Avengers: Endgame

Spoilers.

The least spoilery thing I can say to sum it up is: It's the same basic fan-servicing Marvel that we've been seeing recently -- but something's different, because I enjoyed watching it this time! But yeah, I'm not even going to try, friends. There are definitely spoilers here!

Endgame: the big secret. The actors knew nothing; no information was released during marketing; and fans go to extreme lengths to avoid spoilers before release day. Even I did it the "right" way and achieved about 97% blindness. And still. Not one thing was legitimately surprising. Maybe if I'd gotten an out of context spoiler, sure; but within the narrative of the movie, there were no shocks, or plot twists, or anything that you'd expect to be kept secret -- save for the mere two deaths. The OG Avengers use time-travel to bring back the dusted, defeat Thanos, and pass their torches to the next wave. Pleasantly straightforward.

I should probably mention that this doesn't help me look at Infinity War in an any better light. I wondered for a year if it might, but no.

Yep. I had fun. The time travel aspect was super comic book-y and cheesy in a nice way. They must steal the Infinity Stones from their past selves in previous movies and the Back to the Future Part II vibe was solid fodder for superheroing. Sometimes not used to potential; other times smart, neat, and fulfilling to the characters' individual stories. And the final showdown battle finally took this series to the scale at which they've always wanted to exist. Like comics brought to life. And when the ultra-high stakes come in (Thanos planning to kill them all) you instantly know the heroes are in for a satisfying win, so it's easy to settle back and soak it all up.

Tony is the most focused-on character. Fitting, since he has an ultimate end -- and started it all. He gets to marry Pepper, have a little girl, live a briefly happy life, have a restoring man-to-man with his dad, and then die a hero's death saving the whole universe. Nice. Cap was my personal favorite. Since time travel now exists, he lives out a normal life with Peggy. Nothing could be more satisfying. And I realize this is fan-service, with no veil or pretense attempted. I was primed to be okay with that fact by the continuous pulling out of the rug from under my hopes of simple enjoyment, and don't care if it worked. These were thoughtful ends that the characters deserved. About time they received them.

Throwback to when these two were the GOAT.

Even Natasha's death felt earned and meaningful. Her and Clint's friendship was one of the first things I fell in love with in these movies, and that scene they had together made it all conclude in a way that felt natural and right. The scene mirrors Gamora's Infinity War death, even with the same music, yet inverts aspects in profound ways. They fight each other out of love, which has never happened in the MCU before. The sad tone was uplifting, and the emotion unforced. Long-established and consistent characters dealt with respectfully. Strange to think that after using movie after movie to point forward to the next with relentless ferocity -- actual, final ends are given here.

But it's not all satisfying lovey-dovey goodbyes. There's Beer-Belly Thor, which is by far the worst iteration of Thor even conceived. The weight (unintended) of the abject failure he feels could have been so powerful were he not turned into a joke. The scene with his mother was nearly good even with that looming over it. On top of that, the "joke" isn't funny. I'd like to say nonsensical too, but I have no proof, so I'll just say it annoyed me -- especially after Thor was the greatest redeeming factor of Infinity War. I've always liked original Thor Thor best, so I wasn't expecting much... but that was just insulting.

Animated humanoids like Hulk and Thanos are impressive, but still fail to draw me in -- even in the way cyborgs and small CGI creatures do. 

I could devote a similar paragraph to Star-Lord, but I'll limit it to this: I hate, loathe, and despise what these films have turned Quill into. It makes me angry in a way that fictional things shouldn't, and this movie was the worst offender. The only mercy is his limited screen time. On the flip side, Nebula has never been more complex and involving. She continues to earn her spot on the team. Scott had the highest ups and the lowest downs: His reunion with Cassie had some of the most genuine MCU acting I've ever seen; and the time travel test was the "joke" that would never end. Yes indeed, the Marvel-brand jokes are still here, and bland as ever. It's impressive how deftly they skirted around Paul Rudd's comic abilities.

It's like the outline of the story had effort, with a nice and plain three act structure that kept the pace going, and thought-out building on past scenes -- but then the details were filled in by an MCU bot. Every tidbit and third line were a callback, and the rest stuffing. The dramatic scenes work by sheer force of will from the actors as they push real emotion through dialogue lacking any written personality. The Marvel-brand green screen and overly-CGI'd pastiness is at large too. The initial swell of the battle did have nice imagery with the portals though, and Vormir appeals, green-screened as it is. I genuinely liked one shot: the last one of Clint sitting in the water with the soul stone.

I thought it was nice how the movie was more or less bookended by farewell speeches from Tony. There is muddling around, but ultimately there's a simple, solid structure.

This movie exists because of past successes, like a greatest hit episode; no legs of its own to stand on, but enjoyable, nevertheless. Exactly what we expect from Marvel -- packaged as a tribute to those who got it started. The effort is nearly derailed by cringe jokes and mountains of CGI: There's lots of filler, lots of worthlessness, and lots that's recycled from the deep, deep, rut that Marvel has dug for itself. Sadly creative ruts aren't a factor for Marvel anymore. Their oodles of cash isn't earned due to quality craft, but to calculated marketing; and with these loyal fans, and the ability to fabricate and promote empty secrets, any kind of slop could've played on that screen and made the same amount of money.

Fortunate, then, that the slop they played for us was a relatively good time, made for pure, widespread enjoyment, and was relatively respectful; serving founding characters with one last dose of genuine progress and a hearty farewell. Almost not slop at all, at heart. Despite shortcomings and extended lapses into stupidity, at least there's a story here, used for the satisfying completion of the journeys of long-beloved characters. Despite everything, I'm glad I got to see the Avengers assemble for one last hurrah.

Ant-Man and the Wasp

Spoiler free!

Ant-Man and the Wasp's tonal separation from Infinity War saves it; and its universe connection destroys it. From the consequences of Civil War coming into play at the beginning and dictating the plot, to the how inconsequential it becomes in the shadow of this year's earlier monstrosity, it's restricted by its universe ties. But, as it is not a monstrosity of melodrama, it is, despite significant failings, still more superficially enjoyable than that universe-ending party that Scott Lang was somehow not invited to.

Dodged a bullet there, buddy. Probably literally.

The movie's most obvious saving grace is its hero, played by Paul Rudd, who, after this, I'm am fully convinced could carry 12 gallons of water in his hands without the use of a bucket. He can probably carry a tune in the vacuum of space; or the whole world if only he could get underneath it; and he absolutely carries this movie. He single-handedly saves at least five jokes from cringe territory, and even the jokes that wouldn't have face-planted without him, he still elevates, by being, you know, actually funny and charming. Rudd had a hand in the writing too, but the writing only hits on external appeal.

No one has character arcs in this. It's a nonstarter. But with Scott it doesn't matter because he's fun to be around even when he doesn't need to grow or learn something -- perhaps especially so. Same goes for his sidekicks, like Luis, who's so much the same that he even makes the same jokes over again. The crazy part is, it's still funny, because Michael Peña is the man. Bobby Cannavale got the biggest laugh of the whole movie, and sadly Judy Greer was saddled with some stinkers that would've challenged even Rudd. I enjoyed Randal Park, simply for being lighthearted and amusing when the opposite is what you'd expect.

Story-wise, this movie should've been Hope/Wasp's, but it only almost is.

Hank (Michael Douglas) and Hope (Evangeline Lilly) have the most drama going on, and I guess that's what was meant to pass for development. Most of the "progress" they make is things that were backtracked from their growth level of the last movie, and when they overcome it, they're only back where they started. This is mostly applicable to Hope. Hank's more like an echo of her, dramatically. The villain (Hannah John-Kamen) didn't have much potential to start with, but in the end, she only seemed to exist to pad out the run time. Of course, that could be said of the whole movie; pad out a run time, to make a movie, to pad out year time, until Captain Marvel and Avengers: And Now the Other Half gets here.

With what it's sandwiched between, there was little room for creativity. It had to end where it did, and it had to start where it did -- though I do take some issue with how it started. Most of the nonsense the film contains accumulates there. Without the nonsense, the story wouldn't exist. It's a sticky situation, so I sympathize, but there had to be a less paint-by-numbers way of doing this. Ant-Man movies bank on being small-time, but when scaled down, more focus on heart and meaning is required, not less. The story is spread thin over the separate needs of too many characters, and under the microscope, we never get a clear picture of anything, or anyone.

That's why Ant-Man came down to a tiny battle in Cassie's room -- she was all that mattered.

Visually, I've never seen a Marvel movie done so lazily. The action is the best the writing had to offer besides the dialogue (there actually were plenty of good jokes that didn't need Paul Rudd-delivery to work) -- but the sequences are filmed so normally. Remember in the first movie when Scott shrinks for the first time and everything's so otherworldly? That wonder is gone. They plow through action with the style of a lawnmower cutting overgrown grass, and only slow down when they literally slow down -- for a slow-mo shot. There's an extra visual kick, and then it's back to the lame gracelessness.

If I ever watch this again it will be for Rudd and that montage of him hanging out in his house by himself. The movie only irritated me two or three times, but otherwise gave out so little to hold on to, or invest in. I never cared about anything; the characters, their success, their failure; anything. All I cared about was when the next glimmer of fun was going to happen -- moments that were extra welcome in a Marvel movie, but never succeeded in brightening their surroundings. They would flash, and fade, along with my interest.

I guess I should've known Hawkeye wasn't going to be in this. Too good to be true.

Marvel is getting more mechanized by the minute, with less and less importance placed on the human touch. This one barely even attempts to be any kind of art -- it's just there. A movie. I'm sure there were good intentions, and the charm of the leading man, and some commendable humor choices do lend it a nice, distracting coat of paint. Too little, too late. Not tiny and laser-focused, not giant, sweeping and epic; Ant-Man and the Wasp is just average.

Upcoming Movie Roundup - July

Okay! Last month I got out to see Jurassic World: Fallen Kingdom as expected, and I will be seeing Incredibles 2 later today! Fallen Kingdom was pretty dumb. Dumber than I expected in fact -- but it had solid elements to it, and I expect I'll watch it again someday, if only for that one scene that unintentionally made me belly-laugh. Read my review here!

I got around to seeing Solo, despite warnings, and yeah, it's not good. But it's the kind of not good you can enjoy if you're not offended by how literally the story takes the existing Star Wars canon while simultaneously destroying it with some of the stupidest ideas I've ever heard of in my life. Review here!

Not a great year for the Howards.

And I caught up on some of the artsy film releases of earlier in the year -- Annihilation, (review) which I didn't care for, but it was fine; no shade if you loved it -- and Thoroughbreds (review) which I did love. I think about it a lot.

Summer's in full swing and there's not an overwhelming amount of new releases this month! If all goes according to plan I'll be seeing two of them in theaters. What are your movie plans for for July? Stay cool out there!


The First Purge
July 4th; R
Believe it or not, I've seen all the Purge movies so far. And I actually liked... one... of them. Or was it two? I dunno, but Frank Grillo's character is fun. I was super excited for the last one expecting it to be real dumb in a fun way because of the parallel's it seemed to draw with the 2016 election... but it wound up being all those things except the fun part. This one is even more political, and almost certainly even more toxic, so I'm probably done. Until it can be watched for free and then maybe. We'll see how high my curiosity gets, but without Frank... not promising.




Ant-Man and the Wasp
July 6th; PG-13
Man. I have never felt so ho-hum about a Marvel movie. I almost don't even want to see it -- but I already have tickets because I have a Marvel Fan for a brother. He, the Rotten Tomatoes score, and my pathetic hopes and dreams keep saying to me, "But what if it's actually good?" And to that I say: Then I'll have a real nice surprise I guess. I expect I'll enjoy it (as it's a comedy and therefore hopefully not a complete slog) more than Infinity War, but, man. The Marvel fatigue is for real right now. Still, I do my duty. They promised me Hawkeye and it had better be more than a cameo!




Skyscraper
July 13th; PG-13
What's this movie about? *watches trailer* Oh. Okay. Because of the poster I had the impression that The Rock spends most of the movie trying to get inside. But I see. As far as Rock action flicks go, this looks like it's on the higher scale of potential. Like a scifi-ish Die Hard knock-off. It would probably be more my thing if it wound up being laughably bad. But then again, Jumanji was a Rock action flick and it was awesome!




The Night Eats the World
July 13; TV-14
The water buckets collecting rain water on the roof of the building reminds me of 28 Days Later, which makes this movie seem like if 28 Days Later was just the part where they're hiding out in the apartment, which makes me think I'd enjoy watching this.




A Midsummer Night's Dream
July 13th; NR
I have a ubersoft soft spot for Shakespeare adaptations that keep the language but set the story in modern day. So count me in -- no other reason needed. I did notice that Fran Kranz is in the cast though. He was in Joss Whedon's Much Ado About Nothing and is generally pretty awesome.




The Equalizer 2
July 20th; NR
I don't exactly remember much of the first Equalizer movie, but I definitely remember liking the first Equalizer movie -- and that, plus this trailer, is good enough for me!




Mamma Mia: Here We Go Again!
July 20th; PG-13
Say the title with a sarcastic inflection. Yet, I'm kinda excited too. I hope it's as dumb and cheesy as it looks. They'd just better not rehash all the songs. I will be mad.




Mission: Impossible - Fallout
July 27th; (NR, but probably PG-13)
What is there even to say about this? It's Mission: Impossible, and has consistently been one of my top anticipated movies for the past three years! Tom Cruise is back to do dangerous things for our entertainment; my favorite Simon Pegg is back; the dark horse wonder woman from Rogue Nation Rebecca Ferguson is back; and the director who upped the anti in this impossibly crazy franchise, Christopher McQuarrie is back! No Jeremy Renner, but that's the nature of the franchise. New additions are Henry Cavill (with the infamous mustache) and Vanessa Kirby who I love. I'm ready. If this disappoints me I will never love again -- so don't let me down team! (With a trailer that looks like this I don't see how they could.)




Hot Summer Nights
July 27th; R
This movie looks so stylish I could watch it for that reason alone. All retro and neon. And I love the movie Charlie Bartlett so I guess I can't say anything about it being a teenage coming-of-age film where the main character deals drugs. I also saw Lady Bird a bit ago, so I can say I like Timothee Chalamet's acting abilities, and I definitely like Maika Monroe... so I guess I'm on board. Depends on how the plot goes as to if I'll like it or not.

Upcoming Movie Roundup - June

In May I got the surprise of the year when I went to see Deadpool 2, and absolutely loved it! Read my review here. My favorite superhero movie since Spider-Man: Homecoming. It was very R-rated, but used its rating with more discretion than the first one, making it more loyal in tone to the comics. The jokes hit and Deadpool "dies" a lot in some awesome action scenes which was something the last one sorely missed. I'll probably see Solo soonish too. Maybe today.

Let the summer officially begin! What's been your favorite of the year so far? And what are you looking forward to next? Let me know in the comments. With five Fridays in June there's LOTS to look at this month! Let's get to it:


Upgrade
Jun 1st; R
This looks like a fun hardcore action flick. One neat premise -- where an AI implant allows a crippled man to go on a revenge spree -- that's just about as catered to the R-rated action genre as a premise can be. I expect some of the plot will be familiar, but that's okay by me as long as it's done well. The action looks great -- by the cinematography mostly. I really like it when the camera is far enough away so we can actually see what's going on, and doesn't cut every half-second. Plus -- those spin moves. This one's out today, and already has enough good reviews that I'm definitely interested to see it for myself.




American Animals
Jun 1st; R
Also out today, and also getting some good reviews. This one caught my attention with it's cast of Barry Keoghan and Evan Peters, but finding out more about it, my interest has only been dropping since. It definitely looks like a well made movie; I just expect that the plot would irritate and stress me out. I don't know anything about the real-life event, but I seriously doubt this movie could end well. It's the sort of thing I'd watch when it's streaming for free.




Adrift
Jun 1st; PG-13
Hopefully that's the last time I ever have to see a trailer for this movie. (Update: It wasn't.) As far as true stories go, I'd a million times rather watch the above than this, even though I expect this one has a happy ending. Shailene Woodley and Sam Claflin are meant to be a big draw (Tris and Finnick, together at last! Wait...) but for me it has the opposite effect. I'm so full of ugh over this movie, but I had to include it, to say no thank you. So -- no thank you!




Breath
Jun 1st; NR
Simon Baker directs, based on a novel. It's set in the 70's in Australia, and it appears to be a coming of age type movie with surfing. So that's all different and interesting. I'm not much a surfing movie fan, but I do like a good coming of ager. Will keep an eye open.




All Summers End
Jun 1st; NR
I heard about this movie in 2014 whenever Tye Sheridan had a few guest appearances on Last Man Standing as Kaitlyn Dever's boyfriend. I wonder why it took so long to be released, but that explains why they look so young. This is the sort of movie I'll be watching, disregarding reviews, without expecting much. Any other day I might not have given it a second look, but it's got Tye Sheridan, and I've low-key been waiting for four years, so....




Ocean's 8
Jun 8th; PG-13
Oh boy. Another Ghostbusters, or something actually good this time? I expect more the former. I'd be much more interested even if they weren't trying to bank of the Ocean's movies. Whether you call it a remake a reboot or a sequel, it can't help but feel like it's clutching onto the boys for support instead of trying to stand on its own high-heeled legs. Maybe it can stand on its own; maybe it can't. It's just a matter of principle, and one of the warning signs of a bad film.




Hereditary
Jun 8th; R
YIKES. This looks like a great horror movie. Which is why I'll probably never watch it.




Hotel Artemis
Jun 8th; R
If I ever watch this, it will be for Jeff Goldblum and sunglasses cinematography. I dunno, I mean, there doesn't appear to be anything wrong with it. It's got a nice cast, a scifi kind of premise. A siege plot. A nice look. It's just not appealing to me in any significant way. If it ever does, I'll be there.




Incredibles 2
Jun 15th; PG
I know everyone's excited about this, I just find it hard not to be cynical about sequels, even when it's Pixar. Not that Pixar has exactly been up to par recently. There are two main things about this sequel that gives me hope: One, Brad Bird is back. That is extremely comforting. And two, Jack-Jack's portal superpowers. I love that. So we'll see I guess!




The Yellow Birds
Jun 15th; R
Hmm. Alden Ehrenreich and Tye Sheridan war movie. Oh and Toni Collette. She has quite a few movies coming out this month. I don't think the movie looks particularly good, and I'm not generally big on modern war films, but I may give it a shot sometime for the cast.




Jurassic World: Fallen Kingdom
Jun 22nd; PG-13
I seriously doubt that I'll enjoy this one as much as I did the first Jurassic World, but I also expect that I'll be seeing it in theaters. Unless it really bombs. Chris Pratt has lost some of his appeal to me, but I'm sure he can still carry a movie with star-power. And I'm sure the dinos will look great on the big screen. And hey, this one has Rafe Spall in it. He's probably a bad guy, but that's okay. He's great.




Under the Silver Lake
Jun 22nd; R
Haha wow, this movie looks like it was made for Andrew Garfield; perfect for him in a way no one could have guessed kind of thing. Intriguing and bizarre. My only real question is: how did that girl go swimming and still have all her makeup be so perfect and completely not smudged??




The Catcher was a Spy
Jun 22nd; R
Paul Rudd leading a great cast; WWII spy movie. But, true story, so I guess I should find out what happens before I watch it. Looks kinda fun and kinda serious. I'd be willing to give it a go, even just for Rudd. I was like "Catcher of what?" and then I watched the trailer.




Sicario: Day of the Soldado
Jun 29th; R
The first one was a good movie, and when this one was announced I figured it'd be terrible, especially when I heard Emily Blunt wasn't in it. But really, it's going in such a different direction, I think I've changed my mind. It looks fun; very different from the first, but still with Benicio Del Toro and Josh Brolin's characters. Brolin in on a roll this summer, my goodness. So I doubt it'll have the immaculate and intentional filmmaking of the first, but I also doubt it'll be a waste of time.




Leave no Trace
Jun 29th; PG
Looks like a sweet movie. Also a good movie for hermits. From the writer/Director of Winter's Bone, whoever that is. And that was a good movie, so sure; advertise that. But one of the blips here compares this girl to Jennifer Lawrence is a completely blatant way, and that seems unfair. Salt-of-the-earth people aren't really that scarce, and I'm sure one could think of a way to praise this girl's performance and demeanor without resorting to such laziness.




Woman Walks Ahead
Jun 29th; R
Sam Rockwell? Sign me up, boys! Although the movie looks to be so full of politics that it doesn't have any room for anything else, I'll give it a chance for Sam. Jessica Chastain is great too. I'm sure she makes an excellent lead. And modern-made westerns are a fun thing. Or at least they can be. We'll see what happens.

Mute

Spoiler free!

Leo (Alexander Skarsgård) is a lo-fi guy living in a hi-fi scifi world. He was raised Amish, and keeps up the plain and simple lifestyle, but not in an Amish community; in the bustling, grimy, neon-lighted city of near-future Berlin. A childhood accident left him mute, so his quiet life is literal too. He has one friend, Naadirah (Seyneb Saleh) his girlfriend. And she has been keeping secrets from him. When those secrets cause her to suddenly disappear, he goes looking for her, but he has no idea of where to start, or what he's getting into.

Directed by the wonderfully incorrigible Duncan Jones. Never, ever change.

This is the most pure scifi-noir film I've seen since Blade Runner, and it's about time. Science fiction and film-noir go together wonderfully, and often get paired up, but the tech-noir phase pretty much always puts the scifi first -- the noir is for tone and mood. I love that of course, but I also enjoy a noir-plot, and to get those you still have to go back to the 1940's. Until now. Mute follows a classic noir plot structure faithfully, and makes sure to include traditional elements of the genre. Then it uses scifi on the side to put cool twists on it all.

At its core, it's a mystery thriller, plain and simple. No time travel, no body swapping, no aliens, no distant galaxies, no extended action sequences. In fact the way the bits of action and violence is done is extraordinarily good -- brief, and shocking, and often shown passively, which only enhances the effect. And the intensity build throughout the plot is a thing to behold. That last turn was completely unexpected. But Leo spends most of his time following clues, and the truth is revealed to us slowly. The only thing that breaks the noir protocol is a parallel, bad guy plot involving American surgeon buddies Cactus Bill (Paul Rudd) and Duck (Justin Theroux). Clearly they're involved in the mystery, but we never find out how until Leo does.

He wears the best Hawaiian shirts.

Cactus, with his magnificent mustaches, has that Paul Rudd charm, and a daughter he cares about, but is not a nice guy. But Duck, complete with perfectly horrendous floppy hair, and an annoying penchant for the word "babe" is far worse; and as we learn this, it was interesting to watch him slowly surpass Cactus on the evil scale. He's a creep times a thousand. Rudd has never been this good in a role, and I've not seen him give one bad performance. It's like the character was written for him, yet he still gave it a steady stream of unexpected twists. And Theroux -- my goodness. He made me feel sick, and my skin crawl, and I might have hated it if it wasn't so incredibly impressive.

I did wonder why they were so heavily featured, especially as their plot goes down a dark and seemingly unnecessary path. But when the two plots merge, it all makes sense and ties importantly into the theme. Also, Leo doesn't talk, so his scenes get to the point fast. They have to. But Cactus and Duck get to banter and chit-chat, and take their time. Then their side of things actually serves Leo too. Their being fully developed characters whenever they meet him helps things make sense, and allows the movie to focus on developing Leo in those scenes, instead of being distracted with villain motive. Whenever Leo is present in a scene, that scene serves him; doggedly. It refuses to become distracted, and I love that.

He certainly has a presence. And if looks could kill, his sad faces would be as deadly as his angry ones.

My dad suggested that Leo could have done noir-style narration via inner dialogue, and I half expected him to constantly use sign language which would then be captioned for us, but no; narration and captions are both cop-out solutions to a challenging character. Jones took the hard route, and the result is worth the trouble in spades. Alexander Skarsgård portrays Leo's every emotion, thought, and intention physically; expressions, body language, and actions. He signs and writes down a handful of things -- all minimally. Like the tagline says, he doesn't need words. They made sure that was true, and it works beautifully; he is heartbreakingly raw and open, and absolutely mesmerizing.

And he's not only an exceptionally interesting, different, well acted and written character; he really does lead the film. Even with the significant handicap of never speaking; the story revolves around him, and it's him that we care for. We get to see -- not only hear -- that he's kind and gentle, innocent bordering on naive, but will literally fight to protect the people (person) he loves. Naadirah, a blue-haired beauty instead of a blue-eyed beauty, at work seems just a part of the neon bustle, but then she washes off her garish makeup and treats him with equal love and respect a she does her. Their relationship is so unexpected, yet makes so much sense.

They're so sweet together.

This is another great example of a film where the darkness makes the light brighter -- the goodness of their relationship and his character, poised against the movie's many deplorable beings; some of whom accept the grime and depravity of the city's dark neon underbelly; others who create it. I ran the movie through VidAngel to remove the sex and nudity, but the film still deals with mature and dark things; all the better to explore a character who is defined by innocence and morality. The conflict was as contrasted as the neon and black visuals.

Besides the basic plot structure, Mute's atmosphere is decidedly noir, with a Blade Runner-like city of casually-used run-down technology. The best way to describe it is "neon-noir" as it often takes place at night, lit exclusively with neon lights. And that femme fatale character... all I can say is that it was unexpected, and worked perfectly. I also liked that it was set in Germany, and featured a few German characters. Maybe because I like German, maybe because of the tone it helped create too. It remembers to be depressing and pessimistic, but doesn't leave us hanging heartlessly. Like I said, there's light here, and hope, and it looks fondly on the purity of innocence.

Too bad none of the characters smoke. Watching people smoke in dramatic lighting is one of the finer things in life. And super noir.

All the elements I love in modern films are here -- a compelling lead with meaningful arc, moral exploration without preachiness, plot complexity that requires attention, and attention to detail and visual beauty. That is all paired with noir film tone, tropes, and structure; violence that isn't glorified or stylized; and emotion that isn't heavy-handed or exploiting. I have literally wished for a movie like this. I can hardly believe it exists as a real thing now, let alone works as well as it does. Striking on every level; compelling from its first moment to its last.

Duncan Jones obviously had a specific vision for this film, and it clearly was the last thing anyone expected. It's non-conforming, and non-traditional for these modern times. I know it's not something that everyone should be able to enjoy. It's niche -- but not that niche. People aren't saying it's just not for them, they're saying it's badly made. But it was made purposefully to mimic an old film noir, and that it undeniably does, so I say it's undeniably successful. That's why the plot is hard to follow, and "strangely" structured. There certainly aren't any glaring holes. It doesn't exposition us to death; character is revealed naturally; and it stays focused on what's important -- on what it wants to say.

And it's beautiful, but doesn't get hung up on being beautiful.

Appropriately, everything it says is said without words. It's all conveyed through subtext, imagery, even symbolism; and of course, expressions. With a title and a hero like it has, why in the world should it be expected to outright declare what it is? It gives us enough clues, if only we could shut up and listen. A throwback to the filmmaking past, a neat speculation into a realistic future, and a thoughtful and hard examination of good, evil, innocence and corruption; Mute is a scifi-noir film for the ages.

Perhaps age will see it gather the understanding it deserves.

Upcoming Movie Roundup - February

In January I saw The Greatest Showman, and I've just realized that I never wrote a review for it! Oops. I have a perfect record of reviewing all movies I've seen in theaters since I started reviewing movies, so I definitely can't let that one fall through the cracks. Sadly, we didn't have time for The Death Cure, so that's been pushed into this month's agenda -- top priority.

February has lots to talk about -- good and bad -- so let's get to it! What looks good to you this month?


Peter Rabbit
Feb 9th; PG
Domhnall. Sweetie. What are you doing? Good grief this looks bad. At least all Daisy Ridley and Margot Robbie had to be convinced of was to lend their voices -- and I don't think James Corden needed convincing. But how in the world did they get Domhnall Gleeson to agree to do the live-action portion? They must have paid him a ton. He does look exactly like Mr. McGregor, so maybe they thought it was worth it. Even with this cast, I'll be steering clear. Far, far clear.




The 15:17 to Paris
Feb 9th: PG-13
Okay. First of all, this is an awesome true story. Second of all, it's a really neat idea to cast the real guys as themselves. But -- I still have that reservation on the artistic side that true stories rarely make good movies due to un-cinematic structure. Clint Eastwood is at the helm, and it's clear that a lot of effort was put into the movie, so who knows, maybe this will be the next Apollo 13, or, something close to it anyway. I'm definitely interested just because the attack on the train is supposed to play out exactly how it did in real life, so that would be cool to see. At any rate, reservations or no, this is one to keep an eye on.




The Female Brain
Feb 9th; NR
This movie doesn't look particularly good, but I can, occasionally, have simple tastes, and this has Toby Kebbell in it, so I'm on board.... for whenever its streaming on Amazon or what have you. The differences in the ways male and female brains work is great fodder for comedy, so we'll see if this movie mined the truth in that area, or if they just used tired old stereotypes and worked off the top of their head. That's sadly the more likely option.




Basmati Blues
Feb 9th; NR
All I'd heard about this movie was that it was a Brie Larson film and it was terrible. And I thought that was pretty strange because how could Brie Larson be in a movie and not make it at least decent by her presence? Then I watched the trailer, and it all made sense. Larson probably does enhance it, but it really looks THAT bad. It's American trying to feel Bollywood by making it a musical romance, but it all feels extremely cheap and weird. I may have to watch it streaming just to confirm. It really doesn't make sense.




Black Panther
Feb 16th; PG-13
This is the big one of the month I guess, but to me it could go either way. The trailer is bursting with style and energy, so if that translates to the actual movie it should be on those points alone a solid flick. And it's Marvel, so you know they have their winning formula for crowd-pleasing movies. But I'm personally getting tired of the formula, and if all the movie is, is cool and stylish action played over a fourmula plot, then I might not be disappointed, but I won't be impressed either. And I want to be impressed. Also, early reviews are doing a lot of praising of what the movie "has to say" and, as you may know from my opinion on Civil War, I hate it when movies preach at you. Preaching does not equal plot or character development. Still, there's a chance here, with a great cast and a lead character I already like, so let's go -- impress me if you can!




Early Man
Feb 16th; PG
I'm trying to figure out if I'm required to see this, because on one hand, I've fallen in love with stop-motion and have been trying to watch all stop-motion movies I can find. On the other hand this lumpy clay style of making the dolls is my least favorite. And Chicken Run practically traumatized me as a kid. But then, I like the comedy style, and it has a good cast (Tom Hiddleston, Eddie Redmayne!) and a neat plot. The great thing about stop-motion is that it's so hard to do, people don't actually bother to make the movie unless it's a story they care about. So... yeah. I guess I am pretty much required to watch it sometime... but not only that -- I think I want to!




The Party
Feb 16th: R
I see Cillian Murphy, and I'm sold. Simple. Beyond that, this one has more potential than the one I'll probably watch only because Toby Kebbell is in it -- this one looks genuinely funny and genuinely dramatic (though it may still prove not to be my cup of tea) and I really, really, like that it's in black and white. Like the appeal level for the B&W is just under Cillain Murphy. And besides him there's quite a few familiar and talented faces. Good praise among the critics, which is a good sign too. I would like to RSVP as "coming."




The Boy Downstairs
Feb 16th; PG-13
Classic -- and I mean CLASSIC indie rom-com-dram. It has all the earmarks. The lead is even a writer. I'd watch it. That's all.




Annihilation
Feb 23rd; R
Well, I don't care for Natalie Portman, but other than her being the lead, this movie has nothing in it that isn't interesting to me. It makes me think of Arrival, except with horror and fantasy-feeling scifi added in. Based on a book, so now I'm gonna have to check that out and see if it's worth a read. I'm always excited to see a big-budged, full-fledged scifi film coming round the bend, and this one looks so cool that the Natalie Portman thing isn't even leaving a dent. Plus there's Oscar Isaac, even if he is probably in a coma most of the film, so that helps a lot. But yeah, I am here for the scifi!




Game Night
Feb 23rd; R
This trailer is on the verge of being funny. On the verge. It's so close that I want to watch the movie to see if it actually succeeds there. I don't think Rachel McAdams is capable of doing pure comedy. Heck, I don't think Jason Bateman is capable of pure comedy, but he at least has loads more experience. If they put enough drama in the mix it might work, but people like Bill Murray are legends for a reason. I'm not sure about Kyle Chandler, either. Actually, the funniest person in this trailer is the dude from USS Callister and he didn't even say anything. (I'm sure he has a bigger part in the movie.) The premise is really good, and if they go where they seem to want to, making a Clue-type movie, it could be good. But, I don't think they're going to succeed. They don't appear to... have all the pieces.




Mute
Feb 23rd; NR
Duncan Jones' new original film is a Netflix release, and I just forgot about all of the above movies. I want to see this so much and I won't even have to leave my house to do it! The trailer is pretty vague and confusing, but I only watched it for this post anyway -- I would would watch anything by Duncan Jones without a trailer. Moon is one of my all-time favorite scifi movies, and Source Code is also great film. Warcraft was pretty bad, but hey, that one wasn't original, so... This one stars Alexander Skarsgård (of the Skarsgård acting family) as a mute guy. And Paul Rudd is in it. The scifi world looks awesome too, but even without all that I'd still be here. Because Duncan Jones.




Altered Carbon
Feb 2nd; Netflix
Don't get this and the above mixed up -- the trailer covers are laughably similar! If Mute doesn't count as scifi noir, then this one certainly does. Blade Runner vibes everywhere. This one's a Netflix TV series, which has it's own pros and cons. And if I base it solely on the trailer I might not like this one as much even with noir mystery element, but we'll see. Oh yes, we will see. I now officially declare February to be a Month of Science Fiction. I am a very happy camper right now. Even if all the scifi releases disappoint, right now, the anticipation is great.

Ant-Man

This review is Spoiler-free.

Don't worry; I'll refrain from the size jokes.

Ant-Man is the newest Marvel flick, and it's been a while since we've seen a solo introductory Marvel film. The solo film's style should reflect accurately the character of the hero it features, and it's an important task to get right as it sets the tone for that character for the rest of his movie career. In that, and in many, many other things, Ant-Man knocks it out of the park.

Standing in the tub trying to get the full view in the bathroom mirror. Things we can all relate to.

Scott Lang is a burglar. He very strictly only does non-violent crimes of sneaky thieving and even takes cues from Robin Hood. But he still gets caught. We pick up as he's just finishing his three-year stint in prison, and he's determined to go straight -- for his daughter. That doesn't work so well though, and eventually he decides to take just one last job -- for his daughter. But this job of burgling one Dr. Hank Pym's house gets him way more than he ever asked for, and exactly what he needs; a chance to become the good guy, save the world, and be a good dad -- for his daughter.

"Save the world" sounds exactly like what you'd expect from a Marvel flick, and it's true that the fate of the world hangs in the balance in this plot, but, it hangs in the background. There's no immediate danger of aliens or robots actively destroying the world. I say this not because it features a guy who shrinks, but because it's true; Ant-Man is just plain on a smaller scale than any Marvel film so far. And I love it. 

A smaller scale never means there's any less heart.

Captain America: The Winter Soldier was a superhero spy movie; Guardians of the Galaxy was a superhero space movie; Ant-Man is a fantastic superhero heist movie. And heist movies, by definition, do not make a lot of noise. It was wonderfully refreshing to not see massive destruction and hordes of casualties in this one; but at the same time, when, say, a suitcase, or a miniature city gets completely obliterated, it gives the impression of the superhero destruction and delivers on all the visual thrills that entails -- just without all those bothersome consequences.

Paul Rudd at the lead of this film is just as cool and charming as you would expect out of the newest Marvel movie superhero, but his Scott Lang has a lot more to him that I did not expect; being a new and determined convert to the ranks of "family man" for one. For Scott it's more about his daughter than anything else, and that's a particularly sweet thing to see in a movie like this. He also gives the impression of just being a regular guy better than any of his super predecessors. His hard work and determination makes him worthy of his superhero status, and his charm and humor makes him a lovable lead for the film.

He was also automatically cool, as a burglar... but he probably would have been cool anyway.

Michael Douglas is the resident movie veteran, so of course he is great. Dr. Pym is the creator of the Ant-Man suit, and is Scott's mentor and trainer, but he has plenty of his own character development to worry about, and some of may be a bit contrived, but he handles it all like the pro he is. Evangeline Lily is Pym's daughter; source of much snark and cynicism, and the general greatness we've come to expect out of her. She is fun and involving and lovely, and a little bit deadly. The villain is Corey Stoll, and he does a fantastic job with what he has, but doesn't get to go quite as crazy as he is capable of and I was hoping for. Still he was a classically sinister kind of villain which was great, and was very well-dressed.

When you look this good, you really should rule the world.

And Judy Greer was there, as Scott's ex-wife and mother of his daughter, and I liked her so much I felt kind of sad that there didn't seem to be any chance of their getting back together. Bobby Cannavale was her fiancé and a cop, so of course there's clashing between him and Scott which helped makes things more personal and closer to home. Hayley Atwell and John Slattery also make appearances as their Peggy Carter and Howard Stark. Plus there's one very fun surprise appearance that I won't ruin.

Evangeline, hard to recognize under that hair.

Scott's team of fellow burglars is Luis (Michael Peña) Kurt (David Dastmalchian) and Dave (T.I.) Used mostly for comic relief, they were all funny, and helpful to the plot to boot, but Michael Peña stands out for miles and miles with his scene-stealing and hilarious character. At least a little bit of the credit for his hilarity though, has to go to the writers for writing that one awesome gag and knowing who to give it to for the best effect. There were several writers -- Joe Cornish, Adam McKay, the great Edgar Wright and even Paul Rudd himself -- so I don't know who gets credit for that bit, but I get the feeling it goes to Wright. The director Peyton Reed also certainly deserves props here too.

Three funny dudes.

I knew I'd love this movie, and I was right, but what I couldn't predict was why, and how differently I love it from the way I love other Marvel flicks. This movie reminded me of what I loved about movies as a kid, and made me feel like I was that little kid again; being thrilled by the sheer inventiveness and involved in the classic, old-fashioned-type plot events. I was even slightly more shocked at the little language and slightly disturbing violence than I normally would have been. Things that I would normally find too silly I suddenly found easy to forgive as well, and even sometimes quite easy to accept and enjoy, just because the movie itself embraced and wasn't ashamed of the silliness. I feel sentimental about this movie, like it's a childhood favorite, and I only saw it yesterday.

One cool thing I didn't expect was how much the ants were used. They were totally helpful and unique, and yes, pretty darned cute too.

This film is one of the more family-friendly, and definitely the most family-oriented Marvel films to date, but don't think that means it leaves our more refined adult side bored and wanting. It easily holds its own against the plethora of more obviously enticing and effortlessly marketable superhero flicks already in existence -- with its tongue in its cheek, its head held high, and its sights focused on its own sky-high goals. Goals that are reached with heart and humor and a determined effort. Ant-Man is a fun and fantastic caper that caters to the child in all of us. And let's be honest; if we're watching a superhero movie, we already have a child inside, just waiting to be catered to.

Upcoming Movie Roundup - July

In June I got out to see Jurassic World (review), and it was every bit as awesome as I wanted and expected it to be. I also saw a May movie, when Far From the Madding Crowd (review) finally showed up at a theater near me. And as to how much I liked it -- I'm in the middle of reading the novel now.

July is chock-full of movies -- as it should be -- and contains at least two must-sees for me! What movies are your must-sees this month?


Terminator Genisys
July1st; PG-13
This one, the newest attempt at reviving the Terminator franchise, released today, so based on critic reviews, I have a pretty good idea of what to think. I'm thinking I'm going to wait for the rental. Spending any more money on it would be a waste according to the pretty terribly sad 26% on RT. The fact that Arnold Schwarzenegger is back for this one is a plus, but I don't like that Anton Yelchin's Kyle Reese was traded in for that dull hunk Jai Courtney. Jason Clark could be cool as John Connor, and I hear Matt Smith is in it, but have yet to see any evidence. And if the twist that appears to be revealed in this trailer really is the twist it appears to be, then I'm thinking I'm going to be feeling more annoyed and confused than excited while watching it.




Aurora
July7th (limited); NR
In a lot of ways this movie looks pretty cliched. Humans, "destroying" the earth get booted out of control by an AI that "knows better" but is really evil and the bad guy. But, who knows, maybe this movie will be the one that finally perfects that plot by being more than it appears to be by the trailer, and then those cliches can be put to rest. Or, maybe it'll be exactly what it seems -- all the cliches, sci-fi action coolness and romance and everything. I still might very well be interested.




Self/Less
July 10th; PG-13
This is the big, mainstream, non sequel or franchise sci-fi movie of the month, so I kinda have doubts of how profound it will actually be, but this trailer certainly does promise lots of things. Ryan Reynolds stars as a dying billionaire (Ben Kingsley) who gets a new body so that his mind can live longer. Complications and mystery ensue. At least, I really really hope mystery ensues. And I hope it's really really complicated too -- in a smart way of course. In all likelihood though, I'm dreaming. Ryan Reynolds certainly doesn't inspire too much faith on that score. I'll be keeping an eye on reviews for this one.




What We Did on Our Holiday
July 10th(limited); PG-13
David Tennant and Rosamund Pike in a British comedy. Done. It looks totally silly and cutesy and light and airy, but I'm fairly sure that there's nothing it could do that would keep me from wanting to see it, or from enjoying at least some of it once I do. The only real question here is "when?"




Ant-Man
July 17th; PG-13
The "when?" for this one is easy: as soon as possible. Ant-Man is my first must-see for this month, which isn't really a surprise considering it's a Marvel movie. Paul Rudd is Ant-Man, Corey Stoll is the villain, Evangeline Lily is there; Michael Douglas, Judy Greer, Michael Pena, and the list goes on and on. I've witnessed others doubting this one (my brother included) but I have a feeling about, like the feeling I had before Guardians of the Galaxy released, and I'm dying to see if I'm right about it. I don't expect it to be as good as GotG of course, but I plan on liking it. A lot. Even if it turns out to be a letdown in terms of Marvel movies, I'm sure I'll still will enjoy it, but, I'm planning on it not being a letdown, but another unexpected surprise, hilarious, epic, fun, and a unique success. Very, very, very highly anticipating this wildcard!




Mr. Holmes
July 17th(limited); PG
Unfortunately this one's not sparking interest with me. I'm sure Ian McKellen does a great job as an aged Sherlock Holmes, and the trailer absolutely looks like a well-made film in every way. But it also looks like the kind of movie I would never really bother to watch. Too sentimental and grit-less perhaps. And why would I want to see all of Holmes' mind-blowing traits and defining skills be debunked? Maybe I'll be wrong and suddenly grow some interest, but it's not happening yet.




Paper Towns
July 24th; PG-13
I certainly want to see this one eventually, but right now I can't imagine it being even close to the greatness of the book it's based on. Many of the thing I adored about the novel seems to be softened and smoothed down for the movie, and that will easily disappoint me. I'm also not sure I like the casting of Cara Delevingne for Margo. Though I do think Nat Wolff will be the perfect Q. And the story is ideal for a movie as long as they're not wimpy about it. Hopefully this one turns out even half a bold as the book, and maybe if I don't get my expectations up too high I'll enjoy it.




Mission: Impossible Rogue Nation
July 31st; PG-13
No chance this one won't be thrilling! Tom Cruise, Jeremy Renner, Simon Pegg, and Ving Rhames are back, and Alec Baldwin appears to be the bad guy. And the stunts have been dully taken up to the next notch, with Tom Cruise hanging on to the outside of an airplane as it takes off -- and you know it all real too because Cruise wouldn't do anything less! As far as I can tell the plot looks smart and fun, but honestly all my requirements for having a blast while watching this movie have already been met. Second must-see of the month of July!