Movie Corner

The Batman

2022-03-06T13:03:00.001-08:00

It's been a minute. The last few years have certainly been disruptive to the old routine, but that doesn't mean I haven't been keeping up with my cinematic addiction. It's been awhile since I felt inspired to articulate my thoughts about a film, so what better vehicle than the latest oldest superhero attempt? At nearly three hours, director Matt Reeves' interpretation of the worlds greatest detective gives us a very raw and stripped down character in a bloated, ambitious story that leads down a highly predictable path. That may sound like a negative take, but trust me, there is enough to like about the film to earn my endorsement. The character of Batman has been done so many times it's hard to keep track of (West, Keaton, Kilmer, Clooney, Bale, Affleck) but the one recurring theme is the suave and confident aura of the alter ego Bruce Wayne. He's larger than life and cooler than James Bond. Not the Robert Pattinson version though. I was as dubious as the next guy when he was announced as the new dark knight, but he plays it with an emotional understatement that I wasn't expecting. The epitome of the strong, silent type, his demeanor doesn't change from one identity to the other, and that is something that humanizes him more than previous renditions. Excellent choice in portrayal all around. Our introduction to Gotham is in the early days of the masked vigilante's story. We're spared the regurgitation of the back story (thankfully) and find a reclusive billionaire watching his city eaten up by corruption and violence. His only recourse is to take out his rage on the criminal element of the city, and he does it with reckless aplomb. Enter the Riddler (Paul Dano). Forget everything you remember about the Jim Carrey performance (you just thought about it, didn't you?) This Riddler is much more Heath Ledger, and much less Frank Gorchin. He's a haunting psychopath that never fully gets developed to the extent I was hoping, but the lack of screentime adds to the mystique. He's hunting Gotham's elite, and Batman is scrambling to catch him before he consumes any remaining vestige of hope in the darkest city in the world. Batman enlists the help of a new and improved Catwoman (Zoe Kravitz) and their chemistry provides the levity that the heaviness of the rest of the film needs. It's a bit out of sync with the tone, but the darkness is a bit much at times, so it is a welcome sidebar. As Batman and Jim Gordon (Jeffrey Wright) team up to catch the psycho killer, their quest takes them into the dark underbelly of the city, crossing paths with familiar characters and villains until the ultimate climax, which takes a page from "Se7en" a bit more than it probably should have. We end in Arkham Asylum, setting up the next chapter, which will inevitably give us yet another depiction of the award-winning character of the Joker. I'm imagining this film will make enough money to justify a sequel, and Warner Bros. can't seem to move beyond Batman in its constant quest to follow Marvel's goldmine that is its cinematic universe. The overall tone is darker than it's ever been. I know, it's Gotham, but this one is both gritty and haunting. In an "I could see this place actually existing" kind of way. The colors are muted, and the fantasy aspect has been stripped down to its skeleton. Kudos to Reeves for expressing his vision so powerfully and meticulously, and his version of the Batmobile is the best yet. Cinematically, it's always been a combination of a tank and a ferrari, but this one is unapologetically a muscle car with a turbine engine. Way bigger than it needs to be, but throaty and exciting. Nailed it. The music. Michael Giacchino (Oscar winner for "Up") has created a character all in itself. Subtle, haunting chords follow our anti-hero on his quest for vengeance from start to finish, and it's a bit primitive and redundant, but effective. Throw in a depressing Nirvana ditty with deep, monotonous subconscious lyrics, and we get a whole new portrayal of Batman. Matt Reeves actually said that he took a bit of inspiration from Kurt Cobain for his Bruce Wayne, and it's noticeable. The film is a dramatic departure from what we've seen before, but the familiarity and keeps it grounded. I personally love the direction, and am optimistic that it might be the kickstart that a new version of DC Justice League needs to get back on its feet. Unfortunately, with "Flash" and "Aquaman 2" on the horizon, we might not have the most promising trajectory, but there is always hope with the upcoming "Black Adam." There's a reason it's been rebooted a kazillion times; it's profitable. It also strikes a nerve in the human psyche. Masked vigilante justice is just so primitively appealing. This new Batman is a winner in my book, even if the character has been overdone. 7/10.

Best of 2020

2020-12-16T15:20:00.003-08:00

With the dumpster fire of 2020 nearly extinguished, we find ourselves contemplating some of the finer moments of the year from a cinematic point of view. Certainly the disruptions at theatres and postponement of many tentpole films (Marvel, DC, James Bond, Tom Cruise, etc.) had a negative impact on the menu of options, but there were still several great films, many of which will be up for some critical awards come 2021 despite never setting foot in a theatre in America. That said, this year does feel a bit different. I think my last theatrical viewing was in February, and although I do miss the thrill of sitting back and indulging in a highly-anticipated big-screen viewing. There's something about movie theatres that has always filled me with a sense of excitement and comfort. With digital streaming becoming the norm, and studios like Disney and Warner Bros. embracing the shift in cultural zeitgeist, we all find ourselves in a surreal place in history. I will fondly hold nostalgic memories of theatre experiences not for the films themselves, but for the feelings evoked. After all, that's what movies are all about; How they make you feel. Full disclosure, I haven't seen all of the films available. This is simply due to access issues as well as the time constraints of self-isolation but I have some idea of how awards season should go, and am curious how things will play out. Tops of my must-watch list (what I must watch, not you) is Nomadland. I'm expecting this to be the best picture of the year, with Chloe Zhao (the Rider, Eternals) and Frances McDormand in a surefire Best Actress nomination. Then there's Chadwick Bozeman's final film, Ma Rainey's Black Bottom, George Clooney's The Midnight Sky, Carey Mulligan's Promising Young Woman, and the fictitious revisionist historical biopic One Night in Miami. All of these show great potential, and I am excited to see each one when possible. The ultimate winner of the year is digital streaming studios. Netflix and Amazon have crushed 2020 either through their original stories or by purchasing hot properties that didn't have anywhere else to distribute. Whatever the circumstances, they have demonstrated the sustainability of this new model, and we will see how Warner Bros. blockbuster WW84 fares when released on HBOMax on Christmas. Disney+ didn't do too bad itself, and Apple has a handful of originals to contribute as well. Traditional studios are weighing options and will have to choose a side of moving forward or being left behind. Here are my thirteen favorite films that I highly recommend in no particular order. The Blockbuster 1. Tenet. Yes, I know it's cliche to put the biggest box office draw of 2020 on this list, but it was absolutely breathtaking and John David Washington and Robert Pattinson are both outstanding in Christopher Nolan's latest with notes of Inception and time inversion. It is complicated. Blink and you'll miss a lot, and I would highly recommend a second viewing to catch up on any gaps (just like Inception), but it is full of deeply metaphoric mindbending details. You know you want to see it, just set aside a few extra hours for the second viewing and some thoughtful reflection time. The New Guard 2 and 3. Extraction and Old Guard. Two Netflix properties with Chris Hemsworth and Charlize Theron, respectively. Both are legitimate blockbuster films that could have easily made nine figures at the box office, both could have also been glossed over as "made-for-tv" properties by a different lens, but with the new model of straight-to-digital-streaming, these two trailblazers stand out as well done, exciting, and proof positive that just because it's a Netflix film, doesn't mean it's not one of the best films of the year. The Sorkin Effect 4. The Trial of the Chicago 7. Aaron Sorkin in all his psilocybin-inspired screenwriting glory delivers a stellar biopic about the confluence of civil rights agendas in a time and place of unrest. With all the characters wittily speaking a mile-a-minute, the film is not only well-written, but it's delivered and performed exceptionally as well. The Quirky Duo 5 and 6. Palm Springs and King of Staten Island. Two lesser-known films that might not make anyone else's end of year list, I found Andy Samberg and Pete Davidson (SNL alumni) both captivating in a pair of comedies with more substance than seen at first glance. Both films are enjoyable and clever, but also tug a little at the heartstrings. The Uncomfortable Experience The Devil all the Time. In my book, this might be the best picture I've seen thus far. The characters are despicable and relatable in a setting that oozes backwater drama. Some may be turned off by some of the gritty material, but it strikes all the chords of what I'm into when it comes to raw cinematic craftsmanship. The Double-Take Love and Monsters. Say what? Really? I say yes. Clever dystopian story of mutated insects and reptiles that have driven survivors underground into bomb shelters. One man (Dylan O'Brien) ventures out to brave the danger to search for his long lost love. It's cheesy, predictable, and doesn't have particularly memorable characters or dialogue. But you know what? It's entertaining. The effects are pretty spectacular, and O'Brien's character is empathetic and has an ethereal quality that I just can't put my finger on. Whatever it is, the film is a great unexpected fun. The Character-Driven Vehicles Sound of Metal, Uncle Frank, Hillbilly Elegy, Black Bear. Acting mastercrafts all around. Riz Ahmed and sound editing that will win Oscars shine in the depressing Sound of Metal. Paul Bettany thrives in the period piece about the closeted gay uncle. Amy Adams hits all the right notes as the angry and abusive woman who just needed a way out. And finally, my Best Actress of the year, Aubrey Plaza puts on an absolute clinic in Black Bear, a film about the making of a film. The Underdog All Day and a Night. I loved this movie. Of course, I love Jeffrey Wright, and the writer/director wrote Black Panther as well, so there is that. This movie flew under the radar, and I even had to look up the name again when I was describing it to a friend. I'm not optimistic that it will end up on others' best of lists, but everything about it was fantastic and it will certainly end up on my Top 10 list once January hits. There are a lot of great films that have come out of this otherwise horrendous year, and I plan on finishing December by catching up on the ones I've been unable to see thus far, but I wanted to shake the rust off my blog (it's been a minute) and share my preliminary picks before 2021 pokes its head out. One thing that is certain is that there are no clear favorites in any of the categories (Tenet might have some technical categories wrapped up and Sound of Metal should take sound mixing and editing awards). Women will rule acting this season with McDormand, Adams, Plaza, and an understated performance by the always brilliant Meryl Streep capturing four of the nods. For the men, it's a little less predictable with Gary Oldman the only perennial fave for his take on 1930's Hollywood in Mank, and a posthumous nomination for Chadwick Bozeman seeming likely. Otherwise, I like Riz Ahmed (Sound of Metal) and young Ashton Sanders (All Day and a Night) as well as Paul Bettany (Uncle Frank) to potentially receive nominations. One thing that 2020 taught us is that awards season will require flexibility in our perception of what's typical or to be expected. There will be movies. There will be awards. And, those things won't be going away anytime soon, even if we do watch them in our bedroom, on our laptop, or even on our phone instead of on a big screen. As the Italians say, Viva La Cinema!

Oscars Preview

2020-02-08T15:07:00.004-08:00

The wait is almost over. Tomorrow we will find out who the Academy thinks should be recognized for achievement in film for 2019. I have to say, I was impressed with the accuracy of the nominees this year, and felt there were truly fewer snubs than in the NBA All Star game. I am not expecting the winners to deviate very far from predictions, and the winners will all assuredly be deserving. In a time when it's an honor just to be nominated, you could honestly make arguments in earnest that there are no less than two other deserving nominees, but that's not what matters. What matters is who wins. Tomorrow night, an actress will receive her second Oscar, and three people will receive their first (as actors).

Picture - 1917. Devastating and beautiful. The film is a true cinematic triumph and will be a model of excellence for several years to come.

Director - Sam Mendes. His visionary style created a breathtaking experience that honestly if you haven't seen it on the big screen, you really are missing out. 1917 is tremendous.

Cinematography - Roger Deakins. Anyone who can make a film appear done in two shots is a genius. I've loved his work for decades now.

Original Writing - Quentin Tarantino - Once Upon a Time in Hollywood. The master of banal dialogue and quirky characters created one of the stronger contenders this year, thanks in large part to his two leads, but there is something mesmerizing about the dialogue of a Tarantino movie. It sucks you in, and before you know it, you're having a great time.

Adapted Screenplay - Todd Philips, Joker. One of the weaker categories this year, this is the one pick I'm less confident with. Joker was a controversial film, but understanding the intent of the vision and the execution of the character, all of the darkness is completely justified.

Supporting Actor - Brad Pitt. A completely effortless portrayal of a guy who is too cool to care about anything bothering him. Brad Pitt will get his long sought-after Oscar and he deserves it. This stage of his career is going to be fun to watch as he has limitless possibilities in front of him, although his producing career is more likely to churn out more golden statues.

Supporting Actress - Laura Dern. Marriage Story was a difficult movie to love because it was so heartbreaking. I do remember while watching just being in awe of Laura Dern commanding every ounce of attention with every scene she was in. She'd better thank Noah Baumbach first and foremost for writing that character into existence.

Actor - Joaquin Phoenix - A no-brainer this year, Joaquin has emerged with a haunting performance that makes you think about Heath Ledger's iconic portrayal of the clown prince of Gotham and genuinely struggle to decide who played it better. A ripe role, he's the perfect actor to pull it off, and one prediction is that his acceptance speech will be the wildest one of the night.

Actress - Renee Zellweger. Not my favorite film of the year, and not my favorite actress, but a home run performance. I wouldn't be upset if another actress won, but I also doubt it will happen. Sincerely.

2019 was a record-shattering year for film, and 1917, Once Upon a Time... In Hollywood, and Ford v Ferrari were the clear best films of the year. Avengers blew the box office out of orbit, and Midsommar left a mark as a guilty horror pleasure. Paddleton came and went on Netflix without so much as a mention, and the Peanut Butter Falcon raised my eyebrows to a Shia LeBeouf resurrection. His performance in Honey Boy is nothing to sneeze at either.

I'm already looking forward to 2020's delivery of goods. I'm just ready for the Trump Impeachment film. I'm guessing Adam McKay is working on something already and wouldn't be surprised if Russell Crowe or Christian Bale went after the role. With Meryl Streep as Nancy Pelosi, and Steve Carell as Adam Schiff? Just off the top of my head.

1917

2020-01-10T08:10:00.001-08:00

Rarely do I find myself in awe of the technical execution of a film. "The Revenant" comes to mind, as does "No Country for Old Men." "1917" is not just a World War I film, it is also a visual and cinematic masterpiece that is not just the best film of the year by a mile, but also makes its mark as one of the best films ever made. The story, acting, and even music could have been stronger, but the spell cast by the camera is nothing short of breathtaking. Shot as one continuous scene, there was only one obvious camera cut in nearly two hours, and a couple of instances where trick editing could have occurred. The lack of cuts builds a tension and immersion into the journey of Corporals Blake (Dean-Charles Chapman) and Schofield (George MacKay). The journey is the most realistic, and meticulously crafted WWI story ever brought to life on screen.

Written by Sam Mendes based on stories told by his grandfather, the narrative immediately finds itself in "Saving Private Ryan" territory. The stark difference is there's no Tom Hanks or Matt Damon, and the ominous silence and lack of gratuitous violence is noticeable. George MacKay (deserves a Best Actor Oscar nomination) and Dean-Charles Chapman are two soldiers sent through no-man's land to deliver an urgent message to a Colonel about to go over the trenches with nearly 1,600 British soldiers. If they fail to deliver the message in time, the soldiers will be massacred. What we experience through the brilliant camera's lens is a race against both fear and time.

Roger Deakins has delivered a tour de force with his camerawork here. I would bet my life savings that he takes home his second Oscar, although he should have a half dozen by now. I will happily line up to see any project he works on opening night for the rest of his hopefully long career. He has made the Coen Brothers, Dennis Villenueve, and Sam Mendes the directors they are today.

The film has come out to a great deal of critical acclaim, hype, and even two Golden Globe awards, but it is a landmark film that should inspire a higher expectation of technical achievement for years or even generations to come. It's that good. Sam Mendes' ambition shows clearly, and he will reap the rewards for his efforts.

Last year, there was a documentary that stirred me. "They Shall not Grow Old" by Peter Jackson. He compiled archive footage and letters and brought them to life through color restoration, and it shone a light on WWI like never before. "1917" is the fiction, blockbuster answer to that documentary, and together they have done the Great War justice in ways never accomplished in the past (no offense to "All Quiet on the Western Front," "Paths of Glory," "Johnny Got his Gun," "War Horse," or "A Very Long Engagement").

Although rated R for realism, it is tastefully done in a way that can be appreciated by war film buffs and the squeamish alike. It's a mesmerizing trip back to 1917 France, and the attention to details is nothing short of stirring. This is what a two-hour cinematic experience is supposed to feel like. I applaud Sam Mendes and Roger Deakins and will cheer when they are rewarded with Oscars next month. 10/10.

2019 Year in Review

2020-01-05T13:50:00.001-08:00

With 2019 in the books, it's time for some reviews and predictions. Let me start with my top 10 movies of the year. Disclaimer, there are a few I wasn't able to see... yet (1917, Honey Boy, The Lighthouse, Just Mercy being most notable). That said, here are my top 10 films of 2019 in alphabetical order:

Ford v Ferrari
Jojo Rabbit
Little Women
Marriage Story
Midsommar
Once Upon a Time in Hollywood
Paddleton
Peanut Butter Falcon
The Two Popes
Uncut Gems

I'm expecting 1917 to skyrocket to the top of the list, as it's one of my most anticipated awards-season films, but as of right now, Ford v Ferrari is my Best Picture. However, since it wasn't nominated, I'm expecting Marriage Story and Once Upon a Time in Hollywood to clean up at the Golden Globes this year. These will set the precedent for the Oscars, but here is who deserves to win in the Golden Globes categories:

Best Drama - Marriage Story
Best Comedy - Once Upon a Time in Hollywood
Best Actor - Drama - Joaquin Phoenix (although I wouldn't be made at a Jonathan Pryce or Christian Bale win either but Joaquin carried his film)
Best Actor - Comedy - Leonardo DiCaprio
Best Actress - Drama - Rene Zellweger
Best Actress - Comedy - Awkwafina
Best Director - Quentin Tarantino (although Sam Mendes might win if 1917 is as great as I am hearing)
Best Supporting Actor - Brad Pitt
Best Supporting Actress - Laura Dern
Best Screenplay - Quentin Tarantino (although BongJoon Ho might be deserving if Parasite is as good as advertised)
Best Foreign Language - Parasite

We'll see how it pans out tonight...

Star Wars: Episode IX - The Rise of Skywalker

2019-12-20T07:58:00.002-08:00

Imagine for a moment, if you will, Peter Jackson being given the momentous task of not only directing "Return of the King," but also writing it so that the Lord of the Rings faithful would all be satisfied. Such was the task placed squarely on the shoulders of action franchise wunderkind JJ Abrams. Stepping in for Colin Trevorrow (one of six writers), Abrams anchors the ninth and presumably final installment of the iconic, 42 year old universe that has endeared literally generations of movie-going fans. On a combined budget of $1.3 billion, and a collective gross of $9.3 billion and counting (12 films total), the universe has revolutionized how Hollywood looks at extended universes (Marvel - I'm looking at you).

The film begins with Kylo Ren, the new Supreme Leader of the First Order, using a mysterious Sith wayfinder to discover that the Emperor isn't dead at all. In fact, he lives on the hidden planet of Exicle, and he's building an unstoppable army. He offers Kylo the throne with one small quid pro quo; Kill the girl. Of course he means our newly anointed heroine, Rey. The gang gets into shenanigans, they search for a wayfinder of their own that they can use to attack the Sith Lord, and Rey discovers the truth about her origin story. Along the way we make some new friends, get glimpses of creatures and characters from over the years, and get one last stand with some twists and turns.

The ending was somewhat unexpected, and despite loud objections by members of the audience who took to shouting at the screen (they must have been disappointed), the last chapter has now been written and the Skywalker saga has been closed. Is this the last we'll see of our friends? Probably not. $10,000,000,000 says there is more story to be told. In fact, Disney+ is seeing success with "The Mandalorian" and Ewan McGregor just announced that he is reprising his Obi-Wan Kenobi role in a new series coming in 2021. Rian Johnson is rumored to be working on a separate trilogy of his own, and George Lucas still has his fingers in the pie even after exiting with the $4 billion he received for the rights to his baby. Half of it was Disney stock, valued at $46 a share. Today, the stock is worth $130 a share, so his $2 billion is worth approximately $5.7 billion now. Not a bad haul for a crazy idea about an ancient space magic and the battle of good versus evil.

Abrams, who successfully revived the franchise with 2015's "The Force Awakens" introduced us to the new generation of heroes and villains to mixed reviews. The complaints numerous, it was unavoidable and predestined to be criticized endlessly due to the fanaticism of the core followers. I personally liked it after the prequels were special effects overkill.

Fast forward to Christmas of 2019. Forty-two years of story-telling has built to one epic finale. Imagine the pressure on the team of writers. Deliver a satisfying conclusion to a cherished childhood experience for millions, or forever face the scorn of audiences. It's a true Kobayashi Maru (Star Trek reference).

The reason I mention this is that as a film critic, there are sometimes that emotions cloud judgment when watching a movie. Often it enhances the experience and ends in a positive review, but sometimes I find myself walking into the theatre with expectations so unrealistic that no matter how strong the story, direction, acting, special effects, or execution are, there is something missing. I admit, I have grown apart from my love of Star Wars. As a seven year old, watching Return of the Jedi, I wanted to be Han Solo (most of my friends wanted to be Luke). But now, I am more of an observer, and try as I might, I have simply outgrown the unabashed love of the franchise.

That said, Episode IX (that's 9 for the young ones who don't know Roman numerals or cursive or spelling), upon some reflection, was better than I was expecting. It was a truly satisfying conclusion with callbacks to elements of all eight previous films. The somber, existential tone of "The Last Jedi" gives way to a much more popcorn-friendly, explosion and special-effects driven vehicle that doesn't slow down too much to lose the audience interest. Most questions are answered and aside from an eye-rolling "Avengers: Endgame" ploy, it followed the spirit of the franchise from start to finish.

Take it with a grain of cheese and don't overthink your expectations. Enjoy the ride, remember why you loved Star Wars in the first place, and know that this isn't truly the end of the line, because as we know about Jedi, nobody is really ever gone. 8/10.

Ford v Ferrari

2019-11-16T11:46:00.001-08:00

The first Oscar-worthy picture of the year has landed, and in all my years and tens of thousands of films viewed (possibly an exaggeration, but who knows?), I have never experienced a racing film quite this complete and masterfully done. At a robust two and a half hours, it's a bit long-winded (it seems like we experience the full twenty-four hour of LeMans near the end), but for some reason, it maintains focus and paces itself with the brilliant acting of two of Hollywood's best.

Based on the true story of Carroll Shelby's collaboration with Lee Iacoca and Henry Ford to create a car capable of competing with the Italian racing stalwart, Ferrari, in the mid-1960's. Blending elements of nostalgic Americana, the character-driven vehicle relies heavily on props, which in this particular case, is the drool-worthy supercar icon, the Ford GT40. Kudos to the authenticity and attention to detail by director James Mangold (more on him in a bit) and the production team. You feel like you are part of American history, the coming of age story of domestic automobiles.

Carroll Shelby (Matt Damon) is a former racer-turned custom sports car maker who has an endearing relationship with the socially brusque, but genius mechanic/driver Ken Miles (Christian Bale). They tinker and test the limits of their new car (and their relationship) on and off the track. It's a magical relationship of mutual respect, and constantly pushing back against the iconic car manufacturer and the legacy of its founder. Josh Lucas plays Leo Beebe, the executive tasked with putting Ford up against Ferrari on the biggest stage of all, LeMans. His antagonistic approach strengthens the resolve of the unlikely duo, and makes this underdog story one for the ages.

Christian Bale will receive a Best Actor nomination for his work. He's absolutely phenomenal as a journeyman racer who keeps burning professional bridges with his hot temper, but whose comfort and precision behind the wheel is undeniably brilliant. Adding depth to the character is a quirky but loving relationship with his supportive wife, Mollie (Caitriona Balfa) and his constant shadow and biggest fan, his son Pete (Noah Jupe). The father/son relationship was subtle, but incredibly powerful from start to finish, and I'm looking forward to many years of Noah Jupe's work. He has the child "it" factor that many lack. He's going to be around in the industry for a long time.

Damon's portrayal of Shelby is fantastic as he's given most of the film's best lines in comic relief. His admiration and respect for Miles elevates the legendary status of the racing intrigue for the times when the camera is in, above, behind, or next to the beautiful GT40. Although the story is clearly centered around Ken Miles, Carroll Shelby is the star-power from the historical perspective.

The racing puts you on the edge of your seat with a low, throaty, rumbling idle that accelerates to nearly two-hundred and twenty miles an hour. What blew me away was that although there were several races, and the racing screen-time probably approached ninety minutes or more, it never got old or stagnant. The actors and director (and screenwriters) found a way to keep it fresh, interesting, and emotional.

Director James Mangold ("Logan," "Walk the Line," the underrated "Cop Land") delivers a stellar opus that will stand the test of time in the auto racing genre as one of, if not the greatest film to grace the screen. No offense to "Rush," "Days of Thunder," or even the "Fast and Furious" films, but "Ford v Ferrari" just takes exceptional racing, and mixes it with incredible acting, masterful direction, and a story worthy of a gold statuette.

I expected "Ford v Ferrari" to be good, but my expectations were overwhelmed. The only way to adequately describe the film is that it is complete. So many different elements are done exquisitely well, so I can confidently say that this is the current front-runner for Best Picture. Likely there will be something else that comes along in the next six weeks, but until then, the bar has been set. If you enjoy car racing in the slightest, this film is a must-see. If you like Bale or Damon, their performances make it a must-see as well. "Ford v Ferrari" belongs in the pantheon of great sports films, but also as a character study of resolve, ingenuity, and competition. 10/10.

Joker

2019-10-05T15:02:00.003-07:00

Writer/Director Todd Phillips ("The Hangover") had a picture of Joaquin Phoenix on his computer while he wrote the script for this film, and he stated there was no "plan B" if he didn't take the role. Personally, I can't imagine another actor playing the role so naturally, albeit disturbing and awkward. "Joker" is a one-man show to be certain, and it is every bit worth the price of admission to experience his story.

"Joker" is an origin story, and has ties to the Batman universe, but it is more subtle and introspective and hopefully will stand alone as a cinematic gem instead of a gateway into another futile attempt by DC to replicate Marvel's universe. Gotham City is painted as a gritty 1970's New York City with garbage piling up, senseless subway crime, and a deafening cry for society to take notice of the madness that is human nature. It's a bleak environment to be surviving in, and we see mostly the have nots as opposed to the haves. Enter Arthur Fleck (Phoenix). He's a grown man living with his mother, working humiliating gigs as a clown to make ends meet. He lives in squalor, but doesn't seem to care, and he has fantasies about romantic relationships and is being ignored by his social worker. Society is slowly letting him down with every tragic turn of events. His dream is to be a stand-up comedian, and appear on the Murray Franklin show (played magnificently by Robert De Niro), which is an inflated caricature of the delusional nature of his imagination. He is ignored by the system, a poster boy of someone with nothing going for them. Yet, there is something tremendously endearing about him. He is a true victim of his circumstances. Desperate for a break, only wanting a fair shake, he doesn't seem to be malicious by nature, and that's what makes for a great villain. He doesn't fit the villain archetype at all, just a strange dude with a lot of issues. Over the course of the film though, he's literally and proverbially kicked while he's down, and what gets back up is a creature that society is responsible for creating, and now they must live with the consequences.

The thing that makes this film work brilliantly is that Arthur Fleck is a humorless man. He's depressed, disturbed, and by all outside perspectives, he's strange. He even has a medical condition where he awkwardly laughs at inappropriate times out of sheer nervousness, but he desperately is looking for joy and humor in his life. In fact, it's really all he is looking for. Ironically, he only finds joy and attention through malicious and senseless acts of extreme violence and it's only when he gets a taste that he realizes what real happiness is. The optics of this idea is disturbing to be sure, but captured in a two-hour film, it is emotional dynamite. Coupled with one of the greatest living actors (that's right, I said it), this is a rich serving of anti-hero exploration, and although the plot moves slowly, it is forgivable because of the sheer amount of magnetism that Phoenix brings to his role.

Phoenix delivers an acting opus as the centerpiece of this anti-hero character study. An iconic villain that is the envy of practically every actor alive, and after 2008's "Dark Knight" performance by Heath Ledger, one that has a very large pair of shoes to fill. Let's forget about Jared Leto's "Suicide Squad" for a minute as it was pure garbage and a completely wasted opportunity. Phoenix resists the temptation to overindulge in the character to a chilling effect. Viewing his performance takes you into the mean streets of 1970's New York, but spins it with what can only be described as authentic method acting. The current front-runner for Best Actor in my mind, it will take a tour de force to wrestle the statue away from him when the Oscars come around.

Where does DC go from here? Well, there is another incarnation of "Batman" in the works with Robert Pattinson as the caped crusader. Aside from that, I could see the exploration of more villains in stand-alone origin stories. I just hope they avoid the temptation to explore a sequel, and maintain the gritty and dark tone that makes Gotham so attractive in the first place. With recent successes of R-rated superhero films ("Deadpool," "Logan," "Venom"), it's clear that audiences are ready and eager to get more personal with some of our notorious villains.

Already on pace to break October records, "Joker" has hit pay dirt with audiences, critics, and couldn't have dropped at a more appropriate time. Whether life imitates art, or art imitates life, the people feel neglected and want attention from those in power. "Joker" absolutely commands attention. 9/10.

Once Upon a Time... In Hollywood

2019-07-25T21:54:00.002-07:00

Not everyone admits they like Tarantino movies, but everyone respects the quirky, sometimes gratuitous nature of the film maker's style. He's inserted himself into the industry and stands in a class of his own. There is an expectation among audiences when one of Tarantino's films comes out, particularly as awards buzz grows. Critics lead the way, and audiences listen, and what I'm hearing is that it's a strong entry in his diverse (is it though?) catalog of films. "Once Upon a Time... In Hollywood" is certainly filled with likely awards nominees moving forward, but beyond that, it's a satisfying and entertaining two and a half hours.

His latest pairs Leonardo DiCaprio as Rick Dalton, a fading star in beautiful 1969 Hollywood. Brad Pitt, in one of his best performances in years, is Cliff Booth, Rick's best friend, consigliere, and stunt double. The sets take you back in time in a light and fluffy love letter to the awkward post-classical age of American cinema with Coupe DeVilles driving around town, neon marquee signs along the strip, and cigarettes galore. Tarantino loves his cigarettes in film. The two buddies see the sun setting on their careers while hippies take over the Hollywood Hills, and a Roman Polanski and Charles Manson back story sets up the incredible (but predictable) ending that departs from the "Pulp Fiction" style and goes straight into "Inglorious Basterds" territory.

Leonardo has emerged as the best current actor in Hollywood. This film gives him the chance to show a little more range than in the past as he acts within the headspace of an actor on a film about an actor. It's really incredible to see his work demonstrated seemingly authentically, particularly in a pair of fantastic scenes with Timothy Olyphant, and the late Luke Perry. Equally commanding on the screen is Pitt, who is carefree and upbeat. It's a refreshing character, and harkens back to "Moneyball" as he brings the casual coolness of the actual Brad Pitt to the screen.

As with all Tarantino films, there is a laundry list of actors and cameos that seem to find their way into the final cut (a lengthy 2 hours and 40 minutes) but none truly develop into anything memorable. Margot Robbie's Sharon Tate is really the only other actor who appears in more than a few scenes, and she plays a bubbly, naive aspiring actress as well as can be expected, but it's sensationalism and wall covering. A great, tragic familiar story to weave into an otherwise fictional account that's driven almost entirely by the two leading men.

As always, Tarantino spins an entertaining tale. You can see glimpses of his own personality hidden within nearly every frame, and he's evolved as a film maker (not too much), and despite a pretty satisfying ending, it doesn't capture the lightning in a bottle from 1994, and isn't worthy of comparisons to "Pulp Fiction". Although set in Hollywood, this film carries the torch of the Western genre, which is where Quentin has been spending a lot of time lately ("Django Unchained," "The Hateful Eight"). His next project is rumored to be his last (it won't be) and is either the third entry in the "Kill Bill" saga, or an R-rated Star Trek story that he's been wanting to make for some time. My vote is both end up happening in the next decade, although I really did enjoy seeing Pitt and DiCaprio sharing the screen.

People tend to compare or rank Tarantino's films, and use that as a barometer of how good this film is, so obviously the top three films of his are "Pulp Fiction," "Reservoir Dogs," and "Inglorious Basterds," but this one definitely earns its way into the top five with the combination of acting, entertaining story, and satisfying ending. This summer seems to lack strong independent films, and although you could argue that a 95 million dollar budget doesn't really qualify, until he directs "Star Trek," he's still an indy rebel.

If you're a fan of good acting, "Once Upon a Time... In Hollywood" is a clinic. If you like revisionist historical fiction stories, you're in luck. And if you just like entertaining movies, you won't be disappointed. Caution: if you can't handle a slow burn that doesn't really follow any sensible plot lines, you might not like it. It's not for everyone, but I for one found it to be one of the best movies I've seen this year. I expect it will garner some awards recognition come winter, and deservedly so. 9/10.

Avengers: Endgame

2019-04-26T08:54:00.000-07:00

It's been awhile since I did a review, but it was... inevitable... that I review "Endgame". I will keep it spoiler-free because it's the right thing to do. The good news is that the previews throw out some red herrings, so if you can avoid spoilers, you will be thoroughly surprised and entertained. The bad news is that spoilers abound, so if you use the Internet regularly, you need to see the film before they snake their way into your life. People will be talking about this film fast and furious, and no, Ant-Man (Paul Rudd) does not fly into Thanos' butt to kill him.

Nearly a year after the cataclysmic and abrupt ending to "Infinity War", audiences have been salivating and theorizing in anticipation of the epic finale to the ten year and multi-billion dollar Marvel Comic Extended Universe. It's not the actual finale, but it marks the end to phase three. For those unfamiliar, phase one introduced our core heroes (Hulk, Iron Man, Thor, Captain America) and ended with 2012's "Avengers". Phase two was the core sequels, introduction to the "Guardians of the Galaxy," the Avengers sequel, "Age of Ultron" and "Ant-Man". Phase three expanded the universe with Dr. Strange, Black Panther, Spider-Man, and Captain Marvel. The culmination of Phase Three is "Endgame" and now this summer's "Spider-Man: Far From Home" will technically wrap up Phase three, but more likely will jump start Phase four ("Black Widow," "The Eternals," "Dr. Strange 2," "Black Panther 2," "Guardians of the Galaxy 3"). Are you all caught up now?

Thanos (voiced brilliantly by Josh Brolin), who is perhaps the greatest antagonist of the 21st Century (not living in the White House), has decimated the universe with the devastating snap of his fingers. Our surviving Avengers are aimless, searching for purpose and direction now that half of the human population has suddenly vanished. Their only hope is to seek out the infinity stones and hope that they can turn back time to bring their friends back and stop Thanos.

Time travel. Why did it have to be time travel? I'm glad you asked. Ever since we were introduced to the infinity stones in an agonizing fashion over nearly twenty films, we have been slowly meant to believe that there is a cosmic force more powerful than any fathomable law of physics or science. The stones collectively showed their true potential during "Infinity War" and so they are the most valuable treasure in history. They do a nice job of explaining the Marvel version of time travel theory, which is far different than that of "Back to the Future" or "Hot Tub Time Machine." Anyhow, the only way to undo the "snappening" is to go back and change history.

It's no coincidence that the survivors of the snap happen to be our original heroes; Captain, Iron Man, Thor, Hulk, Black Widow. This film is their swan song as they make way for the new generation of heroes who we have come to respect and love.

Iron Man (Robert Downey Jr.) has been the face of the Avengers since day one. His films have literally created everything that followed in both tone and credibility. Marvel could have easily gone the direction of DC and been a scattershot of single films, but the vision, the exceptional casting, and most importantly, the stamina to get to the endgame is nothing short of remarkable. Iron Man was the one who showed the most character growth from start to finish, and his portrayal and performance in his final appearance (his salary is untenable. He's made over $200 million as the character with salaries and back end cuts rising with each film). Downey's portrayal of Tony Stark is effortless as usual, and drives the essence of the entire franchise. His final film is subtle, but full of emotional baggage, and inner-struggles (par for the course with Tony).

If Iron Man is the face of the franchise, Captain America (Chris Evans) is the heart. His moral compass is always true, and it's his unwavering courage, loyalty, and spirit of fight that has made him so endearing over the years. Evolving from a boy scout to a jaded, scorned warrior, and back to somewhere in between. It's Captain's journey that is the most heartbreaking in the end, and to be candid, Captain America is the strongest character developed from start to finish in "Endgame" and it's a fitting ending to his legacy.

Thor is my favorite Avenger, and admittedly, his role in "Endgame" was disappointing to say the least. After his rip-roaring showing of might as the God of Thunder at the end of "Infinity War" he descends into more comic relief and less godliness than is necessary. It's probably the most glaring mistake by the writers and directors, but hey, you can't expect perfection.

Captain Marvel (Brie Larson) joins the team (obviously) to help balance the scales of power in the revenge plot against the Mad Titan, and we are treated to a glorious three hours of ebbs and flows of action, emotion, and ultimately, a finale fitting of "Return of the King" or "Return of the Jedi" status.

The final battle sequence will go down in history as one of the more epic battles in cinematic history, and makes the whole buildup worthwhile. The whole twenty-two film, ten-year journey.

After a year of speculation, anticipation, theories, set photo leaks, scrutinized interviews, and attempts to figure out what finally happened after Thanos' snap, we have closure. Maybe now we can all rest now. Until July's "Spider-Man: Far From Home." "Avengers: Endgame" is tremendous, and checks all of the boxes of what makes a cinematic titan. Personally, a little disappointed, but critically, I was blown away in every way imaginable. 9/10.

Captain Marvel

2019-03-08T08:40:00.000-08:00

After an agonizing wait since "Avengers: Infinity War" last April, we finally have the next step toward resolution of the longest-running action film universe soap opera in history (aside from the Skywalker saga). "Ant-Man and the Wasp" and "Spider-Man: Into the Spiderverse" did very little to move the MCEU story forward.

The biggest disappointment to me personally occurred even before the film began. No new "Avengers: Endgame" preview? and no new "Spider-Man: Far From Home" preview? What kind of malarkey is this? To add insult to injury, the regularly anticipated post-credits scene(s) did little to nothing to illuminate the direction of the highly shrouded mystery that is the next film, coming a mere six weeks from now. Since that is the source of my biggest disappointment, it speaks volumes of the magic that Marvel has created in making every new film release feel like Christmas Eve.

Captain Marvel is a new character to the uninitiated, but we flash back to the time of grunge, slow internet dial-up, and generic government sedans. There's even a Blockbuster Video cameo to boot. Nick Fury (Samuel L. Jackson) is a young, jaded S.H.I.E.L.D agent who stumbles upon the discovery that there are two warring alien species, and their fight has landed on Earth. The Kree are the intelligent, brave, noble warrior species who are battling the reptilian, shapeshifting Skrulls, who hold a secret that will be revealed by the end of the movie (and hopefully even more by the end of "Endgame.")

Carol Danvers, aka Captain Marvel (Brie Larson), is a Kree warrior with long-term memory loss. She awakes with strange powers amidst a flurry of flashbacks, and we are immersed in back-story in a somewhat clever trope. She's a human daredevil Air Force pilot, but how did she end up as a blue-blooded alien superhero? Don't worry, you'll find out by the end of the film. Her mission finds her following a rogue Skrull detachment, while uncovering her own truth along the way, and after meeting with Nick Fury, we see the birth of the Avengers Initiative.

Brie Larson plays the role with a breezy ease that is at first annoying, but becomes endearing over time as you get to know her wit and confidence. She has a strong rapport with her Kree mentor, Yon-Rogg (Jude Law) but more importantly, opens up a side of Nick Fury that we haven't seen before. In a sense, this is his origin as well, and frankly, opens up a twenty-year window of prequel opportunities in the process.

What I loved about this film is the homage to Stan Lee first and foremost. The narrative moves quickly and with the wit that would make James Gunn proud (sidebar, I am very optimistic on the upcoming "Suicide Squad 2" since Idris Elba took over Will Smith's spot and James Gunn was attached). The dialogue, and casual tone of the characters make this a sharp detour from the heavy "Avengers" tone, and opens a new, more family-friendly interstellar universe (assuming the "Guardians" franchise is dead). We see Korath (Djimon Honsou) and Ronan the Accuser (Lee Pace) make appearances, so it seems like the sequel(s) will be the connective tissue for the upcoming "Eternals" storyline (2020 and beyond).

You may never look at cats (flurkin?) in quite the same way, as Goose plays an eerily important role in this one. Additionally, the trending toward establishing strong antagonists (Thanos, Killmonger) continues to bode well for the MCEU as Ben Mendelsohn kills it as Talos, the rogue Skrull infiltrator.

In the end, this is an exciting new character full of franchise potential galore. She's part of the new core Avengers going forward (Black Panther, Spider-Man, Dr. Strange) and fills the red, yellow, and blue suit as well as Chris Evans did in his star-spangled getup. You know you're going to see it, even if you're just killing time until "Endgame." 7/10.

Oscar Predictions 2019

2019-02-22T15:56:00.000-08:00

The event of the year has snuck up on me, and fortunately I was able to watch every contender in every major category, so there are no asterisks or excuses. Instead of doing my usual who will and who should win contrast, I'm going to simply mention the most deserving award winner based on a variety of factors. Are these the individuals I think will actually win? Not in every case, but these are the best in their respective categories this year nonetheless. Keep in mind that I don't have a vote, and I don't have the arrogance to think I have the eye or ear for some of the more technical categories, so I will stick with the big 4 acting, the big 4 production, and cinematography and song because those are fun and I think the cinematographer is the unsung hero of a film in many cases (Deakins, you're my hero!) Anyhow, here are the most deserving winners of the year. Drumroll please.

Best Actor - The best actor of the year was most definitely Rami Malek of "Bohemian Rhapsody". The film was a fun journey down the road of familiar rock anthems, and his portrayal of the iconic Freddy Mercury was nothing short of captivating. I intentionally limited digging into the production details as there's the whole Bryan Singer thing, and although I don't know how much actual singing there was, the performance was picture perfect. Christian Bale will get his Best Actor Oscar before his career is over, but this year belongs to Rami.

Best Actress - Glenn Close kills it in "The Wife" and wins the category with little competition. Long thought of as an A-list actress, it took the perfect role (opposite a truly magnificent Jonathan Pryce) to break the nomination curse at the lucky number seven.

Best Supporting Actor - Jonathan Pryce deserves the award, but he may not technically qualify, so I'll move to my second choice, Michael B. Jordan for his subtle and brilliant role as the antagonist Killmonger in "Black Panther". Of the nominated, Mahershala Ali has the best performance, but I would say supporting actor is a stretch as he shared screen time with Viggo Mortensen. This category is typically my perennial favorite, but this is a weak year. Ali gets the statue, but Pryce or Jordan really deserved it.

Best Supporting Actress - Also a weak year for nominations, my award goes to an actress who tragically wasn't nominated. Thomasin McKenzie of "Leave No Trace". Only eighteen years young, and performing in a low-budget independent film that was one of the best of the year, but didn't get the exposure it needed for Oscar gold. A shame, but keep your eye on this young woman in the future.

Best Director - Probably the least exciting category because Alfonso Cuaron demolished the competition with "Roma". I didn't care for the narrative, but admired the detail, the beauty, and the emotion conjured by his masterful eye. He should win and will win with relative ease.

Best Picture - I've waffled on this one in recent days, and have arguments for several films to win, but honestly, it seems like the stars are in the right alignment for "A Star is Born" to take home the trophy. "Green Book" was fantastic, but missed some of the opportunities to portray a raw character, although some of the scenes were beautifully done. It came off as a bit too commercial in the end. "Vice" was my favorite of the nominees, but it was the writing and witty humor along with A-list acting the pushed it over the edge for me. "A Star is Born" just had enough of everything to win me over in the end. The acting, direction, writing, music, and execution of story was tremendous, and speaks volumes to Bradley Cooper's future behind the camera. It deserves the award in a year when there is no clear favorite.

Best Original Screenplay - I judge an original screenplay by a variety of indicators; dialogue obviously, character depth, story, and how it made me feel. Not all films are designed to make you feel happy in the end, but if it achieved its desired objective (see "Manchester by the Sea"), it's a truly great film. Of the nominees, I have to say Adam McKay's "Vice" gave me the most satisfaction and left the biggest impression on me. I love his work, and am truly excited about his future stories, and judging by his casting in recent films, most of Hollywood is pretty excited about it too.

Best Adapted Screenplay - I tend to look at adapted screenplays as a smidge less impressive than original, but that's the writer snob in me. This year, I have to go with "Blackkklansman" as the most well-written piece. I was pleased when it was included on the best picture list, and much of that is because of the sharp, breezy writing by Spike Lee and his colleagues. Great movie.

Best Cinematographer - Alfonso Cuaron will pick up a trifecta with his masterful cinematography combined with his Foreign Film win as well. If for some reason "Roma" wins best picture, he will net himself an impressive 4 Oscars in one night, which to my knowledge is unprecedented. I'm speculating that he gets 3, which is not too shabby.

Best Song - Shallow by Lady Gaga and Bradley Cooper. This was the most riveting musical ditty of the year, and not just because it was catchy. The song itself contributed to the gravitas of the film and contained more emotional beauty than can be described. It just frankly worked wonders in bridging the narrative, and exposing and developing the characters. It's a beautiful song when you peel back the layers and look at it as a metaphoric plot device. Sheer cinematic magic.

Other winners? "Spider-Man: Into the Spider-verse", and "Free Solo" (because Mr. Rogers got snubbed). The rest of the categories, I could predict, but I'd be throwing a dart blindfolded.

It will no doubt be an interesting evening, full of potential Monday morning arguments, but it's good for the industry to have categories up in the air until the envelope is opened. Let's just hope that Faye Dunaway and Warren Beatty don't screw it up this time.

Alita: Battle Angel

2019-02-16T11:07:00.001-08:00

An innocent cybernetic super-soldier warrior girl (Rosa Salazar) is found in a scrap heap by a child-longing cyber-surgeon (Christoph Waltz), leading to a rebirth that will change the way civilization has regressed. Without getting into too much detail of the clever but cliche dystopia, there are haves and have nots. The lowly Iron City dwellers, and the mysterious upper crust living in Salem (pronounced Solemn), a majestic city in the sky. Lawlessness in the city leads to gangs of hunter warriors, futuristic bounty hunters who work for the kingpin, Vector (Mahershala Ali). He in turn works for the faceless eye in the sky, Nova, who is played in a hilarious creditless cameo by... I won't spoil it. As Alita learns about her past, she learns about her future, and she begins to embrace her destiny.

"Alita: Battle Angel" has been in gestation for decades. James Cameron created "Dark Angel" back in 2000, and although unrelated ("Alita" is based on the graphic novel "Gunnm" by Yukito Kishiro) it was a preview of a concept Cameron had of a dystopian future where an elite female warrior saves humanity. It's a timeless tale of... wait, it's not. Cameron is unarguably one of the most visionary directors in history, but his storytelling leaves much to be desired. Remember that little thing he did awhile back, "Avatar?" Everything except the story (and dialogue) was absolute golden brilliance. It was a visual orgasm that moviegoers had never experienced before, and likely won't again (until "Avatar 2" hits in 2020). I'm not saying "Avatar" wasn't worth watching more than once, it is a well-executed and supercool experience, but let's be honest, the "Fern Gully" criticisms and one-with-nature zen message didn't really add value to the action and effects.

This was the reason I was excited to experience the IMAX 3D version of "Alita" to just get a glimmer of cutting edge visual effects. Well, I have some good news and I have some bad news. Which would you like first? The bad news is that the story is weak and recycled from more 1980's sci-fi action films than I could name. The love story is awkward and frankly kind of uncomfortable, and the dialogue is next to awful. The weapons and fight scenes are a bit clunky and blunt (lots of oversized hammers, saws, axes, etc.) and the sporting event sidebar is just unnecessary and adds distraction and cheese to the narrative.

The good news is that two Oscar winning actors, Jennifer Connelly, Jackie Early Haley's voice (my favorite part of the movie) and Rosa Salazar in a stunning motion-capture performance salvage the scrap heap of a story, but just barely. They don't spend too much time developing the 26th century universe, and don't waste our time with the back story flashbacks, or explaining how things work in the new time frame. They just jump into it and move forward. Kudos to Cameron for that. Additionally, and most importantly, the film is visually stunning from start to finish.

The first installment of a trilogy, the next episode will be based on "Last Order" and the third on "Mars Chronicle." I would expect this trilogy to continue as it is clearly a passion project of Cameron, and is likely to make money globally due to the high quality visual effects. Besides, Cameron will get to play with new technology in his spare time while he's developing "Avatar 3, 4, and 5". This is assuming director Robert Rodriguez is interested in continuing, as this was certainly no easy feat. The attention to detail is obvious, and I admire the work and toil this must have taken.

It's for these reasons that I give it a slightly higher rating than I would typically to a movie of this type. I was impressed and disappointed at the same time, but honestly, it synced up with my expectations pretty closely. This is a typically weak time of year for films, and with a lack of viable entertainment options, there are certainly worse ways to spend two hours of your time. 7/10. For the love of Cameron.

Why Disney has Already Won 2019

2019-02-14T11:08:00.001-08:00

Disney has long been a titan in the pantheon of cinema, but 2019 just might be a landmark year, and I would recommend purchasing stock before it goes through the roof.

No fewer than six films will certainly cross the $1 billion dollar mark, and the collection in its totality should easily surpass the $10 billion threshold (2019 releases continuing to earn into 2020 included). Personally, I have some interest in the live-action remake genre that has dabbled in years past, only to find an under-the-radar smash hit in 2017's "Beauty and the Beast."

Breaking the films into four distinct categories (Disney, Pixar, Marvel, Lucasfilms), my prediction is that Disney will carry the five highest grossing films of the year, something that has never been done by a single studio in history.

March is typically the early entries for Box Office supremacy, and we will see "Captain Marvel" take an early lead on the global market. Although highly anticipated and a massive step for Marvel into new territory (powerful female, cosmic powers) it won't echo the success of last year's "Black Panther." Following a few short weeks later is Tim Burton's imaginative take on the beloved classic, "Dumbo." Of all the films on this list, there are perhaps four that I don't intend to see, and "Dumbo" is probably the one I am least interested in.

April brings the documentary "Penguins" as well as the mother of all superhero films, "Avengers: Endgame." Surprisingly, I predict that "Avengers" will fall to fourth place in the annual list. It is certain to be the most satisfying of the films, and I intend to see it multiple times myself, but at three hours, and marking the certain deaths of multiple heroes, it may be a bit too heavy for some audiences. Also, rated PG-13, it loses a certain core demographic that Disney has targeted since the 1930's.

May is when the box office will heat up. "Avengers" will dominate most of the month until "Aladdin" comes out. Headlined by Will Smith as the blue genie, it should do well at the box office, but I don't imagine it will gain the critical acclaim it may be seeking.

June brings "Toy Story 4" which will move "Avengers" to number two on the list, and become the darling of the year until something a bit more frigid hits in November.

In July, it's time to back up the Brinks truck. "Spider-Man: Far From Home" (a Sony release, but in association with Marvel and Disney) is going to be the box office smash that "Black Panther" was last year. Then "Lion King" roars into theatres, and will supplant "Avengers" and "Toy Story" as the box office king of the year.

For those keeping score at home, we now have the top six (or seven) grossing films of the year; "Lion King," "Toy Story 4," "Avengers: Endgame," "Spider-Man: Far From Home," "Aladdin," and "Captain Marvel". "Dumbo" sits on the outside looking in, but don't feel too badly for the floppy-eared elephant, he will still make nine figures.

August brings the lone Disney action film of the year based on the kids novel, "Artemis Fowl." I don't have high hopes for this one, but it should be profitable nonetheless. It has the promise to fill the gap as we all hold our collective breath for the final two films of the year.

November brings the cold, harsh winter, and with it, the unfathomably anticipated "Frozen 2." This will immediately smash records, and will reign as box office queen of 2019, making its permanent mark on boxofficemojo's list of cinematic gladiators. Four films have broken the $2 billion mark in history, and for my money, "Frozen 2" has a strong shot at surpassing its predecessor and hitting that mark.

Closing out the year, we have the finale to the trilogy of trilogies in "Star Wars: Episode IX." It will take strong reviews and audience reception in order to overcome the disappointment of "Episode VIII" which seems a pretty challenging obstacle, even for JJ Abrams.

The executives at Disney Films have brilliantly spaced out their releases to capitalize on the demand and the market, and we will see the highest marketshare in history if you include the Sony/Marvel/Fox collaborations ("Dark Phoenix" and "New Mutants" will expand the X-Men universe this year, setting the table for a whole new world in the ever-expanding MCEU)

Thirty-seven films have grossed over $1 billion in history, and in 2019, Disney will add more than a half dozen films to that order (I predict eight). Not a bad year for a company founded on a mouse. I challenge any other studio to deliver any film that can break into the top six. I give "Pokemon," "Secret Life of Pets 2," and "Hobbs and Shaw" the best shots at climbing the list. Without further ado, here are your highest grossing films of 2019.

1. Frozen 2
2. Lion King
3. Spider-Man: Far From Home (in association with Marvel)
4. Toy Story 4
5. Avengers: Endgame
6. Star Wars: Episode IX
7. The Secret Life of Pets 2
8. Hobbs and Shaw
9. Aladdin
10. Captain Marvel

Best of 2018

2019-01-26T11:05:00.002-08:00

2018 was a decent year in film, but lacked a real strong front-runner despite several very diverse films. I had high hopes for "Beautiful Boy," "The Favourite," "Roma," and "Boy Erased" but all were a bit lackluster. Lucas Hedges, Stephan James, Joe Alwyn, and Timothee Chalamet showed that they are the faces of the future in film, but nothing really stood out in terms of a cinematic masterpiece.

Top Ten (in alphabetical order)
A Star is Born
Avengers: Infinity War
Blackkklansman
Eighth Grade
Green Book
Hearts Beat Loud
If Beale Street Could Talk
Leave No Trace
Mary Poppins Returns
Vice

Best Film of the Year
My pick for Best Picture would have to be "Vice". "Green Book" is a close second and is my prediction to win the Oscar this year, but for my money, I thought Adam McKay's satirical dark-comedy-biopic was the most satisfying.

Best Action Film
"Avengers: Infinity War" was by far the most exciting film experience of the year, and the only film I felt compelled to see multiple times in the theatre. To see "Black Panther" given such an array of awards and recognition over the massive ensemble that the brothers Russo masterfully orchestrated is a bit of a shame. I would expect that if "Avengers: Endgame" is the film that everyone expects it to be, it should get some 2019 recognition.

Scariest Film
"Hereditary" haunted me. There were several scenes that seared their way into my brain, and Toni Collette's performance in particular was legendary, and worthy of Oscar nomination.

Most Overrated
"The Favourite" was an overhyped piece of mediocrity. Great acting by the three leading women, but the story was a bloated period piece that had desperate "Barry Lyndon" nuances. Yorgos Lanthimos is quirky and talented, but this wasn't the best film of the year, much less top ten.

Most Underrated
It is challenging to choose between three independent films that really moved me. "Hearts Beat Loud," "Eighth Grade," and "Leave No Trace" were all breaths of fresh air. Worthwhile viewing experiences filled with an emotional spectrum that a true cinephile would applaud. All driven by strong, young leading ladies, keep an eye on Kiersey Clemons, Thomasin McKenzie, and Elsie Fisher in the future. They are all terrific actresses.

Best Animated
I was a bit surprised by how weak "Ralph Breaks the Internet" ended up being (my son was disappointed as well), and "Incredibles 2" was certainly strong as a sequel, but the best animated film of the year was "Spider-Man: Into the Spiderverse." It was clever, fresh, and a visual feast. I'm hoping Marvel capitalizes on its dual success and keeps projects like it in the pipeline to make a parallel universe for us to enjoy.

Biggest Surprise
The decimation at the end of "Avengers: Infinity War" aside, the biggest surprise in film this year had to be that 7 of the 11 highest grossing films of the year are superhero flicks. When will audiences tire of the familiar tropes? Rhetorical question. The answer seems to be never, although DC needs to step up their game and has the opportunity with this year's "Shazam!" and next year's "Birds of Prey," "Wonder Woman 1984," and "Flash." I've said it before, and I'll say it again - DC needs to expand with a film that will move out of Gotham or Metropolis. Something that will rival what Marvel did with the "Guardians of the Galaxy" and the upcoming "Captain Marvel" arc. But alas, DC won't listen to me. Yet...

Biggest Disappointment
I'm not sure anyone expected "Solo" to be an instant classic, but it was destined to fail when the directors were canned mid-way through production. Alden Ehrenreich is an incredible actor, but perhaps wasn't the right pick to play the young Han Solo. Firmly placing doubt in my mind as to the future of the revered Star Wars universe, I think Episode 9 may be the end of the line (critically, not fiscally).

Must-See
Since everyone has already seen "Avengers: Infinity War" I would recommend none other than "Won't You Be My Neighbor." It was left out of the Best Documentary category in what is the biggest snub of the year, and the message is as timely as ever in today's challenging climate. It's beautiful and nostalgic and although you'll be sad to watch Mr. Rogers go again at the end, there is a ray of hope in his legacy. It's not the last we'll see of the Mr. Rogers story either, as Tom Hanks and Marielle Heller ("Can You Ever Forgive Me?") team up for 2019's Oscar hopeful "A Beautiful Day in the Neighborhood."

Always looking forward, 2019 promises to be even bigger and better than 2018. Here's hoping.

Golden Globes 2019

2019-01-01T08:32:00.000-08:00

This upcoming weekend will officially set the pecking order for Oscar favorites in the film community, as the Golden Globes are often (but not always) indicators of who will take home the coveted statue. This year's list of Globe nominees left a few notable names and films off the list this year, which was surprising but not unexpected; after all, there are only five slots, and they haven't put me fully in charge of nominations (yet), so my projections aren't always reflected on the big evening. Anyhow, I'm sticking with film, and with the big categories only, so here are my predictions and corrections for next weekend:

Best Picture: Drama - "A Star Is Born" seems to be the favorite at this point, and given the company, I tend to agree that it deserves the win. I might argue that along with "Bohemian Rhapsody," they might be in the wrong category given their strong reliance on music for effect. Moving toward the big show, I don't see the Best Picture Oscar coming from any of these nominees. I would have liked to have seen some of the stronger independent films represented ("Leave No Trace," "First Reformed," "Eighth Grade," "Sorry to Bother You.")

Best Picture: Comedy/Musical - "Vice" was my favorite film of the year, but this category is stacked and will produce the Best Picture winner at the Oscars. "Green Book" and "The Favourite" are worthy adversaries, but the political dramedy is too timely and clever to be overlooked. It should and will win.

Best Actor: Drama - Ryan Gosling and Ethan Hawke were snubbed this year, but Rami Malek had the ripest role of the year, and should deservedly win. "Bohemian Rhapsody" was a bit too optimistic for a true biopic, but there was a remarkable transformation and Malek became Freddy Mercury, which is always a challenging proposition. Expect him to battle another biopic behemoth for Best Actor at the Oscars.

Best Actress: Drama - Full disclosure, I didn't see "The Wife" and I hear Glenn Close's performance is tremendous, but I am coming around on Nicole Kidman. "Destroyer" is the best performance of her long and distinguished career, and I'm a sucker for police dramas. I predict Close gets the award unless "A Star is Born" steamrolls all competition, but I would choose Kidman.

Best Actor: Comedy/Musical - Christian Bale will take this one, but if he doesn't, it will be the upset of the night. Anything can happen when you're dealing with the Hollywood Foreign Press. His portrayal of Dick Cheney in a not-quite-comedy portrayal should challenge all-comers on Oscar night for writing, picture, and multiple acting performances.

Best Actress: Comedy/Musical - I would love to see Elsie Fisher take home the gold, as her performance was heartbreaking and genuine (although there may not have been a considerable amount of "acting" going on) but I'm choosing Emily Blunt for resurrecting one of the most iconic roles in film history and actually doing it well. Not only was "Mary Poppins Returns" satisfying as a sequel 54 years in the making, but it was truly one of the best films of the year as well.

Best Supporting Actor - always my favorite category, and one that yields the most captivating performances, I am torn between Ali and Chalamet on this one. Although I suspect Ali will win because "Green Book" deserves some recognition and all the other nominations are overshadowed a bit, I am absolutely in awe of Timothy Chalamet. His summer film "Hot Summer Nights" was severely underrated, nearly making my top-10 list of the year, and I have yet to see him in a bad film, or in a poorly done role. He is the face of the next generation, and his work in "Beautiful Boy" is stellar, even if the film wasn't quite up to par. On an aside, Steve Carell was mis-cast, and the film could have really exploded on the awards scene if the father was played by someone a bit less known for humor.

Best Supporting Actress - an incredibly strong category this year, Weisz and Stone will cancel each other out, which leaves powerful biopic wives (Adams and Foy) as the front-runners in my book. Both were outstanding and deserving, but the edge has to go to Amy Adams for her portrayal of Lynne Cheney. "First Man" suffered from ultra-realism, and the Armstrongs just didn't have the drama in their lives or to their personalities that the Cheneys did, and for that reason, the acting seems stronger even if it truly wasn't. Watch closely at the acting of "First Man" and you will probably appreciate it more than at first glance. However, this is Amy Adams' year.

Best Foreign Film: The only one I saw was "Roma" but it was beautiful. Not particularly exciting, but the detail in the set and cinematography is remarkable. It should win best Foreign film, and absolutely deserves Best Director as well.

Best Animated Film - "Spider-Man: Into the Spiderverse" was absurd, but visually beautiful. You've never seen a film done quite this way, and I suspect that with the critical and box office success, Marvel (and DC) will venture more deliberately into this market with more offerings as soon as next year.

Best Director - McKay and Cooper do a fine job, and should be honored to be nominated, but Alfonso Cuaron is on another level with his vision and execution. "Roma" wins and should continue to earn honors through the Academy Awards.

Best Screenplay - I'm going with Adam McKay on this one. "Vice" certainly took liberties on the factual aspect (due conveniently to the secrecy of the subject matter) but much like "The Big Short," the film was intellectual, entertaining, funny, and more than anything else, a frightening commentary on history. The screenplay deserves recognition based on its execution.

Vice

2018-12-26T12:27:00.001-08:00

The title of Adam McKay's latest is a bit misleading; it's not a reference to the oft-mocked figurehead position in the Executive Branch, but more an allusion to the addictive grip of power and the extents men will go to achieve it.

Chronicling the life of Dick Cheney (Christian Bale), one of the more mysterious vice presidents in modern history, "Vice" breaks the typical rules of a biopic by taking some dramatic and comedic liberties (the benefits of redacted intelligence briefings and missing emails) and as seen in 2016's "The Big Short," breaking the fourth wall to help the viewer better understand some of the more critical terms (Unitary Executive Theory). The narrator (Jesse Plemons) is cleverly an ancillary character whose importance isn't revealed until the near ending.

Cheney's rise to power began in humble beginnings in 1960's Wyoming where the literal and metaphoric fly-fishing background is at the core of his character's lifelong process. By a stroke of luck, he crosses paths with Donald Rumsfeld (Steve Carrell) and begins an impressive political career (Representative, Secretary of Defense, Chief of Staff, Vice-President). But throughout the whole film, there is always a sense of who's really driving his ambition (Lynn Cheney; played by Amy Adams) and never a complete sense of satisfaction with his own level of power and achievement. He aspires to the top position in the white house, but just never quite gained the momentum or recognition among the voting masses. One of the few downsides to being a quiet, unassuming enigmatic man. His respect and influence within the Capitol Hill community however, is undeniable.

The real story kicks in when he mulls over the offer to be the running mate to a Texan political legacy who doesn't really have a sense of his own purpose (played magnificently by Sam Rockwell). The realization that he can run the country even more effectively as an autocrat if he has one foot in the Legislative, and one foot in the Executive Branches is validated by the thought that if he's part of each, he's not technically accountable to either. A flawless logic that was clearly what the founding fathers were thinking when they established checks and balances.

Christian Bale is a master of capturing a character, but it's what is happening behind his eyes that make this performance so compelling. The moments of silence in between lines of dialogue leave you desperately wanting to know his thought process. A surefire Best Actor nominee, the only thing stopping him from the award is the absence of a monologue or fiery speech, but that's just not who Dick Cheney was (or is perceived to be).

The supporting cast simply shines as Amy Adams, Sam Rockwell, and Steve Carrell turn in tremendous performances without overshadowing Bale's Cheney. The makeup artists deserve some recognition as we see them all age over the course of over thirty years.

What stands out is how sharply the film is put together. Documentary snippets, beautiful visual metaphors, and the use of narration and subtitles to break up the monotony of the history lesson leads to a conveyance of information in a way that tricks the viewer to enjoy it far more than they might if it were simply on The History Channel. Adam McKay has shown twice now that he's more than just Will Farrell's business partner. He's a legitimate writer and director, brilliantly carving out a niche for himself. Next up? "Bad Blood" with Jennifer Lawrence based on a shady tech entrepreneur.

This film fills a void this holiday (and awards) season. There are plenty of biopics, feel-good musicals, feel-bad musicals, uncomfortable looks at race relations, and even an epic superhero film where all of the favorites (gasp) die! But we don't have a film like this in the mix, and for that, I'm, declaring it my top film of 2018. Best Picture and Best Screenplay winners, and a few more nominations to boot. It doesn't get much more entertaining than this, but after all, my bias is probably showing. I am a US History teacher, and ran for Congress this past election... 9/10.

Green Book

2018-11-30T14:08:00.001-08:00

If I told you back in the 1990's that one of the Farrelly brothers ("There's Something About Mary," "Dumb and Dumber") would helm a potential Best Picture Oscar winner, you would call me crazy. Well, it's true. "Green Book" is a perfect blend of a feel-good buddy flick, and high caliber dramatic narrative. Throw in the biopic influence and some tremendous music, and it just plain works.

Viggo Mortensen plays Tony Lip, a stereotypical New York Italian in the 1960's. He's a devoted family man hustling to provide with his gift of gab and enforcer physique. He's the type of guy who talks loudly and carries a big stick. He takes a job as a driver and security for Dr. Don Shirley (Mahershala Ali), a quirky piano virtuoso doing a tour of the deep South. As unlikely a duo as they are, Dr. Shirley is fascinated by Tony's unrefined and uncompromising demeanor.

As they make the journey from New York through the Midwest and ultimately into the heart of darkness in the 1960's (Jackson, MS), the reason for Tony's employment becomes more clear. The invisible racial barrier that Northerners had the luxury of ignoring is made more glaringly obvious with every new venue, and both men evolve in a very unlikely way.

The heavy racial themes are done without the typical dramatic embellishment of prior films of this nature, and that seems to be the prevailing trend, which I find refreshing and makes them stand out from other fare. Because it's a buddy film at heart, the core is the chemistry of the characters portrayed, and both Mortensen and Ali are phenomenal. Both deserve Academy recognition.

During a year in which music is seeming to drive the most powerful films in contention, the way Ali tickles the ivory (even if it isn't genuine) is positively inspiring. Mortensen has done some fantastic work in his career, but this might be his finest yet. Never better than "A History of Violence" and "Eastern Promises" in 2007-08, he packed on the pounds for this one (forty-five according to my sources) and played the most empathetic character yet. You know that deep down he's just a kind-hearted, good person, despite the rough exterior, and that's the trademark of a great actor; conveying depth.

For me, this film struck a nerve that I still can't quite put my finger on. It managed to evoke an array of emotions that only a high quality film can. I dare you not to put this film on your top 10 list this year, and I'm very interested to see the future of Peter Farrelly's filmmaking career. 9/10.

Hunter Killer

2018-10-29T07:32:00.001-07:00

Tense submarine dramas have been hit-or-miss in the past, but the claustrophobia, tension, and fate of the world hanging in the balance of the captain’s commands is a common theme. Taking more than a few ideas from “The Hunt for Red October,” and “Crimson Tide,” Gerard Butler tries his hand as an American bubblehead in this film by untested director Donovan Marsh.

After a skirmish under the ice in Russian waters, the US military sends a Hunter Killer class submarine to investigate the aftermath. Led by newbie captain Joe Glass (Gerard Butler), he leads his men into certain conflict while a Navy SEAL team drops into enemy territory, discovering a nefarious coup that threatens the safety of not just the two countries, but the entire world. I know, sounds kind of cool, right? It is for about the first 45 minutes.

The action is undeniably entertaining. From submarine dogfights (is that what they’re called?) to Navy SEAL incursions, director Donovan Marsh shows he can handle a big-budget feature film targeting the action-hungry audiences that haven’t seen the military on full display on screen since the summer. Unfortunately, the plot, characters, and dialogue trip up the action more than they should have.

The story dictating the action is a gross display of American military ineptitude, which is a disheartening thing to see on-screen. Never before have so many military members disregarded direct orders or questioned authority to the extent shown in “Hunter Killer.” Insubordination abounds as Russian and American sailors recklessly play moral roulette with seven billion lives as the fate of the world rests on this nuclear military standoff. The sailors trust their adversaries far more than their superiors as if the fraternity of submariners is stronger than nationalism, duty, or prevention of imminent war. In addition to being rife with clichés that we’ve seen before in this type of film, the realism falls off a cliff and never quite recovers. But maybe that was by design.
 Gary Oldman’s precious scenes are wrought with overacting and a misguided character portrayal. He goes from zero to sixty like a bomb going off, and never convinces me that he has the temperament for the leader of the entire Navy.

Gerard Butler is simply an enigma. Introduced in the film bow hunting in Scotland, only to be picked up by helicopter and rushed to his first command on a submarine, he displays all of two emotions; focusing on his lines, and trying not to let his Scottish accent slip out. I’m not saying it’s worthy of a Razzie or anything, but he drops the ball in a role that demands a higher caliber of emotional display.

The Navy SEALs are fun to watch as always, but the film could have made a vast improvement by inserting a more recognizable actor in one of the four roles. They are the most interesting characters of the film, and led by Bill Beaman (Toby Stevens), there was an opportunity to resuscitate some of the shortcomings from the main storyline and inject some macho adrenaline, but alas, it fell victim to the 1990’s action film curse; nameless, faceless heroes conducting war games behind enemy lines.

This was Michael Nvyquist’s last film before his death in 2017. He plays the one Russian who has that cold war intimidating presence that is critical for an antagonist, but he’s not the bad guy, so it’s a little wasted. All in all, the film stumbles early and often, but the action keeps it moving at a decent clip. I wanted more twists and turns, and I don’t know if I can ever endorse a Gerard Butler film (although “300” was pretty cool).

It’s a cookie-cutter submarine war film with lots of posturing, but little payoff. “Hunter Killer” just can’t seem to stay afloat. 5/10.

First Man

2018-10-15T07:27:00.001-07:00

“First Man” makes me think of a story about the first female President of the United States. I would have titled this “One Small Step” or something a bit less vanilla. Either way, the title as blasé as it is, portrays a film that is nothing short of epic.

Fresh off the success of “La La Land,” Damien Chazelle and Ryan Gosling once again team up to tackle awards season, but this time it’s Claire Foy who steals the spotlight. With a cast that absolutely kills it every which way possible (Kyle Chandler, Jason Clarke, Corey Stoll, Pablo Schreiber, Shea Wigham, Patrick Fugit, Lukas Haas), Chazelle captures the era with remarkable realism and visual effects, and during the final act, the imagery is awe-inspiring and majestic.

The story of Neil Armstrong and NASA’s moon landing back in 1969 is widely recognized as one of mankind’s most triumphant achievements. The film follows Armstrong (Ryan Gosling) from 1961-1969 as he is balancing the monumental weight of space travel with that of a young family. His wife, Janet struggles to maintain a sense of normalcy or sanity while her husband is training for what many considered a suicide mission, and their two young sons are caught as reluctant parts of history. Armstrong evolves from daring test pilot to the most capable and reliable member of the NASA program with a subtlety that is admirable, while drifting farther and farther from his familial responsibilities.

Ryan Gosling is a thing of beauty to watch. One of the finest actors of his generation, he conveys the stoic nature of Armstrong deftly and with great detail. To a less discerning eye, the acting may seem wooden or uninspired, but it absolutely captures the personality and character including nuanced fidgets and steely-eyed gazes. Amidst the aloof appearance, Gosling has an emotional atomic bomb simmering beneath the surface. You can’t see it, but it’s there nonetheless. Not to be outdone, Claire Foy is absolutely remarkable as his oft-neglected wife. A loyal companion ready to emotionally implode at every moment, but holding it together like a 1960’s housewife is supposed to. The chemistry reminds me of DiCaprio and Winslett from “Revolutionary Road” which is to say the realism is remarkable.

Watching the inner-workings of a 1960’s NASA is cause for a bit of nostalgia mixed with a giddy sense of befuddlement. How did they manage such monumental feats with such antiquated technology? It adds to the suspense, and as trial and error has devastating consequences, the stakes seem even higher as the inevitable goal becomes a reality.

Aside from the aforementioned achievements, Damien Chazelle dazzles with his direction. The era is captured with precision and attention to the most minute detail, and when it comes time for the climax, the tension is palpable and the visuals are magnificent. The moon scenes are mesmerizing and masterful, creating a sense of legitimate awe.

The obvious history lessons aside, this is the type of movie that exudes everything that modern film-making is meant to be. Outstanding story, direction, acting, and production. It is the best film of the year thus far, and although awards season has just begun, the bar has been set very high for the other contenders.

The film is nearly flawless. Any criticisms about realism or detail is simply being overly persnickety. You will find everything about the film satisfying in the end, particularly if you’re a fan of American history, technology, and humankind’s remarkable ability to adapt and innovate. 9/10.

A Star Is Born

2018-10-12T06:39:00.003-07:00

Bradley Cooper is a great singer, Lady Gaga is a great actor, and the music is catchy and tremendous. The true star, however, is alcoholism. In case you hadn’t seen any of the three previous versions, the film follows a fading musician as he crosses paths with a rising star. The narrative intertwines a complicated love story with self-destructive behavior, and carries a cornucopia of emotions ranging the full spectrum.

Jackson Maine (Bradley Cooper) is a successful rock/folk/country star who clearly struggles with substance abuse as he reaches the lonely twilight of his youth and the numb complacency that comes with a long bout of success. He meets and is drawn to the younger Ally (Lady Gaga) in a tremendous scene in a drag bar that sparks their mutual curiosity. They form an inseparable and unlikely pair, and as the relationship grows, the music feeds their burgeoning love.

Bradley Cooper is phenomenal. Considering he’s pulling triple duty (acting, writing, directing) it makes you think about Ben Affleck’s triumphant “Argo” and the awards it won. This film is less of an underdog at this point as the reviews from the festivals have all been raving.

Lady Gaga is outstanding as the budding star. She evolves from starry-eyed simpleton to a confident pop-star grappling with fame and a complicated marriage. The film’s remake has been in talks for decades with Jennifer Lopez, Beyoncé, Demi Lovato, and others attached at one time or another, but there’s something about Lady Gaga (real name Stephani Germanotta) that nails the role with relatable sincerity and an understated confidence that kind of hits the screen unexpectedly.

Co-writer Eric Roth (“Forrest Gump,” “Munich), seems to turn most of what he touches into gold and Lukas Nelson (Willie’s son) is a very strong choice for musical collaboration. Of course, when you have Lady Gaga as well, there is a bit of a recipe for catchiness, but Nelson adds that rough, bluesy edge that makes you reminiscent of “Crazy Heart” and Jeff Bridges’ epic performance.

What drives a film of this nature is truly the music. I can’t overstate how impressive it is what Cooper, Gaga, and Nelson created. There is some folksy blues, some hard country, and a couple of tear-jerking love songs mixed with a little bit of the obligatory pop. Some films try too hard, but “A Star Is Born” nails the necessary tone with a sledgehammer, sucking the audience into an emotional whirlwind that unfortunately climaxes a bit too early.

Sharing the stage, they positively shine, but as their romance progresses, both of their lives take on a tragic loneliness that diminishes the enjoyment. But alas, it is beautifully tragic. Masterfully done by Cooper in his debut, it leaves little to want in the end.

The alcoholism could have been portrayed a bit sloppier as Cooper was a clean, happy drunk for the most part. If there were more realistic depression, sickness, and withdrawal, I would have definitely fallen harder for the characters, but it was actually downplayed in spite of the massive quantity being consumed.

These small criticisms aside, “A Star Is Born” is a fantastic film that trumps everything else released so far, this year. It is the gold standard for 2018 best picture as well as several other awards. I’m curious to see if this is a flash in the pan for Bradley Cooper (Ben Affleck in Argo), or if we are seeing the emergence of the next great actor turned director. Either way, I am excited to see where things go in his career. 9/10.

Venom

2018-10-08T07:57:00.000-07:00

Not quite Marvel, but pretty close. Sony has owned the Spider-Man universe and is transitioning characters and stories to Marvel, but this one is tangential with no direct connection to our beloved superheroes, which truly makes it work. Of course, we can expect a sequel if Tom Hardy is up for the challenge, but that will all depend on how much fun he had on this project. He’s gone on the record saying that he chose the Venom character because it’s his son’s favorite supervillain, so there’s a good chance we’ll see him engulfed in black goo again sometime soon.
 Eddie Brock (Tom Hardy) is a complicated man. We watch as he transforms (literally) from a confident investigative journalist with a great life, to a complete wreck when he loses his job, his fiancé, and his reputation with one bad decision. The Life Corporation and its brilliant Elon Musk type CEO, Carlton Drake (Riz Ahmed) have found life among the stars and are experimenting with its symbiotic ways (is it sym-bee-ote, or sym-bye-ote?). Eddie stumbles upon one such being, named Venom, and they form a sort of partnership as Venom is trying to survive, and Eddie is trying to figure out what is going on. As Carlton Drake tries to recapture his precious extra-terrestrial find, Eddie and Venom have to protect themselves and each other.

The impressively cast of Tom Hardy, Riz Ahmed, and Michelle Williams bring this character-driven action film to life. Michelle Williams has limited screen time, and doesn’t quite show the range she is capable of, but her name adds to the credibility of the film. Hardy on the other hand delivers a cockney New York accent, and is in a perpetual state of sweaty discomfort. He regresses from a confident man to a shell of his former self; sickly and scared. It’s actually kind of great to watch.

Director Ruben Fleischer (“Zombieland”) embraces this complicated story with open arms. He masterfully fuses the character progression with the magnificent special effects, and the perfect mix of humor and horror for such a dark narrative. Venom is shifted from a feared and beloved villain of Spider-Man to an ambiguous super-being that straddles the line of good and evil, which I imagine will become trendier as we move forward with this insatiable superhero appetite that our world has developed.

A super-villain stand-alone is a new concept in an age of heroes, but if you find the right character and the right actor, it carries the same desired emotional effect as your typical hero’s journey. Next year, Joaquin Phoenix will be in a stand-alone Joker origin story, which will almost certainly become the gold standard for villain stories going forward. Samuel Jackson reprises his role as Mr. Glass in M. Night Shyamalan’s 2019 “Glass” as well, so there is a clear movement to fill a void in the genre, and I for one am pretty excited about it.

You can’t help but develop a compassionate feeling toward Eddie Brock, as he is consumed and paralyzed by the symbiote and really forced to do its will, to his chagrin and the reluctance of a sympathetic audience. This is what drives the story and really contributes to the core of its success. Originally conceptualized with an R-rating, the toned-down violence works well for the wider audience, and really amps up the humor. It’s a strong move on the studio’s part.

Was this one of the best superhero films? No. But was it entertaining and fresh? Yes. The mid-credits scene punctuates a fun future for the franchise with the introduction of another beloved villain. You have to look for something a little different to enjoy this, but the motorcycle chase scene down the hills of San Francisco, the oozy fight scenes, and the sheer giddiness of the premise make this worth watching. 7/10.

Smallfoot

2018-10-01T07:07:00.001-07:00

I’ve become something of a reluctant animated film aficionado lately, although it’s mostly watching the same four or five films over and over. And yes, before you pass judgment, I have a four-year-old at home. Before the mid-90’s, computer generated images were a thing of science fiction, but as technological advancements in visual effects make leaps and bounds seemingly each and every year, film studios are seeing the enormous box office potential and are churning out films to capitalize on the market.

Pixar has dominated the animated field since “Toy Story” hit the screens with innovative CGI back in 1995, but now we have Pixar, Disney, Illumination, and Warner Bros. as the four pillars and purveyors of the animated community. Traditional Disney fairy tales are a thing of the past (in animated form) as new, original content is filling the multiplexes more frequently all the time.

“Smallfoot” takes the traditional Sasquatch story (familiar and dear to those in the Cascade region), and flips it on its head. Channing Tatum leads a B-list cast of voices as Migo, the curious and endearing creature who stumbles upon humans, but is frustrated when none of his beastly tribemates will believe his story. You see, the Yeti in the stratosphere of the Himalayas put their blind faith in “the stones,” or a collection of tablets that guide their daily lives. Things like the floating mountain they live upon in the sky that was defecated by a giant yak. Or that Migo’s father (cast perfectly as Danny DeVito) must launch himself across the sky every morning to bang his head against the town gong to awake the giant yellow snail in the sky. Things like that.
Anyhow, Migo embarks on a quest to prove to his people that humans do exist, and everything they thought they knew and believed in was a lie. Along his descent down the mountain, he meets Percy (James Corden), a Steve Irwin type who needs to revive his television career by finding a Yeti. Through adversity, they forge a friendship and learn that valuable kid’s movie lesson in the end.

“Smallfoot” has several deeper and more complex themes than you would expect, but the attempt is a bit misguided. I was caught up in the religious overtones, and the implications of conflict based on ignorance and misunderstanding. Obviously, these themes will probably be lost on the kids, but it dampened my own enjoyment a bit. Fortunately, it takes an optimistic turn near the end, so I was left with a smile on my face instead of thinking about how this is a metaphor for the unending Israeli/Palestinian conflict.

The creatures vary in shape and size, but none truly stand out as interesting or funny. Even the lead (Tatum) is a weak imitation of a character we’ve undoubtedly seen before; he channels his inner-Wreck-it-Ralph with a pretty commendable John C. Reilly voice. LeBron James brings his voice into the mix, as does Common, Zendaya, and Gina Rodriguez, but none are given a character that really adds memorable value to the film.

Written and directed by Karey Kirkpatrick (“Over the Hedge,” “Chicken Run”), it’s an interesting idea packed with fun that kids will undoubtedly enjoy. The humor is cute and some of the dialogue and interactions bring a smile to your face, but there isn’t much for adults.

I even tried to get into the music, and was impressed by Common’s rap about the mystical stones, but there was certainly no “Let it Go” on this soundtrack. All in all, the film was cute and fun, but obviously is a kid’s movie. My estimation is that your children will love the physical comedy and the scenery, but you will be underwhelmed as you sit beside them. Grab some popcorn and just give your kids a thrill. 6/10.

The Predator

2018-09-15T19:00:00.001-07:00

“Predator” and “Aliens” remain two of my most cherished R-rated sci-fi films of all-time. The magic of the worlds created by John McTiernan and James Cameron, respectively, have been often imitated, sometimes intertwined, but never duplicated in the thirty years since they were both created. The franchises have seen various trial and error, different formulas and character shifts. They’ve attempted sequels, prequels, and reboots. But the fire just hasn’t been rekindled since 1987. Until now.

Shane Black has found success as a writer and director (“Lethal Weapon,” “Iron Man 3,” “The Nice Guys”) but his connection to this particular franchise runs deep. This passion project began with his unfortunate role of Hawkins in the original “Predator” and he had been rumored for years to be working on a sequel that will make us all forget about the previous less than stellar installments.

Imagine my sense of childlike anticipation to see a film that might remedy all that was tragically wrong from “Predator 2” onward. It’s cinematic excitement that only comes around maybe a dozen or so times a year. When the previews finally arrived, I was a bit dismayed. Predator comes to Earth looking for something, humans band together and fight for survival while being picked off one at a time.

The Predator comes to Earth looking for something, and the humans band together and fight for survival while being picked off one at a time. Army Ranger sniper Quin (Boyd Holbrook) leads a motley crew of Veteran’s Affairs patients with names like Nebraska, Baxley, Lynch, and Coyle as they are forced to confront the Predator after his escape from a research facility hidden somewhere in the mountainous forests of Chattanooga. To throw a wrench in the mix, there’s a whole recombinant DNA plotline, a nod to climate change, and an enhanced Super Predator who comes to kill the original Predator, forcing us to wonder who to root for and why. It’s all very confusing. What isn’t confusing is the popcorn-munching action fun that accompanies sharp jokes and nostalgia for the original.

Sterling K. Brown is tremendous as Traeger, the most interesting character in the bunch. He delivers his lines with a poise and confidence that is just plain cool. His character borders on bad guy, but is so compelling that you can’t help but like him. I only wish there were more of him and less of everyone else (except the Predator).

I found myself pondering how someone could have that much clout for a secretive government agency with that many resources at his disposal in the middle of Tennessee, and then I thought, “oh yea, this is Predator.” I sat back and simply enjoyed the ride.

Olivia Munn plays the fascinated scientist, Dr. Brackett, whose lack of fear is remarkable. She’s too busy drooling over the alien technology and biology to consider that the beast is literally driven by an urge to kill for sport. Jacob Tremblay plays the severely out of place child with autism who is the focal point of the alien skirmish. The attempt is to humanize and add a sense of empathetic peril, but the entire sub-plot is simply unnecessary.

The characters were written out of cookie-cutters, and the plot could have used a significant amount of polishing, but I have to say, the dialogue was sharp and humorous, the action was far from disappointing, and the kill sequences were for lack of a better word, delightful.

I was pleasantly entertained considering the unreasonable expectations I put upon this film. Sterling K. Brown is a new personal favorite, and I’ll gladly pay to see anything he stars in from now on. I only wish he had more scenes and his character more fully developed.

“The Predator” is what you would expect, and you will be thoroughly entertained if you’re a fanboy (or fangirl). This installment is truer to the original than any attempt over the past thirty years, and you can be certain there will be a sequel. It’s worth the price of admission with so few good choices out there right now. 7/10.

Peppermint

2018-09-08T10:54:00.002-07:00

Oddly symbolic of her own family disintegration, Jennifer Garner makes an attempt to show Ben Affleck what he gave up when he cheated on her with the nanny. “Peppermint” is truly the ultimate closure and a violent metaphor for the adage that hell truly hath no fury like a woman scorned. It’s a fun premise on the surface, and Garner is at her best when faced with combat action, but “Peppermint?” The title is nonsense while trying to be clever. “Soccer Mom Bloodbath” would be more appropriate.

Garner is Riley North, a happy wife and mother who is struggling financially and feeling the social pressures of the affluent stay-at-home mothers who pick on her. After a tragic drive-by-shooting, and the exposed corruption in the system, she sheds her meek, tolerant skin and transforms into a combination of Linda Hamilton and Steven Seagal. Five years later, a battle-hardened and combat-ready Riley returns to Los Angeles to exact her revenge on any and all people involved in her tragedy.

When Riley begins to disrupt business, the Garcia drug cartel digs in their heels and has to turn the slums of Los Angeles into a war zone, which the LAPD doesn’t want any part of. Heck, they are either scared of the cartel or corrupt themselves, so Riley is on her own. She’s the angel of death for her skid row family.

Director Pierre Morel (“Taken”) is to blame for most of the problems here. Sure, the writer (Chad St. John) has to take a little credit, but the director is always the final say. His admiration for Tony Scott is visible in nearly every scene through some flashy camerawork, but plot holes, absurd sequences, spineless characters, and derivative dialogue plague the film from the start. It’s the kind of revenge trope that you desperately want to get behind, but simply can’t. I laughed out loud several times, and couldn’t enjoy the carnage as much as I would have liked due to the insanely poor choices made by the director.

The antagonists are written in an inept, cliché, and quite simply stereotypical way. The Mexican gangsters are given little credibility for any common sense, from being unable to open a locked door to falling for the oldest trick in the book (talk too much, shoot too little). They look menacing with facial tattoos and military-grade weapons, but they are a dime a dozen. It’s simply 1980’s schlock action with a gender swap. Which isn’t to say it wasn’t a little bit fun, but I already saw this movie back when Stallone, Schwarzenegger, Bruce Willis, Van Damme, etc. played the role back in the twentieth century. And Liam Neeson just a few years back.

As the body count piles up, she makes it look simply too easy. Like Schwarzenegger in “Commando,” she manages to waltz in to a Mexican drug kingpin’s house and dispatch dozens of them without breaking a sweat (maybe she was sweating, but she was calmer than a Marine sniper). A team of Navy SEALs couldn’t execute a mission with this kind of precision. You get my point, it was a little bit unrealistic.

The film quickly escalates from a quirky revenge story to a full-on rampage in a matter of minutes, and there are unexplained subplots and underdeveloped characters galore. I regret to inform you that for the fourth or fifth week in a row, I simply can’t recommend a movie to the masses. “Peppermint” is not nearly as refreshing as its namesake. Skip this one and just rest assured that good films are on the way in October. 4/10.