? It's not, but you get my point. Such is the case with "Ran." Directed by the legendary Japanese filmmaker Akira Kurosawa, it's a beloved war epic. While there are parts of the film that are excellent, bordering on brilliant, the film as a whole isn't all that its reputation suggests.

Lord Hidetora (Nakadai) is growing older. Sensing that his time in this earthly realm is drawing to a close (his energy and vitality are decreasing, and his memory is not the best), he decides to split his kingdom between his three sons: Taro (Terao), Jiro (Nezu), and Saburo (Ryu). Hidetora will be ruler in name only, but his power will go to his oldest son Taro, and each son will get a castle. When his youngest son, Saburo, points out the folly in this decision, Hidetora is insulted and banishes him. Saburo's warning proves to be prescient, as both Taro and Jiro vie for complete control of the land. Meanwhile, Hidetora is cast out by both of his older sons and with nowhere else to go, begins to lose his mind.

Although this has similarities to William Shakespeare's tragedy "King Lear," it's not a strict retelling. Kurosawa drew on old Japanese myths and historical figures, and the story grew into a similar story. This isn't the first time that Kurosawa used the Bard as the basis for a film; "Throne of Blood" is a retelling of "Macbeth." However, there are elements of that play that found their way into this film.

In general, "Ran" has two modes: thrilling and tedious. The first descriptor refers to the visuals and the battle scenes. This movie looks incredible. It's awash in vibrant colors, complex choreography, and brilliantly composed shots. Shockingly, Kurosawa's vision had almost completely deteriorated by the time the film was made. He was only able to frame his shots with the help of his assistants, who used his storyboards to compose them. Although this was the director's last epic, it wasn't his last film. He continued making movies until 1993, five years before his death. You gotta hand it to him for his skill and dedication; his wife tragically died during filming as well (he halted filming for a day to mourn, then continued on).

The latter refers to the plot. It's not the material that's boring; epic tragedies make for great filmmaking if done right. But Kurosawa so strenuously avoids any manipulation that it's hard to become invested in what's going on. Many older films, particularly artistically-inclined ones, are emotionally sterile; as if they are considered "less than" if they are easily accessible and emotionally manipulative (which is, of course, completely ludicrous). That stereotype applies here. The characters are finely acted but contain little depth. In fact, there are times when they seem to be acting on a stage, which takes us out of the moment.

The performances are solid, with a few standouts. Tatsuya Nakadai is excellent as the mentally decaying lord. At the outset, Hidetora seems a little befuddled, but still sound of mind. But the tragedies he endures push him into madness. Nakadai doesn't miss a beat. Although Hidetora is elderly, Nakadai was actually in his early fifties when the film was made. Kudos to the make-up department for their successful transformation. The most stunning performance is given by Mieko Harada, who portrays Taro's wife, Lady Kaede. She seems like the stereotype of the feudal Japanese woman (demure, delicate and soft-spoken), but she's a master manipulator and politically ruthless. Only at the end do we discover her true motives. "Vicious" doesn't begin to describe her. The only character that doesn't work is Pita, who plays Kyoami the fool. Rather than being the comic relief, he's simply irritating.

Is "Ran" worth seeing? That's a good question. It is considered a classic, so if you do see it, you will be taken seriously by cinephiles and film historians. On a technical level, it is a marvel. It is masterfully constructed and visually sumptuous. But boy, does it take a lot of effort to get through it.

Three Billboards Outside Ebbing, Missouri

2017-12-03T21:17:00.001-08:00

3/4

Starring: Frances McDormand, Woody Harrelson, Sam Rockwell, Lucas Hedges, Abbie Cornish, Caleb Landry Jones, John Hawkes, Peter Dinklage

Rated R for Violence, Language Throughout, and Some Sexual References

Perhaps the best word to describe Martin McDonagh's new film, which has the unwieldy title "Three Billboards Outside Ebbing, Missouri," is ambitious. This film attempts to: create a dozen or so multi-dimensional characters with their own strengths and weaknesses, solve a brutal murder, show a few romances, two mother-son relationships, straddle the line between comedy and tragedy, and teach a lesson about those left behind after death. It's a lot to do, especially considering the fact that the running time clocks in at a hair under two hours. While imperfect, McDonagh does achieve a lot of his aims.

Mildred Hayes (McDormand) is frustrated. Her daughter was raped and murdered, and her body was set on fire. Almost a year later, no arrests have been made. Mildred has had enough, so she rents out three billboards that call out Police Chief William Willoughby (Harrelson) for his inability to catch the killer. While the town is sympathetic to her plight, they are not pleased that she is sullying a good man's name. And Willoughby is a good man. He's a dutiful officer (with his own off-kilter style), a devoted father and a loving husband. And he understands Mildred's frustration and while hurt by the billboards, he's not angry at her. That's not the case with Jason Dixon (Rockwell), Willoughby's underling. Dixon is a nasty piece of work; he's an idiot and an all-around jerk. He intends to get the billboards down any way he can, violently if necessary.

The movie is far more interesting than I've made it out to be, I promise. That's because it's less about a civic dispute than the people surrounding it. McDonagh has created an array of interesting people, but he puts them in a story with very little narrative drive. The story, what one there actually is, seems to be stuck in neutral. And while the cast is talented and gives it their all, there are times when they come close to feeling like writer's constructs than actual people. The chasms between their good and bad sides are so dichotomous and ironic that it feels as McDonagh was calculating how to give them dramatic depth.

Fortunately, he has brought a stellar cast to bring them to life. No one could have played the role of Mildred except for Frances McDormand. It's the kind of feisty yet plucky gal that she plays so well. She switches from profanity-laced insults to tears in the blink of an eye, and never misses a beat. Just as good is Woody Harrelson. Initially, I feared that he would play another "blunt guy who is too macho to express himself" character that he done far too many times, but that fear was laid to rest before his first scene ended. Quite the contrary, Willoughby is warm and sympathetic. I wish he had more scenes. The strongest performance comes from the quirky Sam Rockwell, whose star has been on the rise for some time now, and will hopefully get the recognition he deserves. It isn't as transcendent as his performance in "The Way Way Back," but hopefully the Academy will realize their previous mistake and give him a long-deserved Oscar nomination. Able support is provided by a cast of talented character actors.

Many have pointed out similarities between "Three Billboards Outside Ebbing, Missouri" and "Fargo." Strange as it sounds, it's an apt one. And not just because both star Frances McDormand. Both films veer between comedy and tragedy, have crime plots, and look at their characters as people inhabiting their slice of the world rather than pawns in a screenplay. However, when compared together, "Fargo" comes out ahead, and by quite a bit. McDonagh attempts a lot of what the Coens did in 1996, but he doesn't have their talent. When they mixed all these elements together, they struck gold. McDonagh isn't as successful. All the elements are there and to a degree McDonagh pulls them together. It's just that they don't gel all that well.

It is perhaps ironic that an Englishman made a movie set in America's heartland. But McDonagh knows what he's doing. He's a gifted writer and director of actors. He's also willing to take risks, even if they don't pay off. His first full-length film, "In Bruges," was an interesting film that was marketed as a twisted black comedy when it really wasn't. "Seven Psychopaths" was an ambitious misfire (if memory serves, I thought it was awful). Here, he's honed in his talents and made a film that, while not perfect, is worth seeing.

There's a lot of good stuff here and it's made by a man who knows what he's doing. It's just that a lot of it has been done better before.

Legend (2015)

2017-11-30T01:03:00.001-08:00

3/4

Starring: Tom Hardy, Emily Browning, David Thewlis, Christopher Eccelston

Rated R for Strong Violence, Language Throughout, Some Sexual and Drug Material

With "Legend," it isn't a case of having a dearth of material. Quite the opposite, in fact. This movie is jam-packed with intriguing characters, plot elements, and violence. It's just that Brian Helgeland doesn't know what to do with them all. "Legend" has a lot of stuff going on, but no real drive. Despite all this, it's never boring.

Twin brothers Reggie (Hardy) and Ronnie Kray (Hardy) have it all: they're rich, connected, and well-liked. Nightclub owners in London's West End, the pair is famous for hanging out with the rich and famous, and for their spread into other areas of London. But there is a darker undercurrent to their public personas, much more than the "bad boy" image that gets them a lot of fame and fortune. They're vicious gangsters, and while Reggie is well-adjusted, Ronnie is a psychotic loose cannon. This movie details their rise and fall during the 1960's.

Whatever problems the film may have, they're not with the performances. Tom Hardy can almost always be counted on to give a terrific performance. In the dual role of the shrewd Reggie and schizophrenic Ronnie, he's at the top of his game. Both have their share of moments of volcanic energy and subdued introspection, but the true genius in his performance is that Reggie and Ronnie seem like two totally different people. This is Oscar-worthy acting in an adequate movie.

The supporting cast is fine, but they struggle to carve out their own niche, as it were, in the morass of all that's going on. Emily Browning, having grown up quite a bit since her performance in "Ghost Ship," is very good as Frances, Reggie's wife. She loves him, but wants him to go straight. It's a promise he makes to her, but partly because of Ronnie's instability, one that he can't keep. David Thewlis is underused as a fellow club owner/mentor for the Krays, as is Christopher Eccelston, who plays the cop determined to bring the brothers down. Small appearances by Taron Edgerton as one of Ronnie's boy toys, Chazz Palminteri as an American gangster, and an uncredited Paul Bettany as a rival.

The problem with the film is that it lacks focus. The film's plot is all over the place, which while always engaging, has the result of the film never following through on any of its ideas. Characters remain sketchily developed, certain plot elements (such as Eccelston's cop) are barely explored, or are introduced and never brought up again. A tighter focus would have lent the film a lot more energy and purpose.

I have no qualms about recommending this movie. It's a little too long and definitely a mess, but at least it's an interesting mess.

West of Memphis

2017-11-27T00:34:00.001-08:00

3.5/4

Rated R for Disturbing Violent Content and Some Language

The case of the West Memphis Three is one of the worst miscarriages of justice in history. Anyone who knows what happened to them is certain that that statement is not a mere opinion. It is fact. Three teenage boys were convicted of savagely murdering three eight-year-old boys despite the fact that the evidence pointed to the fact that none of them had anything to do with it. Religious zeal, felonious police and prosecutorial misconduct, and the need for closure sent Damien Echols, Jason Baldwin, and Jessie Misskelley to prison for eighteen years simply for being easy scapegoats.

I wish I could tell you that this was the work of a great screenwriter, but alas, I cannot. This is absolutely true. It's an event so shameful that the Founding Fathers were surely turning in their graves for the better part of two decades. Fortunately, a few people with pluck and determination started to dig into the story and uncovered a web of secrets, corruption, and ass-covering and turned their story into an international cry for justice. It even caught the attention of celebrity supporters ranging from Pearl Jam singer Eddie Vedder to Johnny Depp.

"West of Memphis" sets out to do two things, which considering the scope and complexity of the case, is definitely ambitious. First, it tells the story of the WM3 and why and how they were wrongly convicted. Second, it seeks to come up with its own theory on who the real murderer is. This movie has all the elements of a great mystery, a legal thriller, and a muckraking social document. John Grisham couldn't think this stuff up.

One thing that really helps magnify this film's impact is that director Amy Berg is absolutely fearless. Berg has built a career on ripping open the most heinous cases of injustice and showing them for the world to see. She was nominated for an Oscar for her documentary "Deliver Us from Evil," about sexual abuse in the Catholic Church, and did a documentary on Warren Jeffs, the notorious LDS cult leader. She also did a documentary on sexual abuse in Hollywood, years before the Harvey Weinstein scandal unleashed a flood of victims and perpetrators. Berg doesn't hold back: she names names, shows grisly crime scene photos, turns the screws on the wicked and attacks her targets with both guns blazing. But she's also a gifted filmmaker. The first 45 minutes or so is a little sloppy on the editing front, but this is riveting filmmaking.

Berg divides her film into sections (not always elegantly) based on topic. What happened to the boys, why the trial was a complete insult to our justice system, how the case gripped the whole world, who did kill the boys, and how they were set free. Her research is exhaustive and clearly communicated; when she opens fire on her targets, she's not being a rabble-rouser. She's like a journalist with the tenacity of a Rottweiler. There's a lot to process here and a lot of people who were responsible for what happened to the WM3. But Berg never loses us and rarely confuses us.

"West of Memphis" is a wild ride; it will make you feel angry, sad, shocked, and strangely happy. It isn't the first documentary about this notorious case (Joe Berlinger and Bruce Sinofsky made a trio of them back when it was all unfolding), but it has the beauty of hindsight. I'm recommending this movie primarily because it's a fantastic movie, but also because it's a warning as to what can happen when we allow fear and zeal to override truth and common sense.

Coco

2017-11-25T17:12:00.001-08:00

4/4

Starring (voices): Anthony Gonzalez, Gael Garcia Bernal, Benjamin Bratt, Alanna Ubach

Rated PG for Thematic Elements

Pixar Animation has been in a bit of a slump lately. Their last great movie was "Brave," although I realize that many people liked "Inside Out"a lot more than I did. Lately, they've been putting out sequels with little inspiration (plus the misfire, "The Good Dinosaur"). That may make executives and shareholders happy, but Pixar has always been at its best when its blazing new trails and trying new things. Only when they're telling a story that they actually care about do they shine. While none of their recent films was awful, the team's heart wasn't in them. That's changed with their new film "Coco," which is easily their best film since "Brave."

Miguel (Gonzalez) is a young boy with the heart of a musician. Unfortunately, his family frowns on music, as his great grandmother Imelda (Ubach) was abandoned by her husband, who chose a life as rock star. Undaunted, he decides to steal the guitar of his great grandfather, who was the famous musician Ernesto de la Cruz (Bratt). That causes him to enter the Land of the Dead, where he is reunited with his deceased relatives, including Imelda. She is happy to help him get home, but on the condition that he gives up music. Miguel refuses, and with the help of a man named Hector (Bernal), one of the dead who is also desperate to get to the land of the living, he sets out to find Ernesto, who will allow him to go home and give him his blessing to be a musician.

"Coco" is pure Pixar, but good Pixar is virtually impossible to turn down. The lovable characters, the positive themes of family, friendship and love, the humor and the dazzling computer animation (it matches "Valerian and the City of a Thousand Planets" as the most visually dazzling movie in recent memory). In terms of plot and structure, there's quite a bit that's recycled. But it puts what's old into new dishes and makes it seem new again. That's what separates Pixar from the wannabes.

The voice acting is, as usual for Pixar, excellent. Newcomer Anthony Gonzalez is instantly likable as the kid who is desperate to play music. Gael Garcia Bernal brings wit, warmth and pathos to Hector, who is more than who he seems. Benjamin Bratt is terrific as the somewhat arrogant Ernesto. And Alanna Ubach manages to be lovable and frightening. The film includes a couple of cameos from Latin stars, such as Gabriel Iglesias, Edward James Olmos, and Cheech Marin. Pixar regular John Ratzenberger has a cameo, but I didn't recognize his distinctive voice.

Music plays an important part of "Coco," which considering the plot, isn't surprising. But rather than just a few Randy Newman songs over plot montages, it's organic to the story. Since the songs are all sung by the characters, it's possible to classify this as a musical, but it comes from the plot (this isn't "The Sound of Music" or "Chicago," with staged musical numbers and dancing).

Family movies are few and far between these days, and good ones are even rarer. If you want to introduce your kids to the magic of film, there are few better options than "Coco." This is one of the year's best films.

The Factory

2017-11-23T22:37:00.001-08:00

2/4

Starring: John Cusack, Jennifer Carpenter, Dallas Roberts, Mae Whitman, Gary Anthony Williams

Rated R for Strong Violence including Disturbing Images, Language Throughout and Some Sexual Material

Despite starring A-lister John Cusack and "Dexter" co-star Jennifer Carpenter, "The Factory" was released four years after it was shot and bypassed theaters altogether. Not a good sign. A movie as troubled as this usually signals a disaster, but that's not the case here. Like "Shanghai," which suffered a similar fate (and coincidentally, also starred John Cusack), "The Factory" is simply mediocre.

A number of prostitutes have gone missing in Montreal over the past few years. Detective Mike Fletcher (Cusack) is convinced that there's a serial killer at work. It's not a popular theory since there have been no bodies of the missing women have not been found. The only one who believes him is his energetic partner, Kelsey Walker (Carpenter). Mike has long since been obsessed with the case, but when his daughter Abby (Whitman) goes missing in a way eerily similar to the unfortunate ladies of the night, he will stop at nothing, to find the killer. However, neither Mike nor Kelsey have any idea of who they are dealing with.

"The Factory" is a Z-list script starring one movie star and a host of character actors. Given that, I guess it's about as good as could have hoped to be. John Cusack, an actor whom I like, tries to expand his range with mixed success. Cusack does his best work as the sardonic everyman, such as in "High Fidelity" or "Midnight in the Garden of Good and Evil." He can do more dramatic work, like in the little-seen and controversial "Max" or "Love & Mercy," but intensity is not one of his strong suits. I'll give him points for making a game try, but the results are decidedly mixed. This is partly due to his lack of range, and also partly because he is simply not trying. The role of the eager beaver partner Kelsey is within Jennifer Carpenter's limited range, but there are times where she goes over-the-top. The weak link in the cast is Dallas Roberts, who plays Carl the killer (since he is the first major character to appear on screen, this revelation is not a spoiler). He's simply not creepy enough. The role calls for someone with an Anthony Perkins level of evil, and Roberts doesn't come close. He's about as intimidating as a housecat.

The best I can say about the work behind the camera is that it's in focus, is coherent, and moves at a decent clip. There are a few neat looking shots in the movie, but that's as far as it goes. This isn't an especially well-made movie, but at least it doesn't have any pretensions about being something it's not. That's more than I could say about "Blade Runner 2049."

The problem with this movie is that the screenplay forces Mike and Kelsey to be convinced that Darryl (Williams), not Carl, is the killer. Adding insult to injury, Darryl is Carl's unwitting and unwilling accomplice. Revealing the killer's identity at the beginning while sending the main characters on a dead end for the majority of the film dilutes almost all of the film's tension. We feel like the movie is wasting our time.

The less said about the ending, the better. I guessed it pretty far ahead of time, but I didn't for once believe the filmmakers would be stupid enough to use it. Turns out, they were. Had I been more than rudimentarily invested in the film, I might have cared. As it is, it's just another mediocre film trying to shock the audience with a twist so cliche it's a wonder that no one has trademarked it yet.

"The Factory" is best viewed when you can't sleep and have nothing else to watch. And I mean nothing.

Justice League

2017-11-20T23:38:00.001-08:00

2.5/4

Starring: Ben Affleck, Gal Gadot, Ezra Miller, Ray Fisher, Jason Momoa, Henry Cavill, Amy Adams, Diane Lane, Ciaran Hinds

Rated PG-13 for Sequences of Sci-Fi Violence and Action

Everyone is trying to mimic Marvel Cinematic Universe: an unending series of interconnected films built on fan loyalty and the build-up to a final smackdown. Legendary Pictures has MonsterVerse, where all the cinematic monsters will duke it out. Universal tried to get the so-called Dark Universe going with this year's "The Mummy," but considering how badly that movie was received, it's doubtful it's going anywhere (despite best attempts to set the stage for a zillion characters). Warner Bros. has DC, and while fans of Batman, Superman and the rest of the DC ensemble rival that of Marvel, the studio has yet to capture even a fraction of the MCU magic. Considering that the critical and audience reception to this movie has been tepid, and it was DOA at the box office, I doubt that it will change their fortune. The performance of "Avengers: Infinity Wars" will determine if my hopes of the dying superhero genre will be answered.

After the self-sacrifice of Superman (Cavill) in "Batman vs Superman: Dawn of Justice," the world has entered a state of melancholy and depression. Without the Man of Steel's beacon of hope, Earth has become a bleak place. That leaves an opening for Steppenwolf (Hinds), a demon who is a destroyer of worlds (duh) to come in and turn Earth into his own private Hell (getting the obvious out of the way, "Born to be Wild" does not play once during the movie). It's up to Bruce Wayne, aka Batman (Affleck), Wonder Woman, aka Diana Prince (Gadot), to assemble a group of heroes to save the day. These include a "badass" merman named Arthur Curry, aka Aquaman (Momoa), an annoying nerd named Barry Gordon, aka The Flash (Miller), and a cyborg named Victor Stone, aka Cyborg (Fisher).

"Justice League" feels like a cheap rip-off of "The Avengers." I didn't like that movie if you recall, but it had the fact that it was "new" in the sense that we had never seen a superhero team-up before. "Justice League" does the exact same thing: gather the supers, have their egos battle, and set aside their differences to become a team and defeat evil. At least Joss Whedon's movie had conviction. This feels like a cynical cash grab. Probably because it is.

The performances are adequate, at least. Ben Affleck and Gal Gadot slide easily back into their roles, not that they're asked to do anything that stretches their limited talents. The newcomers are a mixed bag, primarily because they're so underdeveloped. Jason Momoa hardly has any time to create a character (hopefully James Wan will take advantage of his screen presence in his stand-alone film that comes out next year). Newcomer Ray Fisher is the most intriguing character, but like everyone else, his role is underwritten. The weak link is, surprisingly, Ezra Miller. Whether he's miscast or his role is badly written, the result is the same: The Flash is extremely irritating.

"Justice League" was primarily directed by Zack Snyder, but he and his wife (one of the producers) bowed out towards the end of principal photography after the suicide of his daughter. Joss Whedon stepped in to finish the film uncredited. Save for a new score and a new ending, nothing has changed, and as the film plays out, the change in directors isn't noticeable. This is still a Zack Snyder movie, with aggressive special effects and stunts. The camerawork is at times too frenetic to get a grasp of what's going on, but at least it's not awful.

"Justice League" has its pleasures, but it would be best served to watch at home. Unless you're a die-hard DC fan. In which case you've probably seen it three times already.

crazy/beautiful

2017-11-20T01:05:00.001-08:00

3/4

Starring: Jay Hernandez, Kirsten Dunst, Bruce Davison, Taryn Manning, Lucinda Jenney

Rated PG-13 for Mature Thematic Material involving Teens, Drug/Alcohol Content, Sexuality, and Language

"crazy/beautiful" has to be the tensest teen romance I've ever seen. Check that, the tensest romance I've seen period. While there have been plenty of movie romances with high stakes ("Titanic" and "Casablanca" come to mind), few are as real as "crazy/beautiful."

Carlos Nunez (Hernandez) is a straight-arrow student from a poor part of town looking to better himself. He gets up before six a.m. to take the bus to school the ritzy Pacific High School, works on the weekends and studies hard. He wants to get into Annapolis and become a pilot, despite the fact that he's never been on a plane before. One day at the beach with friends, he spies Nicole Oakley (Dunst) doing community service. There's a spark of attraction, and when he spies her cutting class with her friends, they fall hard for each other. Soon, they become inseparable. But Nicole is unstable, at times dangerously so, and that could throw everything Carlos has worked so hard for down the drain.

The performances by the two leads are terrific. Kirsten Dunst, who rarely gets roles that make use of her considerable talents, is excellent as the wild child. Nicole has some obvious bipolar tendencies, and that makes her such a liability. We never know what she's going to do next. Her instability can, and often does, mean trouble for those around her. But it's impossible not to care about her; Dunst allows the audience to see her zest and energy that make her so captivating. The actress has never been better. Bruce Davison, who is as reliable a character actor as they come, is so busy with being a politician that he can only see his daughter as the "problem child." Or that his new wife Courtney (Jenney) is a superficial bitch. No wonder Nicole is screwed up. Taryn Manning, Lucinda Jenney and Soledad St. Hilaire have supporting roles. Oh, and Zardip plays one of Nicole's friends.

The real star of the movie is Jay Hernandez. Making his theatrical debut, the young actor shows plenty of charisma and talent to match his considerable good looks. Carlos is impossible not to like. He's hard-working, polite, and intelligent. He also has a great deal of integrity, showing no fear in telling Nicole if and when she's gone too far. Carlos is the boy next door who appreciates the opportunities he has been given and wants to make the most of them. But as Nicole's father points out, Nicole is a distraction that could cause him to lose everything. Dunst may be the biggest name in the cast, but it's Hernandez who steals the show, as he did in the "Bad Moms" movies. Even better, he's the central character.

What I liked about this movie is its willingness to deal with the shades of gray in this situation. Director John Stockwell doesn't dumb this story down to a simple "Romeo & Juliet" cheesefest. Those who oppose the relationship between Carlos and Nicole have very good reasons for doing so. There's no sense that "love conquers all" to be found here, nor is there ever a moment where we don't remember that Nicole is putting Carlos's future in jeopardy. Nicole makes a lot of bad decisions, but she also does some good deeds too. Likewise, Carlos is a good kid, but he makes some mistakes too. The dialogue could have been stronger for more depth, but as it is, it's good.

For about 80 minutes, "crazy/beautiful" is unfailing in its honesty and respectful treatment of its characters. They never act contrary to their established natures. Then comes the end. Putting it bluntly, it's fucking awful. It's so bad that it nearly tanks the entire film. Not only does it require that a previously intelligent character undergo a frontal lobotomy, it smoothes over his mistake with nary a word. A decision that should have led to catastrophe is solved with a hug. To get the audience so invested in these characters with such truthfulness only to reward them with such glaring stupidity is a betrayal. At first, I couldn't believe what I was seeing. Then, I was pissed off.

The disaster of an ending aside, there's too much good stuff here to miss out on. I really wish Hollywood would start investing in scripts like this, with real characters and insight. Not just stupid, sparkling vampires and teen angst. Movies like "crazy/beautiful" are things to be cherished. Ideally with better endings.

Crouching Tiger, Hidden Dragon

2017-11-15T01:03:00.000-08:00

4/4

Starring: Chow Yun-Fat, Michelle Yeoh, Ziyi Zhang, Chen Chang, Cheng Pei-Pei, Sihung Lung

Rated PG-13 for Martial Arts Violence and Some Sexuality

It could be reasonably argued that "Crouching Tiger, Hidden Dragon" fits better into the romance genre than martial arts extravaganza. Oh sure, there are plenty of truly sensational action sequences, but, at its heart, this is a love story.

Legendary warrior Li Mu Bai (Yun-Fat) wishes to leave his fighting days behind him. To bring closure to his past life, he has decided to give his legendary sword, the Green Destiny, to his benefactor, Sir Te (Lung). Meanwhile, the woman he loves (but has never admitted it), Shu Lien (Yeoh), has developed a friendship with Jiao Long (Zhang), a governor's daughter who is set to be married into wealthy family. When the Green Destiny is stolen, these three people will find their futures tied together as they confront their pasts.

"Crouching Tiger, Hidden Dragon" is like a myth come to life. It has all of the grand emotions, the epic scale, and the burning passions. Ang Lee has built his career on understated emotions, such in "Brokeback Mountain," "The Wedding Banquet," or "Eat Drink Man Woman." Here, he goes all out, as far Lee goes. It's still bubbling beneath the surface and filled with longing, but Lee allows it to breathe and burst from the screen in a way that all the great epics do.

The performances are astonishing. Action stars Chow Yun-Fat and Michelle Yeoh show considerable dramatic chops not often associated with the genre. Yun-Fat is famous for his work with action director John Woo in films such as "Hardboiled" or "The Killer," but in Hong Kong he's known for romance roles. As a man who is tired of fighting, the actor portrays Li Mu Bai as a weary man who accepts his future with grace and resignation. That he is retiring without avenging his master from the notorious criminal Jade Fox weighs heavily on him. But he finds redemption in the hopes of training Jiao Long, who has a tremendous amount of skill, but not much focus. Yeoh plays a woman who deeply loves Li Mu Bai, but is forbidden from acting on it, as his master and her fiancée were the same person. Ziyi Zhang is stunning as a young girl who is at a crossroads with her future and her past. She has a connection to Jade Fox that neither Li Mu Bai nor Shu Lien are aware of, but she also has to choose between her arranged marriage or the thief Dark Cloud (Chang) who loved her many years ago. All three deserved, but did not get, Oscar nominations.

Undoubtedly, the major selling points of the film are the action scenes. They're fantastic. Actually, while they do feature martial arts and weapons, calling them "kung fu" or something is a bit of a misnomer. This isn't Jackie Chan. Each movement is filled with grace, beauty and rhythm. Truth be told, they're more like ballet dances rather than traditional fights. In fact, Zhang isn't trained in martial arts, so she uses her dance moves instead. The actors did their own stunts, with the help of wires that were removed in post-production. So yes, they are flying across buildings and Yun-Fat and Zhang do have a fight in the tree tops. If there's a flaw, and it's a minor one, it's that the action moves so fast that the camera can't track it very well. And there were two instances where something happened and I wasn't able to tell how it happened.

On a technical level, the film is no less impressive. The cinematography by Peter Pau is awesome. There are some truly gorgeous images to be found. Not just in the landscapes (which are jaw-dropping), but even in the smaller, more subtle moments, such as when Shu Lien loses track of her target and is left in the middle of the courtyard. The soundtrack by Tan Dun is also incredible with a main theme that perfectly compliments the action, and the long tones of acclaimed cellist Yo Yo Ma highlighting the yearning of the characters.

"Crouching Tiger, Hidden Dragon" is one of the few foreign films that got the reception it deserved. People couldn't stop talking about it when it was released. It was such a hit that Sony Pictures Classics released it into multiplexes, where it earned over $100 million in the US alone (its reception in the Asian markets was decidedly less impressive, where it was viewed as just another wuxia flick). It also earned a shocking 10 Academy Award nominations, including Best Picture (which, considering the competition, it should have won). This was unheard of for a foreign film, let along one where not a word of English is spoken.

"Crouching Tiger, Hidden Dragon" is a bona fide masterpiece. That is without dispute. Every element shines and Ang Lee brings them together as only he can. If you haven't already seen it, that's a mistake you would do well to remedy as soon as possible.

A Bad Moms Christmas

2017-11-11T18:47:00.000-08:00

3.5/4

Starring: Mila Kunis, Kristen Bell, Kathryn Hahn, Christine Baranski, Cheryl Hines, Susan Sarandon, Jay Hernandez, Peter Gallagher, Justin Hartley

Rated R for Crude Sexual Content and Language Throughout, and Some Drug Use

Last year's "Bad Moms" was a breath of fresh comic air. In an age where comedy is apparently watching a bunch of stand-up comedians riff incessantly on the same non-existent joke while trying to be as gross and offensive as possible, watching "Bad Moms" was like finding a lake of crystal clear water in the middle of the Sahara. Unlike "Mike and Dave Need Wedding Dates" or the pair of Seth Rogen monstrosities, the tone-deaf "Sausage Party" and the horror that was "Neighbors 2," "Bad Moms" had an actual script. It was about actual characters and situations, and it had a comic point of view. It was a big hit for those reasons, but mainly because it was absolutely hilarious. Thus, a sequel was made. The question is, can it make magic strike twice? Not quite, but it comes pretty damn close.

Amy (Kunis), Kiki (Bell), and Carla (Hahn) are finding solace together from the stresses of being a mom. But it's the Christmas season, and the need for perfection in all things Christmas is leaving them frazzled. But just when they've resolved to say "fuck it" and let the chips fall as they may, they each get a bombshell: their mothers are coming to visit. Carla's mom Isis (Sarandon) is a gambling junkie who only drops by when she needs money. Kiki's mom Sandy (Hines) is a borderline psycho with serious boundary issues. But Amy fares the worst. Her mother is Ruth (Baranski), a super critical perfectionist who pushes everything to the 11 (and then some). It's a war between the moms for Christmas. And their sanity.

One of the hallmarks of "Bad Moms" and this sequel is that it gave a giant middle finger to the pursuit of perfection. Not only did it accept the fact that no one is perfect, it embraced it. The need to be successful in any pursuit is a universal feeling, as is losing sight of why you're actually doing what you're doing. "Bad Moms" tapped into that in a very real way, and this movie is no different. We can vicariously live through these characters and their rebellion against societal expectations that are impossible to meet. That's why everyone can relate to these movies, mom or not.

But more than some sort of anarchic treatise, "A Bad Moms Christmas" is a comedy, and on that level this movie hits one right out of the park. This movie had me howling. It's filled with great moments, like when the girls get freaky with the mall Santa or when Kiki has surprise visitor in the bedroom (while she's trying to have sex with her husband). The most uproarious sequence is a Sexy Santa contest that gets way out of control. That the movie opens with an exasperated Amy looking at her trashed house as a camel walks by should tell you that this movie will not be labeled as "Capra-esque."

The performances are on target. Kunis, Bell and Hahn are just as hilarious as before, playing the decisive Amy, naive Kiki and bawdy Carla. They're equally matched by their foils. Christine Baranski is perfectly cast as the mother from hell. She's such a bitch that is a wonder that Amy turned out so well-adjusted. Type A does not do this woman justice. Cheryl Hines mixes creepy and funny with almost surgical precision as the uber clingy mother. And Susan Sarandon has no problem playing the politically incorrect Isis. The supporting cast is just fine. Jay Hernandez returns as Amy's impossibly good looking and charming boyfriend Jesse, and "This is Us" star Justin Hartley shows up as a sex bomb with the hots for Carla.

Most Christmas movies have happy endings, and this is no different. That doesn't mean that writer/directors Jon Lucas and Scott Moore aren't above having fun with it. As earnest and schmaltzy as it gets, it's never played completely straight. There's always a joke around the corner to prevent it from turning into a Hallmark movie. That being said, whenever "A Bad Moms Christmas" goes for drama, it works.

The film's comedy isn't as consistent as the original (I counted two or three dead spots), hence the 3.5/4 rating. But it misses a perfect 4/4 by a hair. There are far too many scenes that left me roaring with laughter. That's more than enough to ensure a very enthusiastic recommendation. Hopefully this will turn into a franchise (idea for the sequel: the trio takes on summer vacation). Good comedy is rare indeed. Maybe Seth Rogen will learn a thing or two.

Don't miss it!

City of God

2017-11-09T02:07:00.001-08:00

4/4

Starring: Alexandre Rodrigues, Leandro Firmino da Hora, Phellipe Haagensen, Seu Jorge, Alice Braga

Rated R for Strong Brutal Violence, Sexuality, Drug Content and Language

In what some may view as the height of arrogance or naivite, I once proclaimed "City of God" to be the best film ever made. Now that I'm older and hopefully a bit wiser, I realize that such a claim is probably impossible to make about a single film. That being said, Fernando Meirelles' 2002 masterpiece is definitely up there. This is a fascinating thriller that is as disturbing as it is illuminating.

The protagonist of this story, which is based on true events, is Rocket (Rodrigues). He is our guide through this hell on Earth, introducing us to its inhabitants and clearly informing us how they relate to each other. Unlike many other citizens of the slum known as the City of God, Rocket isn't a hood (his attempts to rob people end up with him getting advice from a friendly man, a ride home, and even a pretty girl's phone number...John Dillinger he is not). His passion lies in photography, which puts him in a dangerous position as he becomes caught in the middle of a vicious turf war between two crime lords: the psychopathic Lil' Ze (da Hora) and the revenge-minded Knockout Ned (Jorge).

"City of God" is less about narrative than it is a travelogue through time in one of the most dangerous places on Earth. Here, kids don't go to school or play outside. They smoke dope, deal drugs, and kill people. They are society's cast-offs, and as a result the slums have turned to anarchy ruled by drug lords. What makes it so interesting is that, while obviously a place no one wants to live in, has achieved a sort of equilibrium. Of course, when that is shaken, the streets run red with blood. To give you an idea, I'll add a bit of trivia. For safety reasons, this movie couldn't have been shot in the actual City of God. It had to be shot in a less dangerous one, although such was the risk that had Meirelles known what he was in for, he wouldn't have made the film.

The performances are uniformly excellent, particularly because at Meirelles' request, all newbies (many, including the star, actually lived in the slums). Alexandre Rodrigues makes it easy to get on his side. He's smart and articulate, has a crush on a local girl (Braga), and knows how to keep his head down. What's interesting about how he narrates the film is that he explains who the major players are as they become relevant to the story. He isn't afraid of halting the narrative to show us who these people are and how they got there. It's a little unorganized, but that's by intent. And the momentum never slows down.

Also worth mentioning are Leandro Firmino da Hora and Phellipe Haagensen. da Hora is positively chilling as the narcissistic psychopath. Lil 'Ze desires power over the entire slum above all else, and no act of savagery lies outside his moral compass if it brings him closer to what he wants. Ironically, da Hora had no intentions of becoming an actor; he only attended the audition to keep his friend company. As Benny, Phellippe Haagensen lives up to his character's title: "The coolest hood in the City of God." Haagensen has a natural charisma and friendliness that even melts the heart of a monster like Lil 'Ze and becomes his right hand man. The actor plays it perfectly.

Director Fernando Meirelles plows through the story with a furious energy that's rarely seen in movies. This is a live wire that puts our emotions through the wringer. It's at times thrilling, shocking, and disturbing. Meirelles got his start in TV and commercials, which makes sense. This is a very busy motion picture. I do mean that as a compliment though, since all the flashy camera angles, editing tricks and playing with the timeline do serve a purpose.

Don't think that when I say "energetic," I mean light-hearted or kid friendly. Nothing could be further from the truth. There is constant violence and drug use, both of which are dealt with shocking frankness. And I'd say about 75% of that involves teenagers and young children. One especially horrifying scene involves two little kids being shot, and then another kid being forced to choose which one to kill.

"City of God" became a big hit in the US upon its release, as far as foreign films go (the marketing power of Miramax doubtlessly had something to do with that). It earned four Oscar nominations, including Best Director, which is rare for a foreign film. Ironically, it was shut out of the Best Foreign Film category. Then again, the Academy is the Academy, so such stupidity is to be expected.

But for those of you who haven't seen this movie, you have absolutely no excuse. This is a masterpiece, plain and simple. No one, especially not lovers of good cinema, should miss this movie.

Whale Rider

2017-11-07T01:39:00.001-08:00

2/4

Starring: Keisha Castle-Hughes, Rawiri Paratene, Vicky Haughton, Grant Roa, Cliff Curtis, Rachel House

Rated PG-13 for Brief Language and a Momentary Drug Reference

"Whale Rider" is a good little indie coming-of-age story provided you've never seen a little indie coming-of-age story. Readers of my reviews are well aware that I have zero problem for formula pictures, provided that they are done well. Unfortunately, that's not the case here. With a poorly explained cultural foundation, a badly written lead character and a clunky story, it's a wonder why this movie became such a hit back in 2002. I can think of a half dozen foreign and/or indie films that impressed me more. By several orders of magnitude.

In Maori tradition, it's the first born grandson of the leader who inherits the title, back to the original whale rider who arrived from Hawaiki. But tragedy has struck: the grandson of the current leader, Koro (Paratene) has died along with his mother, leaving his twin sister Paikea as the sole survivor. After his son Porourangi (Curtis) flees in grief, Koro raises Paikea (Castle-Hughes) himself. But he resents her for being female and blames her for conflict within the tribe. Koro reluctantly tries to find his successor in the other first born boys of the tribe, but Pai feels that it is her destiny to be the leader. Needless to say, Koro does not take this well.

"Whale Rider" could, and should, have been an excellent movie. But it's not. It's a muddled mess of a movie that has little narrative momentum and few dramatic moments that actually land.

One reason is that the Maori traditions are poorly explained. It's a little unfair to blame the film for this, since it was made for a New Zealand audience, who I'm assuming would be more familiar with such traditions. But there's no denying that a more thorough explanation would have helped the film's start considerably. Too little is explained and what is told is not communicated effectively.

Certainly, such an oversight is problematic. But that's hardly the only flaw of the film. The film falls into an extremely predictable rhythm. Not only in broad strokes (which are a given), but in the details. Not only do we know what is going to happen, but how it's going to happen. For example, after Koro and Porourangi have an argument where the older man viciously insults Pai, she walks outside and stares at the sea in heartbreak. Her father joins her, they have a "deep" conversation, and thus begins the plot of the movie. How moving! And that's not the only case of this happening. During the middle portion of the movie, after Koro forbids Pai from learning the roles of the tribal leader, she's taught by her uncle, who conveniently knows the ropes and will teach her because it will make Koro mad. And of course all of his friends get in on it. Who hasn't seen that before?

Structurally, this film is extremely repetitive. In essence, it goes like this: Koro needs something to happen for the new leader to arise. Pai volunteers, of course, but Koro shuns her. No one else can do it. Pai does it in secret. This repeats ad nauseum. This isn't even formula. It's just bad storytelling.

If there's one thing that saves this from being a complete train wreck, it's the performances. Keisha Castle-Hughes, in her debut performance, scored an Oscar nomination as Pai, but I'm at a loss to understand why. This is less a criticism of her acting (which is excellent when she's afforded the latitude) than how her character is written. Pai is supposed to be this great inspirational heroine, but until the final scenes, she's kind of a doormat. Presenting her with more strength would have made her more interesting and identifiable.

The supporting roles are better. Rawiri Paratene is perfect as Koro. With a constant sneer and bullish attitude, there's no mistaking him for a staunch traditionalist. However, Paratene uncovers a lot of depth and presence to make him a man who clings to the old ways rather than a generic jerk. He's blind to the obvious and stubborn as a mule, but at least he has motives for it. Cliff Curtis shows up for a few scenes as Pai's father, who is all too aware of Koro's rigid nature.

The film is nicely photographed by Leon Narby, although director Niki Caro's attempts to show "realistic" imagery to set the stage can get a little clumsy, and her attempts show a connection between Pai and the whales lack any semblance of subtlety.

For those who are interested in a movie about Maori culture, there is a much better movie called "Once Were Warriors." Unlike this movie, it's definitely not for children (it ranks alongside "The War Zone" as one of the most brutal movies I've ever seen), but it's a much stronger film.

Thor: Ragnarok

2017-11-05T20:35:00.000-08:00

2/4

Starring: Chris Hemsworth, Cate Blanchett, Tom Hiddleston, Mark Ruffalo, Tessa Thompson, Jeff Goldblum, Anthony Hopkins

Rated PG-13 for Intense Sequences of Sci-Fi Violence and Action, and Brief Suggestive Material

The Achilles' Heel of the MCU is what makes it so insanely popular: all the movies feel exactly the same. It makes it easier for Marvel executives to sleep at night, since there's considerable reward with virtually no risk. And obsessed fans will be happy since Marvel Studios takes enormous pains to fill the movies with in-jokes and Easter eggs. Not to mention a Stan Lee cameo. MCU fans will love this movie, since it (presumably) has everything they want in a MCU movie. But for everyone who isn't a member of that group, you're not going to miss much.

Thor (Hemsworth) has returned to Asgard after taking the crown of a nasty demon/god/some king of monster. There, he finds that Loki (Hiddleston) is alive and well but that his father Odin (Hopkins) is in exile. When found, Odin reveals that he is dying, and that Thor's sister, Hela (Blanchett) is on her way to take over Asgard and control the cosmos. She gets Thor and Loki out of her way by sending them to a planet on the edge of the universe where Thor will have to fight the Hulk (Ruffalo) in gladiator-style combat for the pleasure of the Grandmaster (Goldblum). Now they have to figure out a way to get back to Asgard and get a Asgardian exile named Valkyrie (Thompson) to help them take down Hela (Blanchett).

Honestly, the only reason I was excited to see this movie was the hope that I would see Cate Blanchett kick some ass. It's always fun to see a high class thespian let their hair down and have some fun, and this is no different. Blanchett gets to participate in some high energy action sequences and toss off some delicious one-liners. Unfortunately, she's strictly a supporting character, and the film turns into a generic Marvel movie whenever she's off screen.

MCU veterans Chris Hemsworth, Tom Hiddleston, Mark Ruffalo and the others slide easily back in their roles, but they're stuck in a movie that is overlong and appears to have been scribbled by a few comic book nerds on their lunch hour. There's more humor than in other Marvel movies, but little of it is actually funny. The audience was laughing, but I wasn't. That would imply that I actually cared about anyone in this movie, which I didn't.

In the end, this is another Marvel Cinematic Universe movie. It doesn't shake the boat, and it gives fans and studio executives exactly what they want. No more, no less.

The Deep End

2017-11-03T00:45:00.002-07:00

3.5/4

Starring: Tilda Swinton, Goran Visnjic, Jonathan Tucker, Raymond J. Barrie, Josh Lucas

Rated R for Some Violence and Language, and for a Strong Sex Scene

How far would you go to protect someone you love?

The immediate response would be "to the ends of the Earth." Or something like that. But how far would you really go? And are you willing to pay the price?

That's the question Margaret Hall (Swinton) is forced to ask herself. You see, her gay son Beau (Tucker) was in a car accident with a sleazebag named Darby Reese (Lucas). She pays him a considerable sum to stay away from Beau, but that doesn't keep him away. He and Beau fight and Darby ends up dead. Margaret finds his body the next day, and makes a spur of the moment decision to cover it up. She thinks that the whole sordid event is over and done with, until a man named Alek Spera (Visnjic) shows up with some damning evidence. He tells her that unless she gives him $50,000 by tomorrow, he'll turn the tape over to the police. Since her husband is away at sea, it's up to her to do the impossible. But there's something that we (the audience) know that she doesn't.

"The Deep End," loosely based on the novel "The Blank Wall" by Elizabeth Sanxay Holding, is an understated thriller. This is not a movie with shootouts, car chases and explosions. But that doesn't make it any less suspenseful. The smart script, strong performances and sure-handed direction make sure of that.

Is there anything that Tilda Swinton won't do? More to the point, is there anything she can't do? From playing the psychologically scarred mother of a school shooter ("We Need to Talk About Kevin") to displaying her post-birth body in the nude ("The War Zone"), Swinton is as daring as she is talented. There's nothing remotely that controversial in "The Deep End," but she's just as good here as she is, well, anywhere else. The strength of her performance comes from her refusal to go over-the-top. She plays Margaret as a normal woman. She's stressed, trying to keep a household with three kids and her father-in-law running, and keep her family hidden from the mysterious man lurking about. But she's smart, and deals with the situation the best she can.

Her co-star, Croatian actor Goran Visnjic, is just as good. He is a scary individual, but he does things that Margaret doesn't anticipate. Without going into spoilers, I'll say that it's a tricky role, and that Visnjic pulls it off effortlessly. Visnjic, who became famous for playing Dr. Luka Kovac on TV's "ER," is a fine actor, but is in too few movies these days. This is a perfect example of what he can do with a good script.

The supporting cast is very good as well. Jonathan Tucker is in fine form as a uncommunicative teenager who is coping with his sexuality. But like his mother, he's also smart, and it doesn't take him long to figure out that something is going on with her. Josh Lucas is one of those actors who can creep you out simply by walking on screen, and that's what he does here. "Snake" is an apt descriptor. Sadly, veteran meanie Raymond J. Barry is given the short end of the stick. His performance is fine, but his character is not well written. Fortunately, he's only on screen for a few scenes.

The direction by Scott McGhee and David Siegel is top notch. They get the essentials right (pacing, intelligence, good acting and writing, and so on). But they also get the details right. They get the atmosphere of upper middle class Lake Tahoe exactly right (I have family who once had a house there, so I speak from experience), the realities of suburban life, and so on. Little details, like how Margaret has to use a taxi to get to Alek further enhance her isolation. And whenever they pause to show how she's coping with keeping her family together while dealing with extortion, they always use it to enhance her feelings. This is a great story already, and it's well told, but little moments like this enhance it.

Sadly, the end of the film is routine. No, I won't go into any spoilers, but I will say that something this smart doesn't need to resort to the clichés that make up the climax. That it's well done softens the blow, but the fact is that it shouldn't have been done at all. The characters are so intelligent and realistic that something more clever and honest would have been warranted. I also think the ending isn't earned. More than that I will not say. The key scene of the first act isn't capitalized very well either, but that's more of a nitpick, and upon reflection I have no complaints that the directors put it in there.

The ending aside, this is a movie that will grab your attention and keep it for the film's entirety. There aren't many good thrillers about smart people in plausible situations. So if that's your cup of tea, I strongly suggest you check this one out. You'll be glad you did.

Rabbit-Proof Fence

2017-11-02T00:17:00.001-07:00

2/4

Starring: Everlyn Sampi, Tianna Sansbury, Laura Monaghan, David Gulpilil, Kenneth Branagh, Jason Clarke

Rated PG for Emotional Thematic Elements

There are few doubts in anyone's mind that the Stolen Generation is a black stain on Australia's history. This policy, which lasted from the 1910's to, unbelievably, the 1970's, allowed the government to forcibly take "mixed-caste" children (who had one parent of an indigenous race) from their families and "integrate" them to European society. Estimates place between one in ten and one in three children were subjected to this, and the effects are still being felt to this day.

Clearly, this story needed to be told. However shameful or painful this mark on the history of the land down under is, we must not forget it. But as a snapshot of history, or even conventional filmmaking, "Rabbit-Proof Fence" comes up short...and by quite a bit. What should have been a powerful and harrowing experience left me almost completely unmoved.

Molly Craig (Sampi), her younger sister Daisy (Sansbury) and their cousin Gracie (Monaghan) are "half-caste" children. When A.O. Neville (Branagh), the sole "legal advocate" of the Aboriginal people, orders them removed and sent to Moore River Native Settlement. There, the three promptly escape and set out on the 1800 mile trek back home. Meanwhile, Neville is sparing no expense to find them.

This story would seem like great cinema, except that it isn't. That's because, in truth, not much happens in it. Half the movie is spent watching the girls walk along the fence that divides the country to get home. The other half is watching Neville plan how he will capture them. It's just not strong enough to sustain a feature film.

The acting is solid, which is impressive considering that calling any of the characters two-dimensional would be a stretch. The actresses who play the young girls are all effective, showing little in the way of discomfort when being in front of the camera (although Sampi ran away from the set twice and was found both times trying to buy a train ticket home). Kenneth Branagh does something interesting with his character. He portrays Neville as misguided, but not evil. Neville isn't a mustache-twirling sadist. He really believes that he's doing the right thing for the girls. But as they say, "the road to Hell is paved with good intentions."

"Rabbit-Proof Fence" was directed by Phillip Noyce, an Australian director whose track record is inconsistent. He did directed some good movies, like "The Bone Collector," "Dead Calm," and "The Quiet American." But he did "The Saint" with Val Kilmer, which is all that really needs to be said. Unfortunately with this movie, his work leans more towards the latter than the former. Usually it's on solid ground, but his POV shots and attempts at getting inside Molly's head come across as clunky and pretentious. Actually, any time he gets artsy, it fails.

I honestly feel bad about giving this movie a negative review. The subject matter is so important and it's a story the world needs to know. But the film just doesn't live up to its potential.

The Oxford Murders

2017-10-31T01:23:00.000-07:00

3/4

Starring: Elijah Wood, John Hurt, Leonor Watling, Julie Cox, Jim Carter, Burn Gorman

Rated R for Language, Sexual Content/Nudity and Some Violence/Disturbing Images

After viewing "The Oxford Murders," one thing is absolutely clear: this movie is not for everyone. Ostensibly it's a murder mystery, but however it's main thrust is the philosophical and mathematical discussions that are necessary to stop the killer. Those who would not prefer to watch a movie that challenges them intellectually should not bother with this movie.

Martin (Wood) is a young grad student who has come to London to study with the famous mathematician and philosopher Arthur Seldom (Hurt). But Seldom is such a pompous ass that Martin decides to go home rather than be insulted again by this loser. That is until they find his landlady murdered in the home where he is renting a room. Also at the murder site is a mathematical symbol that indicates they are dealing with a serial killer who is using math and logic as tantalizing clues. If they are going to stop the killer, Martin and Arthur will have to work together to solve the riddle before the next victim is chosen. But who is the killer? Could it be Lorna (Watling), Martin's sexy racquetball partner? Or is it Beth (Cox), his landlady's daughter? Or could it be Yuri (Gorman), Martin's fellow student that, had this been made a half century ago, would have been played by Peter Lorre?

Math and logic are not my strong suit. My brain is just not wired that way. But I nevertheless enjoyed the mental sparring between Martin and Arthur. It was occasionally confusing, but I could follow the music of their conversations. Wood and Hurt are quite good here, accomplishing what I thought would be impossible: making math interesting.

Does it spend too much time posing questions about math, philosophy and logic? Perhaps for some people, but not for me. I found their discussions mentally stimulating, and in a way, it reminded me of "Silence," the criminally overlooked Scorcese movie from earlier this year. Both movies used violent storylines to stimulate conversation for the mind, but "The Oxford Murders" isn't as good as "Silence" (not by a longshot), and Alex de la Iglesias is definitely not Martin Scorcese.

One thing I noted is the color desaturation in the film. de la Iglesias leeches out almost all the color from the film's visuals, giving it a cold and oppressive feeling. It's meant to heighten the suspense, and while the camerawork by Kiko de la Rica is solid, doing this is so overdone that it's become irritating. Interestingly enough, I considered watching another thriller called "The Lodger," which had a noir look with deep colors and atmosphere. Directors of thrillers need to get away from this washed out look because it's lost a lot of its effectiveness.

If you're curious about this movie based on what you've read here, go ahead and check it out. I doubt you'll be disappointed. On the other hand, if it doesn't sound like your cup of tea, then it probably isn't.