Happy New Year!
I've done a terrible job catching up on 2019 movies. Last month I saw Star Wars: The Rise of Skywalker as expected, and it was more enjoyable than expected though still messily made. (Read my review here!)
Then we went to see Richard Jewell and I'm real glad we did. It wasn't trying to be overly artistic, but just to tell the story truthfully, and it comes across beautifully. I haven't reviewed it yet, but I will. I'm saying that I will right here so that I will have to.
I also watched The Aeronauts off Amazon Prime. It wasn't good, but I gave it a chance. Maybe I should review that too, so I can explain the bizarre way in which it is bad. No promises though.
There's still so many I want to see before I make up any king of top movies of 2019 list. Little Women is on the schedule, as is 1917. But now the January movies are coming! And I kinda like January movies. They reset my love for film by being dumb and enjoyable.
What are you looking forward to seeing in 2020 -- January and beyond?
1917
Wide release Jan 10th; R
I'm still counting this as a 2019 release since it had a limited release over Christmas. But I haven't seen it yet, and thought I would point out that the wide release is on its way. Since it my most-anticipated film of 2019, I don't mind having to wait until 2020 to see it. Or at least... I can wait. I have tickets. I'll probably make it. I HAVE to make it!
The Informer
In theaters Jan 10th; NR
Starting the year off right -- this is EXACTLY the kind of movie that should get released in January, and the kind of movie I'm ready to see. That obviously not Oscar-quality deal, that promises you won't have to use your brain much to enjoy it. Maybe it'll be genuinely bad, but to me it looks like a simple action thriller, cliched but not in an annoying or necessarily bad way, starring capable actors. I'll totally watch this.
Just Mercy
In theaters Jan 10th; PG-13
Time to get political (sorry) but this is interesting. This is a true story about a lawyer who works to right and injustice -- very similar to the plot of Richard Jewell. But watching the trailer for this, most of what I see is preaching about the agenda the film wants to push. Maybe it's less the case in the actual movie, but the reason Jewell worked so well was it just told the story plainly, without inserting it's own political ideas into the script. I think its best when political movies don't have political messages. Especially true stories should tell the truth and let the audience take away what they see. But I guess we'll see about this one. It does have a good cast of Michael B. Jordan, Jamie Foxx, Brie Larson, Tim Blake Nelson and Rafe Spall.
Underwater
In theaters Jan 10th; PG-13
Another ideal January release. Deep ocean movies are essentially lost in space movies but with the extra detail of water instead of the vacuum of space, and this flick knows it. It's Alien under the sea, and I'm ready to go watch it right now. It looks like a lot of fun, and has a nice big cast of names to kill off, with Kristen Stewart in the lead. Movies like this are film essentials. I hope it tires hard to entertain and doesn't take itself too seriously. If it weren't for movies like this I would get tired of loving film altogether.
Inherit the Viper
Limited release and streaming Jan 10th; R
Hard to tell with this one. It looks like it's very self-serious but also not particular in any way. Rednecks and drugs and violence starter pack. Family dramas don't need exceptional plots to be great, but this one seems focused more on plot than character. If I had to venture a guess, it'd be that the movie's too safe and unremarkable to be truly great, but maybe it's well made and acted enough to make it worth watching.
Bad Boys for Life
In theaters Jan 17th; NR
I have seen Bad Boys 2... but not Bad Boys. And that should clue you in to the level of care I have for the franchise. A new sequel might inspire me to see the first one and the second again perhaps -- especially if this is any good. Honestly though, I doubt it will be. It's been too long, and more importantly, no Michael Bay in the director's chair. You might think that's a good thing, but the directors are intentionally mimicking Bay's style, and, love him or hate him or anything in between we can all agree on one thing: No one can do Michael Bay but Michael Bay. (Language warning for the trailer.)
Dolittle
In theaters Jan 17th; PG
This movie has a pretty good cast... of voice actors and one or two people whose face we'll see. It's a lot to ask of the people who are clamoring for Robert Downey Jr. to will an Oscar for his performance in Avengers: Endgame. Because it's up to them and them alone to buy the tickets so it won't bomb. Just kidding, I'm sure nostalgia will drag in some unsuspecting patrons. They're scraping the bottom of the barrel with CGI reboots, and you can tell from this trailer that tried to look epic and get you on emotion instead of the promise of a good film. I won't be surprised if people say it's good, but I would be very surprised if it actually is.
The Wave
Limited release and streaming Jan 17th; R
Justin Long indie scifi drug trip? I dunno, but it looks like the sort of movie that I won't be able to put aside until I've seen it and understand what it's about and what it's trying to do. Looks very low-budget, but that can breed creativity and it certainly has a unique sense to it.
The Turning
In theaters Jan 24th; PG-13
Finn Wolfhard has been the scared person in enough horror movies now and is leveling up to being the scary person. I look forward to bearing witness. With the lights on. Preferably during the day. That's all.
The Gentlemen
In theaters Jan 24th; R
Well this has Guy Ritchie written all over it -- and that's nothing but a good thing in my opinion! My favorite of his work to date is RocknRolla, and this one looks much more like that than Sherlock Holmes (which the trailer wants you to remember) or Arthur: Legend of the Sword (which it doesn't want you to remember). Ritchie returning to his roots maybe? Also quite the cast. Charlie Hunnam leading (who I like now) with Matthew McConaughey (who I still don't like very much) and Michelle Dockery, Henry Golding, Colin Farrell, and Hugh Grant (all of whom I definitely like). This is the sort of movie that I won't trust the critic reviews on, and will certainly have to see for myself.
The Rhythm Section
In theaters Jan 31st; NR
First of all I legit thought this was a sad music drama or something based on the poster. Second, Blake Lively is trying to be taken seriously as an action star now, apparently. Looks like she's channeling Jason Bourne here. The plot isn't like Bourne, I'm just getting that vibe. A stylistic knockoff of an irrelevant franchise doesn't sound promising, but if I don't forget it exists I'll consider watching it if it can tempt me with good reviews.
Showing posts with label Robert Downey Jr.. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Robert Downey Jr.. Show all posts
Thursday, January 2, 2020
Sunday, April 28, 2019
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.
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.
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.
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.
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.
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.
Monday, April 1, 2019
Upcoming Movie Roundup - April
Alrighty! In March I saw Captain Marvel as expected. Found it pretty unremarkable (review here). And sadly didn't get to see The Kid which I was hoping to be able to. I did watch Triple Frontier because it was on Netflix, and it was good enough to make an enjoyable watch, but I didn't have anything to say about it, so I didn't review it.
The biggest surprise though, was that I went to see Five Feet Apart, and not only that, but I really, really liked it! And not just in a typical teen romance kind of way. It was good in ways that surpassed the genre. But it also fit the genre too. It was a great balance of cheesy romance, real emotions, and informative of Cystic Fibrosis that worked without any element stepping on the toes of the others. (review here!)
I'm still annoyingly interested in seeing Dumbo too, but no one want to see it with me. Sad days. Anyway, April is shaping up nicely! If all goes to plan more than a few of these movies should be a good time! So what looks good to you?
Shazam!
April 5th; PG-13
My most anticipated of the month is first! Zachary Levi, Jack Grazer, Mark Strong... I haven't seen the kid who plays Billy before, but I bet he's good too. I admit, the trailer got tiresome when it first came out, but since my excitement has steadily been building regardless, and all the positive early reviews are only making me more pumped! The idea of making Big into a superhero movie seems like a ton of fun, and I'm looking forward to a superhero flick that isn't a boring slog for a nice change. The DCEU has had its downs but it's capable of great heights too, and I get a feeling this one's going up!
Pet Sematary
April 5th; R
I dunno, maybe someday, but definitely not in theaters. Honestly, I'm not over Hereditary yet, and need some more time before seeing legit scary movies again. Or maybe the way to fix it IS to see some better scary movies! I heard somewhere this is the scariest Stephen King adaptation yet. It does look good, and generally my speed. Jason Clarke and Amy Seimetz (of Stranger Things) star.
High Life
April 5th(limited); R
Robert Pattinson and his daughter, Mia Goth and other what? Criminals? In space? I keep an eye on all scifi movies, so this is here. But somehow, I get the impression that it isn't exactly what I'd want it to be. Looks pretty though.
The Wind
April 5th(limited); R
Another horror movie, and this one seems more supernatural, which isn't so much my horror speed. I do like the lonely setting and the richly low-key tone though. Will consider, if the opportunity arises...
Unicorn Store
April 5th; NR
Brie Larson's directorial debut, on Netflix, with her Captain Marvel buddy Samuel L. Jackson too. I feel like I'll definitely watch this, mostly out of curiosity and because it's on Netflix so it's free. The plot doesn't instantly appeal to me, but it could be interesting. Or it could be frilly nonsense. I guess we'll find out!!
Hellboy
April 12th; R
I just recently realized that my liking the Guillermo Del Toro version is kinda an "unpopular opinion" or maybe the people who didn't like it are just being extra hard on it in anticipation of liking this one more. I mean, it's rated R, so what could go wrong, right?? Well, that sounds fine to me, but I honestly didn't notice anything lacking in Del Toro's, and this one won't have his eye for visuals or practical effects. It's looks CGI, and less than spectacular. Also seems a bit cheap script-wise with several lame jokes in the trailer, but Del Toro's was no masterpiece on that score either. It does have David Harbour... in place of Ron Perlman. Seems like a toss-up there. If it gets good reviews though, I wouldn't be surprised if I went to see it.
Missing Link
April 12th(limited); PG
It's stop-motion animation. I don't care what it's about: I'll see it. But it's about some Bigfoot-type creature, apparently. And the cast is great: Hugh Jackman, Zoe Saldana, Timothy Olyphant, Emma Thompson, Zach Galifianikis, and Stephen Fry. Doesn't look like the best stop-motion ever, with the dumb jokes, but like I said. I'll give it a chance!
Teen Spirit
April 12th; PG-13
This is like the kind of movie that I'll always be interested in but never actually buckle down and watch. It looks great, I love the neon and the style... but plot-wise, there's this dread that it'll go the way it appears to be that might keep me away. Elle Fanning tries to become a teen music idol.
Stockholm
April 12th(limited); R
Yeah, I guess it looks pretty funny in a pleasantly dark way, and it's got Ethan Hawke, Mark Strong, and Noomi Rapace. I guess this is the real-life situation that started the whole Stockholm syndrome thing? All I know is that this is the sort of thing I might or might not ever watch, depending on if the mood strikes and there's nothing better to do.
The Perfect Date
April 12th; NR
Hahaha, yes, please! Noah Centineo rents himself out to high school girls in need of chaperones. So... like... a PG escort service. The premise alone makes me laugh. It's Netflix, it's a teen rom-com. You know I'm on board.
The Man Who Killed Don Quixote
April 19th(limited); NR
Is this for real? Is it actually coming? I feel like this movie doesn't actually exist and we're just getting duped right now. The biggest April Fools joke of all time or something. I know it has mixed reviews at the moment but I can't help being absolutely stoked -- it just looks exactly like my kind of deal. Jonathan Price, Adam Driver and Stellan Skarsgård. Terry Gilliam craziness hopefully. I don't know if and don't expect it to come to my theater, but I will definitely be seeing it at my earliest opportunity!
Under the Silver Lake
April 19th(limited); R
Another potential April Fools joke. This one I had in my upcoming post back in June of last year and I think it might actually be coming for real this time. Andrew Garfield and Riley Keough. At this point it's mostly the curiosity that's keeping me from forgetting it entirely.
Avengers: Endgame
April 26th; PG-13
Le sigh. My brother hasn't bought our tickets yet, but undoubtedly I'll be there opening night. I'm not dreading it, but I'm not excited either. There are things I think seem promising that I'll likely enjoy and other things that will almost certainly irritate me. At this point, it's par for the course with the MCU. The biggest event movie of the modern era, and my hype level is a resounding zero. Let's get it over with, so we can get back to Spider-Man.
Body at Brighton Rock
April 26th(limited); NR
This looks like quite the interesting little indie thriller. Obviously pretty cheap, but has a very solid premise of an inexperienced park ranger finding a body and having to wait with it for help to arrive. If they do the story well it won't matter at all if the production is cheap.
The biggest surprise though, was that I went to see Five Feet Apart, and not only that, but I really, really liked it! And not just in a typical teen romance kind of way. It was good in ways that surpassed the genre. But it also fit the genre too. It was a great balance of cheesy romance, real emotions, and informative of Cystic Fibrosis that worked without any element stepping on the toes of the others. (review here!)
I'm still annoyingly interested in seeing Dumbo too, but no one want to see it with me. Sad days. Anyway, April is shaping up nicely! If all goes to plan more than a few of these movies should be a good time! So what looks good to you?
Shazam!
April 5th; PG-13
My most anticipated of the month is first! Zachary Levi, Jack Grazer, Mark Strong... I haven't seen the kid who plays Billy before, but I bet he's good too. I admit, the trailer got tiresome when it first came out, but since my excitement has steadily been building regardless, and all the positive early reviews are only making me more pumped! The idea of making Big into a superhero movie seems like a ton of fun, and I'm looking forward to a superhero flick that isn't a boring slog for a nice change. The DCEU has had its downs but it's capable of great heights too, and I get a feeling this one's going up!
Pet Sematary
April 5th; R
I dunno, maybe someday, but definitely not in theaters. Honestly, I'm not over Hereditary yet, and need some more time before seeing legit scary movies again. Or maybe the way to fix it IS to see some better scary movies! I heard somewhere this is the scariest Stephen King adaptation yet. It does look good, and generally my speed. Jason Clarke and Amy Seimetz (of Stranger Things) star.
High Life
April 5th(limited); R
Robert Pattinson and his daughter, Mia Goth and other what? Criminals? In space? I keep an eye on all scifi movies, so this is here. But somehow, I get the impression that it isn't exactly what I'd want it to be. Looks pretty though.
The Wind
April 5th(limited); R
Another horror movie, and this one seems more supernatural, which isn't so much my horror speed. I do like the lonely setting and the richly low-key tone though. Will consider, if the opportunity arises...
Unicorn Store
April 5th; NR
Brie Larson's directorial debut, on Netflix, with her Captain Marvel buddy Samuel L. Jackson too. I feel like I'll definitely watch this, mostly out of curiosity and because it's on Netflix so it's free. The plot doesn't instantly appeal to me, but it could be interesting. Or it could be frilly nonsense. I guess we'll find out!!
Hellboy
April 12th; R
I just recently realized that my liking the Guillermo Del Toro version is kinda an "unpopular opinion" or maybe the people who didn't like it are just being extra hard on it in anticipation of liking this one more. I mean, it's rated R, so what could go wrong, right?? Well, that sounds fine to me, but I honestly didn't notice anything lacking in Del Toro's, and this one won't have his eye for visuals or practical effects. It's looks CGI, and less than spectacular. Also seems a bit cheap script-wise with several lame jokes in the trailer, but Del Toro's was no masterpiece on that score either. It does have David Harbour... in place of Ron Perlman. Seems like a toss-up there. If it gets good reviews though, I wouldn't be surprised if I went to see it.
Missing Link
April 12th(limited); PG
It's stop-motion animation. I don't care what it's about: I'll see it. But it's about some Bigfoot-type creature, apparently. And the cast is great: Hugh Jackman, Zoe Saldana, Timothy Olyphant, Emma Thompson, Zach Galifianikis, and Stephen Fry. Doesn't look like the best stop-motion ever, with the dumb jokes, but like I said. I'll give it a chance!
Teen Spirit
April 12th; PG-13
This is like the kind of movie that I'll always be interested in but never actually buckle down and watch. It looks great, I love the neon and the style... but plot-wise, there's this dread that it'll go the way it appears to be that might keep me away. Elle Fanning tries to become a teen music idol.
Stockholm
April 12th(limited); R
Yeah, I guess it looks pretty funny in a pleasantly dark way, and it's got Ethan Hawke, Mark Strong, and Noomi Rapace. I guess this is the real-life situation that started the whole Stockholm syndrome thing? All I know is that this is the sort of thing I might or might not ever watch, depending on if the mood strikes and there's nothing better to do.
The Perfect Date
April 12th; NR
Hahaha, yes, please! Noah Centineo rents himself out to high school girls in need of chaperones. So... like... a PG escort service. The premise alone makes me laugh. It's Netflix, it's a teen rom-com. You know I'm on board.
The Man Who Killed Don Quixote
April 19th(limited); NR
Is this for real? Is it actually coming? I feel like this movie doesn't actually exist and we're just getting duped right now. The biggest April Fools joke of all time or something. I know it has mixed reviews at the moment but I can't help being absolutely stoked -- it just looks exactly like my kind of deal. Jonathan Price, Adam Driver and Stellan Skarsgård. Terry Gilliam craziness hopefully. I don't know if and don't expect it to come to my theater, but I will definitely be seeing it at my earliest opportunity!
Under the Silver Lake
April 19th(limited); R
Another potential April Fools joke. This one I had in my upcoming post back in June of last year and I think it might actually be coming for real this time. Andrew Garfield and Riley Keough. At this point it's mostly the curiosity that's keeping me from forgetting it entirely.
Avengers: Endgame
April 26th; PG-13
Le sigh. My brother hasn't bought our tickets yet, but undoubtedly I'll be there opening night. I'm not dreading it, but I'm not excited either. There are things I think seem promising that I'll likely enjoy and other things that will almost certainly irritate me. At this point, it's par for the course with the MCU. The biggest event movie of the modern era, and my hype level is a resounding zero. Let's get it over with, so we can get back to Spider-Man.
Body at Brighton Rock
April 26th(limited); NR
This looks like quite the interesting little indie thriller. Obviously pretty cheap, but has a very solid premise of an inexperienced park ranger finding a body and having to wait with it for help to arrive. If they do the story well it won't matter at all if the production is cheap.
Saturday, April 28, 2018
Avengers: Infinity War
Major Spoilers!
Welcome to the latest greatest Marvel movie, where all your favorite superheroes come together against the super-villain, Thanos, a very reasonable crazy person who wants to destroy half the universe! They fight super hard for two hours and thirty minutes, and then Thanos destroys half the universe. It's great fun.
There's a filmmaking 101 rule. If, say, a bomb is introduced to the plot, and there isn't eventually an on-screen explosion, your movie is bad. You must detonate that bomb. That's why Iron Man flew the nuke into space and exploded the Chitari spaceship. That's why Ronan's plans of destruction via the Power stone are shown by The Collector as he explains the danger -- because you must show it. It doesn't have to happen for real, but it has to happen. This rule, which is religiously followed in action films, is the reason I wasn't surprised by the end of Infinity War. The end rolled around sans a preview of the destruction, so I braced for impact.
But that's not why I didn't like the movie. The reason why I didn't enjoy myself watching this film as much as I should have, is that I felt the need to brace for impact in the first place. I like plenty of these characters. In fact, I dislike none of them. But the MCU doesn't typically make it worthwhile to be invested in the plights or well-being of its characters, and this film is the worst offender of the lot. Thor, Gamora and Strange are pushed to develop more than most of the sea of characters this film possesses, but whether they receive a little attention, or a lot, this movie can't agree with previous films on what their established character is, or the directions they should take.
It's an antihero movie from Thanos' perspective more than anything else. He wants to save the entire universe by destroying half the universe, (If you kill half the people, the rest will have more room and resources. Think about it!) and while his reasoning makes sense for a crazy person, he doesn't act crazy. He's just a big purple dude with a dream, and besides his partial-genocide plan, he keeps his evil deeds to a minimum. Are we supposed to sympathize? Because he achieves his goal at great personal loss does that make him deep? No. He's one-note, and it never makes sense why his goal is so important to him.
Conversely, every single hero's goal is clear: save the world, save the universe, save the people they care for. Viewers will latch on to that automatically; it's a fundamental part of a hero's being. Yet we are forced to watch them fail and give way to Thanos' character over and over. And with no ultimate triumph to make it worthwhile, it all becomes meaningless. This story has no reward. It kicks you in the head on intervals, tosses in a few neat fights, then pulls the rug out and waits for the praise to come rolling in. And fans, concussed, stagger away mumbling about how they "need to process this." You don't need to process it: it felt like one big sucker punch because that's what it was.
The film started out feeling very similar to flipping channels -- if every channel was playing a generic Marvel film. But the plot does tie it all together in a cohesive way, and as it puttered along I found myself more and more interested in the outlandish space locations and enjoying the odd awesome moment that lands among the unfunny, downright boring attempts at comedy and the even less interesting character development through dialogue. And every time a character died I would wait patiently for the next hint of joy.
Is it too much to ask that superhero movies be fun? It's not that they don't know how to have fun. I recall one particularly spectacular moment between Bucky and Rocket, and Spider-Man elevates everything by double just by having his face on screen. It seemed that the point of the movie wasn't to be entertaining (or heaven forbid -- interesting!) but to be a culmination of the past ten years. To bring it all together under one roof, and in one fell swoop... point to the next movie: because if the audience isn't talking about the next film in the series as they walk out of the theater, you're doing it wrong.
I'm sick and tired of it. I just want to enjoy a movie; to live in the moment of a fantasy world for a few hours, without the threat of anything being held back or saved for later. Marvel is on top of the world right now. They can do whatever they want, and fans will be in the theater, excited, and willing to give it a chance. And what do they do with this power? They give us crumbs. They leave a trail of them, promising more and more, and we follow, like the dutiful fans we are, clinging to the crumbs -- a great character, a favorite actor, a fleeting moment of joy -- and wonder why we don't feel satisfied.
There's not a lot objectively wrong with this movie. It's put together impressively well for being the monstrous task that it was. It mostly makes sense, mostly stays focused, and definitely does what it sets out to do. It often looks good, Thanos and his henchmen's CGI being a notable exception. It has a handful of memorable moments and many more that seem included dispassionately, out of obligation. Some humor is okay, some cringy. Some characters get quality attention, some... aren't even in the movie at all. Hello, Hawkeye? There are scores of nitpicks I could make, but it doesn't matter; the hard truth is, there's nothing this movie could've done that would've made me love it.
Fact is, I don't watch superhero movies to see the heroes fail at the end. On the list of things I don't want to see in a superhero film, ultimate failure is top of the box office all year long. (Failure before the end, however, is equally necessary. It's backwards here.) And I know: I know they're going to fix everything, because Spidey has another movie coming, and Marvel will never kill off a cash cow before it's dry. Therefore, it's possible that in combination with Part 2, I will enjoy the story more. Yep, they have me on the hook for another year. Doesn't change the fact, though. The only enjoyment I got out of the end was being so detached that I was actually amused by the manipulative stupidity on display before me.
There's simply nothing here for me. I am a Marvel fan, but they sure do make it difficult. Forcing investment in a story that is out to manipulate me isn't an option, and I've been shortchanged too many times for it to come naturally. If you don't identify with that statement, you'll probably love this film. Since it banks on killing off characters it's important that you be invested. And good on you if you were invested and did like it -- I'm not here to be Gamora and suck the joy out of everything (I'll even admit her death scene and dynamic with Thanos was alright) I'm just here to complain that I found no joy to begin with.
For a movie with no respect, no energy, and minimal creative effort, where the good guys put aside their differences, joining against a common enemy, only to fail miserably and wallow in a stale puddle of passionless tears, all in a blatant effort to build hype for the next film, Infinity War is about as good as you could possibly expect.
Welcome to the latest greatest Marvel movie, where all your favorite superheroes come together against the super-villain, Thanos, a very reasonable crazy person who wants to destroy half the universe! They fight super hard for two hours and thirty minutes, and then Thanos destroys half the universe. It's great fun.
 |
| I Loki hate this movie. lol. |
There's a filmmaking 101 rule. If, say, a bomb is introduced to the plot, and there isn't eventually an on-screen explosion, your movie is bad. You must detonate that bomb. That's why Iron Man flew the nuke into space and exploded the Chitari spaceship. That's why Ronan's plans of destruction via the Power stone are shown by The Collector as he explains the danger -- because you must show it. It doesn't have to happen for real, but it has to happen. This rule, which is religiously followed in action films, is the reason I wasn't surprised by the end of Infinity War. The end rolled around sans a preview of the destruction, so I braced for impact.
But that's not why I didn't like the movie. The reason why I didn't enjoy myself watching this film as much as I should have, is that I felt the need to brace for impact in the first place. I like plenty of these characters. In fact, I dislike none of them. But the MCU doesn't typically make it worthwhile to be invested in the plights or well-being of its characters, and this film is the worst offender of the lot. Thor, Gamora and Strange are pushed to develop more than most of the sea of characters this film possesses, but whether they receive a little attention, or a lot, this movie can't agree with previous films on what their established character is, or the directions they should take.
 |
| You'd think so little screen-time would keep away glaring inconsistencies, but no. Poor Quill was obliterated. |
It's an antihero movie from Thanos' perspective more than anything else. He wants to save the entire universe by destroying half the universe, (If you kill half the people, the rest will have more room and resources. Think about it!) and while his reasoning makes sense for a crazy person, he doesn't act crazy. He's just a big purple dude with a dream, and besides his partial-genocide plan, he keeps his evil deeds to a minimum. Are we supposed to sympathize? Because he achieves his goal at great personal loss does that make him deep? No. He's one-note, and it never makes sense why his goal is so important to him.
Conversely, every single hero's goal is clear: save the world, save the universe, save the people they care for. Viewers will latch on to that automatically; it's a fundamental part of a hero's being. Yet we are forced to watch them fail and give way to Thanos' character over and over. And with no ultimate triumph to make it worthwhile, it all becomes meaningless. This story has no reward. It kicks you in the head on intervals, tosses in a few neat fights, then pulls the rug out and waits for the praise to come rolling in. And fans, concussed, stagger away mumbling about how they "need to process this." You don't need to process it: it felt like one big sucker punch because that's what it was.
 |
| Half the "good" moments were just blatant rehashes of previous good moments. Thor's plotline was probably best because he has success before the final failure. |
The film started out feeling very similar to flipping channels -- if every channel was playing a generic Marvel film. But the plot does tie it all together in a cohesive way, and as it puttered along I found myself more and more interested in the outlandish space locations and enjoying the odd awesome moment that lands among the unfunny, downright boring attempts at comedy and the even less interesting character development through dialogue. And every time a character died I would wait patiently for the next hint of joy.
Is it too much to ask that superhero movies be fun? It's not that they don't know how to have fun. I recall one particularly spectacular moment between Bucky and Rocket, and Spider-Man elevates everything by double just by having his face on screen. It seemed that the point of the movie wasn't to be entertaining (or heaven forbid -- interesting!) but to be a culmination of the past ten years. To bring it all together under one roof, and in one fell swoop... point to the next movie: because if the audience isn't talking about the next film in the series as they walk out of the theater, you're doing it wrong.
 |
| It's called The Avengers for a reason! They gotta have something to... to.... *Part Two opens* ...AVENGE!!!! |
I'm sick and tired of it. I just want to enjoy a movie; to live in the moment of a fantasy world for a few hours, without the threat of anything being held back or saved for later. Marvel is on top of the world right now. They can do whatever they want, and fans will be in the theater, excited, and willing to give it a chance. And what do they do with this power? They give us crumbs. They leave a trail of them, promising more and more, and we follow, like the dutiful fans we are, clinging to the crumbs -- a great character, a favorite actor, a fleeting moment of joy -- and wonder why we don't feel satisfied.
There's not a lot objectively wrong with this movie. It's put together impressively well for being the monstrous task that it was. It mostly makes sense, mostly stays focused, and definitely does what it sets out to do. It often looks good, Thanos and his henchmen's CGI being a notable exception. It has a handful of memorable moments and many more that seem included dispassionately, out of obligation. Some humor is okay, some cringy. Some characters get quality attention, some... aren't even in the movie at all. Hello, Hawkeye? There are scores of nitpicks I could make, but it doesn't matter; the hard truth is, there's nothing this movie could've done that would've made me love it.
 |
| I'm not an overly emotional person by nature, but Marvel has taught me to be downright stone-hearted concerning their films. |
Fact is, I don't watch superhero movies to see the heroes fail at the end. On the list of things I don't want to see in a superhero film, ultimate failure is top of the box office all year long. (Failure before the end, however, is equally necessary. It's backwards here.) And I know: I know they're going to fix everything, because Spidey has another movie coming, and Marvel will never kill off a cash cow before it's dry. Therefore, it's possible that in combination with Part 2, I will enjoy the story more. Yep, they have me on the hook for another year. Doesn't change the fact, though. The only enjoyment I got out of the end was being so detached that I was actually amused by the manipulative stupidity on display before me.
There's simply nothing here for me. I am a Marvel fan, but they sure do make it difficult. Forcing investment in a story that is out to manipulate me isn't an option, and I've been shortchanged too many times for it to come naturally. If you don't identify with that statement, you'll probably love this film. Since it banks on killing off characters it's important that you be invested. And good on you if you were invested and did like it -- I'm not here to be Gamora and suck the joy out of everything (I'll even admit her death scene and dynamic with Thanos was alright) I'm just here to complain that I found no joy to begin with.
 |
| Except maybe Spider-Man. Spider-Man is still great. Maybe I'm turning into a Sony-Marvel fan... |
For a movie with no respect, no energy, and minimal creative effort, where the good guys put aside their differences, joining against a common enemy, only to fail miserably and wallow in a stale puddle of passionless tears, all in a blatant effort to build hype for the next film, Infinity War is about as good as you could possibly expect.
Sunday, April 1, 2018
Upcoming Movie Roundup - April
Happy Spring, happy April, happy April Fool's Day, and most importantly, happy Easter and Resurrection Sunday!
In March I saw my one must-see, that also happened to be my most-anticipated film of 2018 -- Ready Player One! It didn't hit the highest heights that my imagination hoped it had the potential for, but it was every bit as fun as the book, boasting the same greatness and the same flaws alike. And the cast is perfection. I'll write a review soon, but for now I'm listening to a playlist of the music and relishing the experience.
Still have interest in Thoroughbreds and Isle of Dogs. I need to get better at actually going out and seeing these non-blockbuster releases in theaters. Lean on Pete also hasn't hit a theater near me yet, but looks like it's expanding this month. I'm on Easter break this week, so maybe I should do a serious movie splurge.
What did you see in March? And what looks good in April?
A Quiet Place
Apr 6th; PG-13
My second-most anticipated movie of the year after Ready Player One. After I see this I'll have to come up with some new most-anticipated for the rest of the year's eight months. John Krasinski directs, and stars with his real-life wife Emily Blunt, and I'm sold on that alone. Plot-wise I don't want to know much, but horror/thriller vibes are blatantly obvious, which I'm definitely cool with. Something about this movie reminds me of 10 Cloverfield Lane, and I'm not even worried that influence will make my expectations too high because the movie has been getting rave reviews so far.
You Were Never Really Here
Apr 6th; R
Joaquin Phoenix looks intense. This movie looks intense. It's probably good but it's also probably not exactly my kind of movie.
The Endless
Apr 6th; NR
The color grading make it look like it's on the cheaper side of low-budget indie movies, but the scifi/Lovecraft thing it has going is undeniably appealing. The scifi side of it doesn't look cheap either. I'll be very interested to watch if I ever see it floating around on a streaming site somewhere.
Rampage
Apr 13th; PG-13
Ugh, this looks so dumb. Not that it appears to be trying to be anything else, but it's just not appealing to me. I'd rather watch Skull Island again, or Jumanji. If this movie winds up being dumb but genuinely good and fun like those movies, I will be very surprised. But still, I'll probably watch it at some point, if only to roll my eyes at it.
Borg vs McEnroe
Apr 13th; R
Not that it sounds boring to watch Shia LaBeouf get beat in an epic game of tennis by a Swedish fellow, but to be perfectly honest, the main appeal of this movie for me is that the Swedish side of things is done in Swedish -- so it's half a foreign language film. I don't think I've ever seen Stellan Skarsgård act in his native language. (This trailer isn't green-band approved -- language warning.)
Marrowbone
Apr 13th; NR
It's a creepy horror movie set in what looks like the 50's, and it has Charlie Heaton in it, so I guess I have to watch it. The nice thing is, it's releasing on Amazon -- so probably not the greatest quality film, but that okay by me. Maybe it won't be too scary.
Avengers: Infinity War
Apr 27th; PG-13
Oh yeah, I forgot about this one! lol.
Here's the thing about this movie: I don't care.
I'm going to go see it, but I'm not particularly excited about watching all my favorite superheroes come together and not get enough screentime in a 2-hour, 40-min movie, just so that some drama can be milked and one or two people can get killed off in what I assume will be the most forced, senseless, and irritating ways possible. So sue me. When the ads boast about how Marvel has been building to this for 10 years it irks me, because of how dismissive it is of previous Marvel films -- films that were sometimes this close to being great apart from their shared universe but perhaps weren't simply because they only needed to serve to sell the next film. Even this film is just going to point to next year's Avengers 4. That kind of mindset makes me want to quit with Marvel altogether, but I guess I'm in too deep now. Spider-Man and Bucky are my excuse.
The House of Tomorrow
Apr 27th; NR
Aw, this looks cute. Like a retry of The Space Between Us for Asa Butterfield, but not ridiculous and painfully awkward. I guess he likes playing naive outsiders getting introduced to the world. This one also has Nick Offerman, Ellen Burstyn and the Second Edition Wolff -- Alex Wolff. Are he and Nat twins, because I seriously cannot tell them apart? *research* No. They act so similarly too though -- it's like Nat went back in time and switched the mole on his chin to his lip so he could make more teenage movies. Anyways, this movie. Looks neat. Will check out.
In March I saw my one must-see, that also happened to be my most-anticipated film of 2018 -- Ready Player One! It didn't hit the highest heights that my imagination hoped it had the potential for, but it was every bit as fun as the book, boasting the same greatness and the same flaws alike. And the cast is perfection. I'll write a review soon, but for now I'm listening to a playlist of the music and relishing the experience.
Still have interest in Thoroughbreds and Isle of Dogs. I need to get better at actually going out and seeing these non-blockbuster releases in theaters. Lean on Pete also hasn't hit a theater near me yet, but looks like it's expanding this month. I'm on Easter break this week, so maybe I should do a serious movie splurge.
What did you see in March? And what looks good in April?
A Quiet Place
Apr 6th; PG-13
My second-most anticipated movie of the year after Ready Player One. After I see this I'll have to come up with some new most-anticipated for the rest of the year's eight months. John Krasinski directs, and stars with his real-life wife Emily Blunt, and I'm sold on that alone. Plot-wise I don't want to know much, but horror/thriller vibes are blatantly obvious, which I'm definitely cool with. Something about this movie reminds me of 10 Cloverfield Lane, and I'm not even worried that influence will make my expectations too high because the movie has been getting rave reviews so far.
You Were Never Really Here
Apr 6th; R
Joaquin Phoenix looks intense. This movie looks intense. It's probably good but it's also probably not exactly my kind of movie.
The Endless
Apr 6th; NR
The color grading make it look like it's on the cheaper side of low-budget indie movies, but the scifi/Lovecraft thing it has going is undeniably appealing. The scifi side of it doesn't look cheap either. I'll be very interested to watch if I ever see it floating around on a streaming site somewhere.
Rampage
Apr 13th; PG-13
Ugh, this looks so dumb. Not that it appears to be trying to be anything else, but it's just not appealing to me. I'd rather watch Skull Island again, or Jumanji. If this movie winds up being dumb but genuinely good and fun like those movies, I will be very surprised. But still, I'll probably watch it at some point, if only to roll my eyes at it.
Borg vs McEnroe
Apr 13th; R
Not that it sounds boring to watch Shia LaBeouf get beat in an epic game of tennis by a Swedish fellow, but to be perfectly honest, the main appeal of this movie for me is that the Swedish side of things is done in Swedish -- so it's half a foreign language film. I don't think I've ever seen Stellan Skarsgård act in his native language. (This trailer isn't green-band approved -- language warning.)
Marrowbone
Apr 13th; NR
It's a creepy horror movie set in what looks like the 50's, and it has Charlie Heaton in it, so I guess I have to watch it. The nice thing is, it's releasing on Amazon -- so probably not the greatest quality film, but that okay by me. Maybe it won't be too scary.
Avengers: Infinity War
Apr 27th; PG-13
Oh yeah, I forgot about this one! lol.
Here's the thing about this movie: I don't care.
I'm going to go see it, but I'm not particularly excited about watching all my favorite superheroes come together and not get enough screentime in a 2-hour, 40-min movie, just so that some drama can be milked and one or two people can get killed off in what I assume will be the most forced, senseless, and irritating ways possible. So sue me. When the ads boast about how Marvel has been building to this for 10 years it irks me, because of how dismissive it is of previous Marvel films -- films that were sometimes this close to being great apart from their shared universe but perhaps weren't simply because they only needed to serve to sell the next film. Even this film is just going to point to next year's Avengers 4. That kind of mindset makes me want to quit with Marvel altogether, but I guess I'm in too deep now. Spider-Man and Bucky are my excuse.
The House of Tomorrow
Apr 27th; NR
Aw, this looks cute. Like a retry of The Space Between Us for Asa Butterfield, but not ridiculous and painfully awkward. I guess he likes playing naive outsiders getting introduced to the world. This one also has Nick Offerman, Ellen Burstyn and the Second Edition Wolff -- Alex Wolff. Are he and Nat twins, because I seriously cannot tell them apart? *research* No. They act so similarly too though -- it's like Nat went back in time and switched the mole on his chin to his lip so he could make more teenage movies. Anyways, this movie. Looks neat. Will check out.
Friday, July 7, 2017
Spider-Man: Homecoming
Mild Spoilers.
Though we may be sick of all the rebooting this character has been subjected to, Sony has buckled down and teamed up with Marvel to prove that everyone's favorite web-slinger is far from being used up. It's easy to say Marvel is saving Sony here, giving Spidey a ready-made world to inhabit, but it's just as true that Sony is helping Marvel, lending them a ready-made lovable character that fits into their world like a webbed glove.
Tom Holland is our Friendly Neighborhood You Know What, and after our sneak preview via Civil War, it's no surprise that he's this movie's most valuable commodity. He has that genuine but kinda awkward quality that Maguire had, and the nervous energy of Garfield without overdoing it to the point of (too much) pain, plus adding a new element of actually being believable as a teenager. Holland settles into the role with ease and confidence, delivers the cheesy lines when it's called for, and lets loose on the drama in impressive fashion. I hoped but hardly expected this to be a role for him to show off acting chops; turns out it was, and the opportunities were neither wasted nor overdone. In short, Holland's Peter is a well-meaning sweetheart and impossible not to love.
One of the most pleasant choices this film made was to limit the role of Tony Stark (Robert Downey Jr.). They needed conflict between him and Peter as Peter wants to become a full-time Avenger but Stark doesn't have the time or the confidence in his maturity to comply. I was fittingly very happy to see Happy Hogan (Jon Favreau) cast as a intermediary for this conflict, babysitting Peter and ignoring his texts and calls for an even lower blow to the kid's morale. Then it's all the more devastating when the big man does show up to deal out punishment when Peter messes up. It's a scary and effective absent-father and son type dynamic.
Aunt May (Marisa Tomei) then takes a parental backseat, though she and Peter have a handful of sweet scenes together that help ground the film. Peter's best friend is Ned (Jacob Batalon) who works foremost and most effectively as a sounding board for Peter, and only secondarily has a few fun things to do for himself. Peter's crush is Liz (Laura Harrier) and my pants would spontaneously combust if I said I didn't enjoy the mess out of the teen-flick rom-com elements her character created. No glorious cliche was left un-reveled in, and every irritating cliche was left undisturbed. But don't forget Michelle (Zendaya) who was a darkly sarcastic cynic on par with April Ludgate, and as such I loved her immediately with zero inhibitions. She was underused plot-wise, but has a promising future. Donald Glover even gets a fun cameo role for the fans.
Michael Keaton is the film's villain, Toomes, and the movie started out boldly giving its entire opening to him. It established him as a man in a sympathetic situation who makes the not heroic choice, falling down the slippery slope of immorality into villainy. It's typical of Marvel, but their best villain formula and done particularly well in the capable hands of Keaton. He finds an excellent balance of sympathy and evil, and digs in deep for plenty of content fantastically disturbing and conflictingly sad. In the Vulture costume there's not much besides the menace, and the physical fights between him and Spider-Man are only great when grounded by their emotional and moral conflict. The scenes of mere conversation between them were much more compelling, and fortunately were heavily featured.
One of my favorite things this movie did, and the lead-in for my least favorite thing is how Homecoming felt like a behind-the-scenes Avenger type film. It starts it pointedly with Peter's phone-video Civil War experience, and does a great job keeping it up throughout. Toomes begins the film cleaning up after the Chitari. We see Peter in school before we see him as Spider-Man, and before we get to watch him stop petty crimes, he takes a minute to change clothes for his "after school job" in a back alley, and the real-life element this (and other similar moments) lends is brilliant; amusing comedy plus a solid foundation, making the fantastical elements easy to swallow.
Classic Spider-Man cliches have fun poked at them in winking good humor (upside down kiss?), or are used in such a straightforward way that they lose their contrivance. Spidey must fight the climactic battle sans mask, but instead of contriving some complicated reason or way for it to come off, he just takes it off! And most reliving to me, his ditching friends and school to fight crime without explanation doesn't cause undue repercussions. People get mad at him, but his absence never ruins anything but his reliability. When the movie was in this space, I was on cloud nine, watching it dodge every oncoming bullet so nimbly and cheekily. But once or twice it shoots itself in the foot out of nowhere.
The first time was in a no-man's-land section of act two, where after disabling Stark's "training wheel" program in Peter's suit he is overwhelmed with too many new features right before a fight. It's played for comedy and tries to squeeze fifteen laughs out of what should have been two. Irritatingly, Peter is deprived of all common sense to let it happen. Later he takes a few minutes to learn about the new features, and from there it's actually cool. The second time is in the ending. Right after a wonderfully small-scale and character-driven battle, we and Peter are introduced to the new Avengers facility and are supposed to be wowed by Tony's wit and gadgets when all we want and need is a resolution for Peter's character arc. We get it, but it feels distracted and too frivolous. It could have been done much more effectively in a grounded and quiet scene between Peter and Tony, but sadly the need to refer to Marvel! and The Avengers! overruled.
Spider-Man does fall victim to the classic Marvel-production-line-blockbuster problem, but even considering the couple of blatant missteps and sporadic minor stumbles it hardly seems fair to say "fall victim" because few movies have handled the cut-and-paste formula so comfortably. Jokes land at an average Marvel ratio, but failed jokes don't irritate; lively performances breathe life into the tired script; and the assembly-line action sequences are yet again responsible for turning in fun, if generic, visual thrills. The plot formula is at home here, successfully creating a story that builds interest and is better at the end than it is at the beginning. And the third act is the most spectacular wish-fulfilling thing I've seen in a superhero flick in a terribly long time.
I remember reading that the idea was to make a John Hughes-esque flick, and the moments where that came across on screen were by far the best -- quiet, heartfelt moments, that never seemed to last long enough, and subtle details presented with tact. Distractions occurred, so it's half a Marvel flick and half an every-teen dramedy, and somehow it finds a semblance of balance, and the combo holds together, say, 97% of the way. At times exactly and miraculously what it should be, at times falling to temptation; one thing at least is sure: missteps and mistakes may happen, but Spider-Man has a big heart, and Spider-Man put it in the right place.
Though we may be sick of all the rebooting this character has been subjected to, Sony has buckled down and teamed up with Marvel to prove that everyone's favorite web-slinger is far from being used up. It's easy to say Marvel is saving Sony here, giving Spidey a ready-made world to inhabit, but it's just as true that Sony is helping Marvel, lending them a ready-made lovable character that fits into their world like a webbed glove.
 |
| Spider-Man is pretty much the best thing ever, isn't he? It certainly seems like it right now! |
Tom Holland is our Friendly Neighborhood You Know What, and after our sneak preview via Civil War, it's no surprise that he's this movie's most valuable commodity. He has that genuine but kinda awkward quality that Maguire had, and the nervous energy of Garfield without overdoing it to the point of (too much) pain, plus adding a new element of actually being believable as a teenager. Holland settles into the role with ease and confidence, delivers the cheesy lines when it's called for, and lets loose on the drama in impressive fashion. I hoped but hardly expected this to be a role for him to show off acting chops; turns out it was, and the opportunities were neither wasted nor overdone. In short, Holland's Peter is a well-meaning sweetheart and impossible not to love.
One of the most pleasant choices this film made was to limit the role of Tony Stark (Robert Downey Jr.). They needed conflict between him and Peter as Peter wants to become a full-time Avenger but Stark doesn't have the time or the confidence in his maturity to comply. I was fittingly very happy to see Happy Hogan (Jon Favreau) cast as a intermediary for this conflict, babysitting Peter and ignoring his texts and calls for an even lower blow to the kid's morale. Then it's all the more devastating when the big man does show up to deal out punishment when Peter messes up. It's a scary and effective absent-father and son type dynamic.
 |
| It was nice actually, because May didn't have to be the antagonistic parent-type. Stark fit the part perfectly. |
Aunt May (Marisa Tomei) then takes a parental backseat, though she and Peter have a handful of sweet scenes together that help ground the film. Peter's best friend is Ned (Jacob Batalon) who works foremost and most effectively as a sounding board for Peter, and only secondarily has a few fun things to do for himself. Peter's crush is Liz (Laura Harrier) and my pants would spontaneously combust if I said I didn't enjoy the mess out of the teen-flick rom-com elements her character created. No glorious cliche was left un-reveled in, and every irritating cliche was left undisturbed. But don't forget Michelle (Zendaya) who was a darkly sarcastic cynic on par with April Ludgate, and as such I loved her immediately with zero inhibitions. She was underused plot-wise, but has a promising future. Donald Glover even gets a fun cameo role for the fans.
Michael Keaton is the film's villain, Toomes, and the movie started out boldly giving its entire opening to him. It established him as a man in a sympathetic situation who makes the not heroic choice, falling down the slippery slope of immorality into villainy. It's typical of Marvel, but their best villain formula and done particularly well in the capable hands of Keaton. He finds an excellent balance of sympathy and evil, and digs in deep for plenty of content fantastically disturbing and conflictingly sad. In the Vulture costume there's not much besides the menace, and the physical fights between him and Spider-Man are only great when grounded by their emotional and moral conflict. The scenes of mere conversation between them were much more compelling, and fortunately were heavily featured.
 |
| About as good a Marvel villain as one could hope for. He gets the job done memorably. |
One of my favorite things this movie did, and the lead-in for my least favorite thing is how Homecoming felt like a behind-the-scenes Avenger type film. It starts it pointedly with Peter's phone-video Civil War experience, and does a great job keeping it up throughout. Toomes begins the film cleaning up after the Chitari. We see Peter in school before we see him as Spider-Man, and before we get to watch him stop petty crimes, he takes a minute to change clothes for his "after school job" in a back alley, and the real-life element this (and other similar moments) lends is brilliant; amusing comedy plus a solid foundation, making the fantastical elements easy to swallow.
Classic Spider-Man cliches have fun poked at them in winking good humor (upside down kiss?), or are used in such a straightforward way that they lose their contrivance. Spidey must fight the climactic battle sans mask, but instead of contriving some complicated reason or way for it to come off, he just takes it off! And most reliving to me, his ditching friends and school to fight crime without explanation doesn't cause undue repercussions. People get mad at him, but his absence never ruins anything but his reliability. When the movie was in this space, I was on cloud nine, watching it dodge every oncoming bullet so nimbly and cheekily. But once or twice it shoots itself in the foot out of nowhere.
 |
| The movie is directed by Jon Watts and was written by him and five other writers. Disconnect makes sense. |
The first time was in a no-man's-land section of act two, where after disabling Stark's "training wheel" program in Peter's suit he is overwhelmed with too many new features right before a fight. It's played for comedy and tries to squeeze fifteen laughs out of what should have been two. Irritatingly, Peter is deprived of all common sense to let it happen. Later he takes a few minutes to learn about the new features, and from there it's actually cool. The second time is in the ending. Right after a wonderfully small-scale and character-driven battle, we and Peter are introduced to the new Avengers facility and are supposed to be wowed by Tony's wit and gadgets when all we want and need is a resolution for Peter's character arc. We get it, but it feels distracted and too frivolous. It could have been done much more effectively in a grounded and quiet scene between Peter and Tony, but sadly the need to refer to Marvel! and The Avengers! overruled.
Spider-Man does fall victim to the classic Marvel-production-line-blockbuster problem, but even considering the couple of blatant missteps and sporadic minor stumbles it hardly seems fair to say "fall victim" because few movies have handled the cut-and-paste formula so comfortably. Jokes land at an average Marvel ratio, but failed jokes don't irritate; lively performances breathe life into the tired script; and the assembly-line action sequences are yet again responsible for turning in fun, if generic, visual thrills. The plot formula is at home here, successfully creating a story that builds interest and is better at the end than it is at the beginning. And the third act is the most spectacular wish-fulfilling thing I've seen in a superhero flick in a terribly long time.
 |
| Sixteen Candles with a superhero lead? If it had stuck closer to that it might have been incredible. |
I remember reading that the idea was to make a John Hughes-esque flick, and the moments where that came across on screen were by far the best -- quiet, heartfelt moments, that never seemed to last long enough, and subtle details presented with tact. Distractions occurred, so it's half a Marvel flick and half an every-teen dramedy, and somehow it finds a semblance of balance, and the combo holds together, say, 97% of the way. At times exactly and miraculously what it should be, at times falling to temptation; one thing at least is sure: missteps and mistakes may happen, but Spider-Man has a big heart, and Spider-Man put it in the right place.
Saturday, July 1, 2017
Upcoming Movie Roundup - July
Well -- June was a fantastic month! Firstly Wonder Woman (review!) came and raised the bar for DC superhero films which was lovely and refreshing. Then I got Logan (review!) on Bluray and it made me forget that I was tired of superhero movies by being a superhero movie that felt nothing like a superhero movie. It became my pick for best film of the year, but then lost the spot again a couple weeks later. To Baby Driver (review!), from which I am still rocking and reeling! It was not only the highlight of June as I predicted, but also the highlight of the year. If anything manages to top it, 2017 will be a seriously impressive movie-year.
After Baby Driver, it feels like the summer can finally get started, but now, July is looking almost skimpy. There's two films that I'm definitely interested in, but not much else worth mentioning. First things first: I gotta get another view of Baby Driver taken care of, and then we'll see if anything can turn my head for a significant amount of time!
What's your favorite film of the year so far? And what's in your movie plans for July? I hope you're all having a great summer!
Spider-Man: Homecoming
July 7th; PG-13
Look out, here comes the Spider-Man! We already know that Tom Holland is perfect for Spidey and Peter Parker from Civil War, so up to a certain point, there's no need to worry. Characterization is all but guaranteed to be spot-on, and that is a huge confidence boost. If this flick is anything like the Spidey scenes from Civil War it'll be better than Civil War! And still, I worry. Mostly about the plot, because that is the part that currently looks ambiguous and possibly a bit too generic. And from this trailer, I worry that Tony Stark has too big a role. I'd really hate for him to distract, and I'd really like it if this movie (being only half-Marvel) could distance itself just a tad from the "MARVEL!" genre, which is growing ever-more tired with every rehashing film release. Early reviews are significantly positive, but if you don't mind, I'm gonna be nervous about this one. There's a lot riding on those narrow shoulders, and I want the kid to do a good job!
A Ghost Story
July 7th(limited); R
So this is pretty weird. A romantic drama about a husband who dies and haunts his grieving and unaware wife as a sheet-ghost. Complete with black holes over the eyes and everything. Did I say "pretty weird"? I meant "very extremely weird and actually very creepy, why is this film a romance and not a horror?" Really, the trailer to me is scarier than most horror film trailers. I don't get it. It's an art house type thing, and supposedly is about love and loss and similar abstract, existential things. I guess it gets points for being creative, but as to convincing me to watch it, I'm less likely to go for it now than I was when I didn't know it existed! Still it's so odd I had to mention it.
War for the Planet of the Apes
July 14th; PG-13
I could say that with where the plot of this movie is, the last movie wasn't really necessary, but that's kinda silly because the whole series is pretty unnecessary -- plus I get a feeling that Dawn will be my favorite installment in the end... such as it is. On a technical level these movies are actually interesting and pretty impressive, but that's it. On a story-telling, entertaining level it's laughable how unaware these movies are of their own ridiculousness. It's camp-central. Yet the movies only get more and more serious as their head gets further and further in the sand. A spark of life or even a tiny hint of joy would do wonders, but the bloated, self-important seriousness is obvious, and not even in the same universe as my cup of tea. I suppose these movie were meant for a person who is not me, and to whoever that might be, I'll leave you to it!
Dunkirk
July 21st; PG-13
I think this is an excellent story for Christopher Nolan to tell; a true story that his style can add cinematic intensity to. After Interstellar it should be nice for him to be held back a bit by reality. This also looks to be an excellent film to play "Spot that British Actor" with! One of my favorite games. Just from the trailer we have Kenneth Branagh, James D'Arcy, Mark Rylance, Cillian Murphy and Tom Hardy. Those I expect will be the easy ones. Also I know Harry Styles is in this, but to be honest I don't know what he looks like enough to recognize him, and I'm thinking maybe I should keep it that way. Anyway, the movie has a lot of hype, it's an interesting story I've never seen before, and there doesn't seem to be much question of whether or not it'll be good. I'm not much worried, and won't be surprised to find myself in a theater in a few weeks watching it! Although, as a girl going to a war movie, maybe I should make myself a t-shirt that says "I'm NOT here for Harry."
Valerian and the City of a Thousand Planets
July 21st; PG-13
Please tell me -- am I the only one who reads this title as if I'm Nebula from Guardians of the Galaxy? "A City of A THOUSAND PLANETS." It makes it sound super epic. Look, I've said it before, I'll say it in the future, and I'm saying it now -- I'm a sucker for scifi movies. And this movie is definitely a scifi movie. However I must admit that I have no expectation of it actually being a great movie. I'd love to be proved wrong, but for now, it's good enough for me that it's of the genre it is of, plus Dane DeHaan is pretty cool. I very strongly dislike Cara Delevingne though, to put it nicely. But if the movie turns out how I expect, then being irritated by her will be part of the charm. Prediction: visually spectacular; otherwise spectacularly short. If my expectations are correct I will look forward to seeing this -- not in theaters.
The Emoji Movie
July 21st; PG
Haha, just kidding.
Happy July everyone!
After Baby Driver, it feels like the summer can finally get started, but now, July is looking almost skimpy. There's two films that I'm definitely interested in, but not much else worth mentioning. First things first: I gotta get another view of Baby Driver taken care of, and then we'll see if anything can turn my head for a significant amount of time!
What's your favorite film of the year so far? And what's in your movie plans for July? I hope you're all having a great summer!
Spider-Man: Homecoming
July 7th; PG-13
Look out, here comes the Spider-Man! We already know that Tom Holland is perfect for Spidey and Peter Parker from Civil War, so up to a certain point, there's no need to worry. Characterization is all but guaranteed to be spot-on, and that is a huge confidence boost. If this flick is anything like the Spidey scenes from Civil War it'll be better than Civil War! And still, I worry. Mostly about the plot, because that is the part that currently looks ambiguous and possibly a bit too generic. And from this trailer, I worry that Tony Stark has too big a role. I'd really hate for him to distract, and I'd really like it if this movie (being only half-Marvel) could distance itself just a tad from the "MARVEL!" genre, which is growing ever-more tired with every rehashing film release. Early reviews are significantly positive, but if you don't mind, I'm gonna be nervous about this one. There's a lot riding on those narrow shoulders, and I want the kid to do a good job!
A Ghost Story
July 7th(limited); R
So this is pretty weird. A romantic drama about a husband who dies and haunts his grieving and unaware wife as a sheet-ghost. Complete with black holes over the eyes and everything. Did I say "pretty weird"? I meant "very extremely weird and actually very creepy, why is this film a romance and not a horror?" Really, the trailer to me is scarier than most horror film trailers. I don't get it. It's an art house type thing, and supposedly is about love and loss and similar abstract, existential things. I guess it gets points for being creative, but as to convincing me to watch it, I'm less likely to go for it now than I was when I didn't know it existed! Still it's so odd I had to mention it.
War for the Planet of the Apes
July 14th; PG-13
I could say that with where the plot of this movie is, the last movie wasn't really necessary, but that's kinda silly because the whole series is pretty unnecessary -- plus I get a feeling that Dawn will be my favorite installment in the end... such as it is. On a technical level these movies are actually interesting and pretty impressive, but that's it. On a story-telling, entertaining level it's laughable how unaware these movies are of their own ridiculousness. It's camp-central. Yet the movies only get more and more serious as their head gets further and further in the sand. A spark of life or even a tiny hint of joy would do wonders, but the bloated, self-important seriousness is obvious, and not even in the same universe as my cup of tea. I suppose these movie were meant for a person who is not me, and to whoever that might be, I'll leave you to it!
Dunkirk
July 21st; PG-13
I think this is an excellent story for Christopher Nolan to tell; a true story that his style can add cinematic intensity to. After Interstellar it should be nice for him to be held back a bit by reality. This also looks to be an excellent film to play "Spot that British Actor" with! One of my favorite games. Just from the trailer we have Kenneth Branagh, James D'Arcy, Mark Rylance, Cillian Murphy and Tom Hardy. Those I expect will be the easy ones. Also I know Harry Styles is in this, but to be honest I don't know what he looks like enough to recognize him, and I'm thinking maybe I should keep it that way. Anyway, the movie has a lot of hype, it's an interesting story I've never seen before, and there doesn't seem to be much question of whether or not it'll be good. I'm not much worried, and won't be surprised to find myself in a theater in a few weeks watching it! Although, as a girl going to a war movie, maybe I should make myself a t-shirt that says "I'm NOT here for Harry."
Valerian and the City of a Thousand Planets
July 21st; PG-13
Please tell me -- am I the only one who reads this title as if I'm Nebula from Guardians of the Galaxy? "A City of A THOUSAND PLANETS." It makes it sound super epic. Look, I've said it before, I'll say it in the future, and I'm saying it now -- I'm a sucker for scifi movies. And this movie is definitely a scifi movie. However I must admit that I have no expectation of it actually being a great movie. I'd love to be proved wrong, but for now, it's good enough for me that it's of the genre it is of, plus Dane DeHaan is pretty cool. I very strongly dislike Cara Delevingne though, to put it nicely. But if the movie turns out how I expect, then being irritated by her will be part of the charm. Prediction: visually spectacular; otherwise spectacularly short. If my expectations are correct I will look forward to seeing this -- not in theaters.
The Emoji Movie
July 21st; PG
Haha, just kidding.
Happy July everyone!
Wednesday, September 7, 2016
Charlie Bartlett
Some Spoilers.
One of the many movies I watched because of my love and appreciation of Anton Yelchin, and probably would have never even noticed otherwise. And likewise one of his many movies that wound up surprising me with unexpected greatness. Charlie Bartlett tells the story of a rich high school student who is kicked out of yet another private school and must attend a public school. Charlie's goal in life is to be popular, so he begins to use his rich-kid connections to deal prescription drugs to the student body. Along with listening to their problems and giving them advice, because hey, he's a nice guy.
I've seen this film twice now, and both times was on TV and edited for content. The original is rated R, just for your information. Also, obviously, the film deals with mature and questionable content. The whole plot is about drugs, and the lead is a full-on drug dealer whichever way you slice it. It's also technically a teen dramedy and ticks all the boxes that usually requires. It touches on a lot of serious subjects and always seems to be on the verge of going down a path that is too dark. The first time I watched it, that all came as unexpected. I was just there to watch Anton and have a giggle, but the movie really is more than that. I sat down with it again yesterday with a totally different mindset, and this time the movie clicked for me.
This time I paid attention to what the movie is trying to say. On the surface it easily seems like a casually promiscuous movie full of characters doing objectionable things and getting away with it. But I was surprised at how morally upright it was in the end (comparatively) and at how good its message and themes were. The movie strikes a neat grey area by having Charlie do bad things with good intentions, particularly selling prescription drugs to students. He doesn't need the money; he does it for two reasons: One, he feel that it's important to be popular during high school years. And two, he actually does care for the students. He knows that they often can't or won't get professional help, and thinks he can be a good third option. And in a lot of ways he is.
He spends a lot of time listening to kids who have never had anyone listen to them before, and genuinely tries to help them. When his doling out meds backfires he even continues to listen and give advice free of charge. Charlie always seems to be in the pursuit of doing the right thing. And really this story is about him discovering what exactly the right thing is. He messes up a lot along the way, and almost in some permanent ways, but he mends his mistakes and he gets there, and it's very rewarding when he does.
What's really neat about this character is that, like the film that features him, his surface impression is actually very inaccurate to the real him. Charlie looks and acts like his life is well-put-together, but really he's just as confused and messed up as anyone. His obsession with being liked is very easy to relate to, and slowly we discover ever darker and deeper sides to him. Anger and insecurity which he keeps suppressed -- and even that he does with good intentions -- but it comes out slowly, and impressively subtly for a teen flick. Really I don't think this should count as a teenage movie. It's much too deep, and intricate, and thoughtful for that. Its biggest failings come when it tries to work within the teen flick genre and shortchanges itself.
Anton Yelchin always gave enjoyable performances, but this stands out in a few ways. Firstly he was given a chance to really run wild with exaggerated performances bits. I loved all the scenes where he was at the piano, dramatically showing off. But also there are several moments that required intricate depth too. Like where the character himself his acting -- putting on a front to hide his real emotions -- and he portrays the real emotion and the emotion the character is trying to show. That can't have been easy at all. He pulled it off beautifully.
Also in the cast is Kat Dennings as the love interest Susan, and the school principle Mr. Gardner is her father, played by Robert Downey Jr. He gives a very good performance too. At first he seems like a bad guy, out to get Charlie like Mr. Rooney in Ferris Bueller's Day Off, but he becomes more and more clearly a mess too, with his own desire to be liked. And all that tension between him and Charlie finally culminates at the end in a great scene by the pool. I love that scene. It's the moment where the movie fully and finally transcends the teen flick genre. The stakes slowly climb during the whole film, and there both the characters are finally in over their heads and the facades come down. And then the drama resolves as forgiveness is passed around and things that were for so long right on edge of toppling into cynical tragedy turn around into happy and encouraging endings.
The theme of forgiveness is very strong, and there's also plenty to be said for loving your neighbor and selfless love (there is great, realistic examples of this shown between Charlie and his mother, and Susan and her dad), and the movie is also very understanding in pointing out the true unimportance of being liked just for the sake of being liked. "It's not the popularity; it's what you do with it," it says. And if a kid like Charlie can figure that out, I guess there's hope for the rest of us, too.
One of the many movies I watched because of my love and appreciation of Anton Yelchin, and probably would have never even noticed otherwise. And likewise one of his many movies that wound up surprising me with unexpected greatness. Charlie Bartlett tells the story of a rich high school student who is kicked out of yet another private school and must attend a public school. Charlie's goal in life is to be popular, so he begins to use his rich-kid connections to deal prescription drugs to the student body. Along with listening to their problems and giving them advice, because hey, he's a nice guy.
 |
| "Would you like to talk about it?" |
I've seen this film twice now, and both times was on TV and edited for content. The original is rated R, just for your information. Also, obviously, the film deals with mature and questionable content. The whole plot is about drugs, and the lead is a full-on drug dealer whichever way you slice it. It's also technically a teen dramedy and ticks all the boxes that usually requires. It touches on a lot of serious subjects and always seems to be on the verge of going down a path that is too dark. The first time I watched it, that all came as unexpected. I was just there to watch Anton and have a giggle, but the movie really is more than that. I sat down with it again yesterday with a totally different mindset, and this time the movie clicked for me.
This time I paid attention to what the movie is trying to say. On the surface it easily seems like a casually promiscuous movie full of characters doing objectionable things and getting away with it. But I was surprised at how morally upright it was in the end (comparatively) and at how good its message and themes were. The movie strikes a neat grey area by having Charlie do bad things with good intentions, particularly selling prescription drugs to students. He doesn't need the money; he does it for two reasons: One, he feel that it's important to be popular during high school years. And two, he actually does care for the students. He knows that they often can't or won't get professional help, and thinks he can be a good third option. And in a lot of ways he is.
 |
| The doctor is in. |
He spends a lot of time listening to kids who have never had anyone listen to them before, and genuinely tries to help them. When his doling out meds backfires he even continues to listen and give advice free of charge. Charlie always seems to be in the pursuit of doing the right thing. And really this story is about him discovering what exactly the right thing is. He messes up a lot along the way, and almost in some permanent ways, but he mends his mistakes and he gets there, and it's very rewarding when he does.
What's really neat about this character is that, like the film that features him, his surface impression is actually very inaccurate to the real him. Charlie looks and acts like his life is well-put-together, but really he's just as confused and messed up as anyone. His obsession with being liked is very easy to relate to, and slowly we discover ever darker and deeper sides to him. Anger and insecurity which he keeps suppressed -- and even that he does with good intentions -- but it comes out slowly, and impressively subtly for a teen flick. Really I don't think this should count as a teenage movie. It's much too deep, and intricate, and thoughtful for that. Its biggest failings come when it tries to work within the teen flick genre and shortchanges itself.
 |
| Charlie's mother played by Hope Davis is excellent. |
Anton Yelchin always gave enjoyable performances, but this stands out in a few ways. Firstly he was given a chance to really run wild with exaggerated performances bits. I loved all the scenes where he was at the piano, dramatically showing off. But also there are several moments that required intricate depth too. Like where the character himself his acting -- putting on a front to hide his real emotions -- and he portrays the real emotion and the emotion the character is trying to show. That can't have been easy at all. He pulled it off beautifully.
Also in the cast is Kat Dennings as the love interest Susan, and the school principle Mr. Gardner is her father, played by Robert Downey Jr. He gives a very good performance too. At first he seems like a bad guy, out to get Charlie like Mr. Rooney in Ferris Bueller's Day Off, but he becomes more and more clearly a mess too, with his own desire to be liked. And all that tension between him and Charlie finally culminates at the end in a great scene by the pool. I love that scene. It's the moment where the movie fully and finally transcends the teen flick genre. The stakes slowly climb during the whole film, and there both the characters are finally in over their heads and the facades come down. And then the drama resolves as forgiveness is passed around and things that were for so long right on edge of toppling into cynical tragedy turn around into happy and encouraging endings.
 |
| "Some days are better than others." |
The theme of forgiveness is very strong, and there's also plenty to be said for loving your neighbor and selfless love (there is great, realistic examples of this shown between Charlie and his mother, and Susan and her dad), and the movie is also very understanding in pointing out the true unimportance of being liked just for the sake of being liked. "It's not the popularity; it's what you do with it," it says. And if a kid like Charlie can figure that out, I guess there's hope for the rest of us, too.
Saturday, May 7, 2016
Captain America: Civil War
Spoilers!
After an undeserved guilt trip, Tony Stark (Robert Downey Jr.) worries that the Avengers need to be put in check. He is surprised to find that if, say, an alien army attacks New York, or a robot AI army tries to lift an entire city into the sky and drop it again, people die in the wake. So, he signs a document called the Sokovia Accords, putting himself under the command of General Ross (William Hurt) and forces the other Avengers to either sign as well, or retire from their crime-fighting ways; or become outlaws. Steve Rogers (Chris Evans), however, is Captain America, and as such sees no wisdom in allowing himself to be controlled by someone who may someday order him to do something wrong, or deny him permission to do something right. He and about half the Avengers refuse to sign.
Rising tension between the two sides explodes when Bucky Barnes (Sebastian Stan) appears on the grid and everyone wants a piece of him; Steve, the ever-loyal friend to help him, new addition T'Challa (Chadwick Boseman) for revenge, Ross (and thus Tony) because he's dangerous, and also the villain Zemo (Daniel Brühl) who framed him for the UN bombing in the first place. Zemo plans to destroy the Avengers by leading them to destroy each other.
It's the year of the "hero vs. hero" story line, and Civil War set out to make it realistic. It is -- a little bit too much. Superheroes, practically by definition, are people who can act outside the law and remain good, but this movie challenges that, putting our heroes under the harsh judgment of our reality. The result is that the plot is not fundamentally conducive to the genre. It's like if Pirates of the Caribbean 5 were a courtroom drama where Jack stands trail for all his misdeeds. The film struggles to find footing at the beginning, forced to scrounge around for some contrived situations to justify the plot; some that sacrifice character and sense in the effort.
At first Iron Man is only antagonistic and it works alright. He was pressured and emotionally coerced into believing he needed someone to put him in check, and imposed his beliefs on everyone else. But no matter what that self-righteous, cruel, finger-pointing woman by the elevator wrongly says, Tony is not a murderer, and I hate that they made him buy into that lie. He created Ultron, yes, but ultimately, Ultron was an intelligent being that made decisions for himself. What he chose to do isn't on Tony. And that's something Tony would know if the movie didn't require otherwise. Most of the characters have the drama work for them -- as it should -- but someone had to be made the villain, and Tony got the short straw in a lot that shouldn't have existed.
Eventually it reaches a point where if they'd have just stopped and talked about things for a few seconds everything would have been cleared up. Cap has evidence that Bucky was framed and they attempt to go off after Zemo. But Tony and co. (Rhodey (Don Cheadle), Romanoff (Scarlett Johansson), and Vision (Paul Bettany) with the help of T'Challa, aka Black Panther, and some kid named Peter (Tom Holland)) are under orders to arrest Cap and co. (Bucky, Sam (Anthony Mackie), Wanda (Elizabeth Olsen), Barton (Jeremy Renner), and newly recruited Scott Lang (Paul Rudd)), and they battle it out instead. This was one of the most fun sequences in the movie though, so of course they couldn't just bypass it with a simple exchange of information. Still I reserve the right to be annoyed that that's all it would have taken.
After that Tony discovers the truth for himself and goes off to help Cap and Bucky. Great, right? They team up and prevail against the villain, right? It's a glorious reuniting of friends almost torn apart joining together and putting aside their differences to fight evil, right? Nope -- instead, the villain reveals his plan to them, and shows video footage of Bucky as the Winter Soldier, under the influence of mind control, killing Tony's parents. Tony flips back over in his rage and actually becomes a villain. Not just a misguided and uninformed antagonist -- as irking as that was -- but a villain, uncharacteristically intent on causing harm to the innocent. There are so many things wrong with this; I hardly know where to begin.
Tony knows that Bucky killed his parents because of mind control. And this is not a new issue; Barton killed several people under mind control in The Avengers, but once he came back, no one batted an eyelash. They said it wasn't him, and they were right. Here Cap says the same, and Tony doesn't care, trying to kill Bucky in revenge. (Yet he didn't even blame anyone for Rhodey's injury?) They pick and choose what pushes Tony's buttons based on where the plot wanted to go, instead of the other way around as it should be. He knows he's innocent and he doesn't care -- but not killing innocents was exactly his whole agenda in the first place!
In the end Cap defeats Iron Man physically, but it's really Zemo who wins the day. He didn't succeed in making them kill each other, but he divided them, and the results of Steve's attempts to heal the breach are left ambiguous. Also, it's sad that Zemo's family dies, but it doesn't justify his villainy; it makes it a double standard. He murders in order to orchestrate murder, and his revenge is directed at the people who stopped the one really responsible. These plot lines are the foundation of the movie, and are almost nothing but nonsensical hogwash, and I couldn't buy it. This whole movie was contrived into existence, and characters were bent and broken to its whims all for a nice, swift kick of maddeningly lazy drama that moved nowhere before being resolved by nothing.
Remember that heartbreaking moment in the trailer, where Cap seems to have abandoned his friendship with Tony? "He's my friend" he says of Bucky. And Tony replies sadly, "So was I." I don't know if the same take was used in the trailer and the finished film, but the difference the context made was incredible. Once we see that Cap is at that moment keeping Tony from committing emotionally driven unjustified murderous revenge on his friend, that "So was I" comes across in the exact opposite way. Suddenly Cap is the one we feel for, ever the man who will stand up for what he knows is right, and has his friends turn on him for it. That's noble.
And Bucky -- the movie's main focus in on Bucky, and he was the main redeeming factor that kept the film afloat. Bucky regrets the things he was forced to do, and even though he doesn't blame himself, he takes himself out of the equation, giving up on living a life he deserves until he knows he can live it without inadvertently putting others in danger. Like Iron Man, he recognizes that his existence is dangerous, but he takes it upon himself to prevent that danger. That is noble. That is what superheroes do. Iron Man's only spark of nobility here is only perhaps in his motivations of wanting to keep people safe. His actions do a poor job of reflecting that desire if it's true though, and I wonder if really he was only interested in dulling his misguided guilt. In past movies he's been the noble character, but not here, and that doesn't sit right.
Next, I need to devote a whole section to Spider-Man, (Forget condensed!) because his part in this film felt like a whole different film. He didn't really fit, but I was glad he was there. The scenes he has with Iron Man were the only times in the movie that I actually liked Iron Man, and the fight sequence at the airport was fun (uncharacteristically so) because of him -- and Ant-Man. I knew Tom Holland was going to be my favorite Spider-Man, but he didn't let me down even one bit in his short amount of screen time. He tell his origins with a mere "It's a long story," and explains his version of "with great power comes great responsibility" earnestly and simply, like a teenager would. His place in the movie was obviously contrived, but that didn't dampen the exciting appeal of his presence at all.
But even when Spidey is absent the fights are still the most effective distractions from the occasionally insulting drama the movie gives. The choreography is just as great as The Winter Soldier, and though there isn't exactly an equivalent of the elevator scene, Civil War makes up for it by having lots more fights, and lots of fights featuring Bucky. Bucky was great wherever he went. The stairwell fight and the sequence when Zemo activates Bucky stand out as the best and most memorable. I did miss Cap though. It was his movie in name, but he was slightly overshadowed by the long list of a-list co-stars whose characters had bigger issues than Cap did. Cap's problems didn't carry as much weight as they should because all he had to do was the right thing, and that's the one thing he always does. It's why we love him.
Acting all around was as good as ever, and not hindered by the plot's often confused and illogical nature. Even Robert Downey Jr. pushed a very impressive performance through his character's sludge. Everyone I've previously mentioned had a solid moment to display their chops, and so did Martin Freeman, Emily VanCamp, and even Frank Grillo in a disappointingly short-lived stint as post-Winter Soldier Crossbones. Vision and Wanda's dynamic was quite strange and oddly cute. Not much was new with Hawkeye when he wasn't given much to do but left a mark anyway. Chadwick Boseman makes a great first impression as Black Panther. And Bucky is steadily and ever-increasing in my affections. This movie's moments of organic drama were almost exclusively his. (Any chance he'll make an appearance in Black Panther, you think?
Marvel films at this point have become well-oiled machines, and it's beginning to show in less-than-appealing ways. They know how to cater to an audience, and know what kind of moments will serve fans the most and stoke their fandom fires. In the moment, it's a blast, but it's not a good thing at heart. The stories are becoming less and less personal as a result; and more and more familiar. Civil War goes through the motions of what made The Winter Soldier and Age of Ultron successful, doling out high-caliber, production-line thrills, but slacking off when it came to the stamp of originality, confident that the heroes turning on each other would be enough. I prefer a handcrafted story that respects character foremost, even if it has flaws in the execution.
I doubt I will ever not notice the plot holes and contrivances that allowed for this film's existence, but I know that I will sit through them again for the parts that catered to my action-loving side and appealed to my love of character. This film is not the ground-breaking, tide-turning event it wanted to be and thinks it is, but, as a Marvel film, and as a Captain America film, and as a preview of what a Russo Brothers Avenger film might be like -- not to mention an introduction film for Black Panther and Spider-Man, and a continuation of the Winter Soldier's story -- it's got something of everything. Civil War is so packed with so much that it could hardly have done anything that would've neutralized its addictive fun, or seriously dampened the effect of the chaotically, colorfully intense and exciting blockbuster that it is.
 |
| Divided, they fall. |
After an undeserved guilt trip, Tony Stark (Robert Downey Jr.) worries that the Avengers need to be put in check. He is surprised to find that if, say, an alien army attacks New York, or a robot AI army tries to lift an entire city into the sky and drop it again, people die in the wake. So, he signs a document called the Sokovia Accords, putting himself under the command of General Ross (William Hurt) and forces the other Avengers to either sign as well, or retire from their crime-fighting ways; or become outlaws. Steve Rogers (Chris Evans), however, is Captain America, and as such sees no wisdom in allowing himself to be controlled by someone who may someday order him to do something wrong, or deny him permission to do something right. He and about half the Avengers refuse to sign.
Rising tension between the two sides explodes when Bucky Barnes (Sebastian Stan) appears on the grid and everyone wants a piece of him; Steve, the ever-loyal friend to help him, new addition T'Challa (Chadwick Boseman) for revenge, Ross (and thus Tony) because he's dangerous, and also the villain Zemo (Daniel Brühl) who framed him for the UN bombing in the first place. Zemo plans to destroy the Avengers by leading them to destroy each other.
 |
| Anthony and Joe Russo return for another Captain America movie featuring the cast of an Avenger movie. |
It's the year of the "hero vs. hero" story line, and Civil War set out to make it realistic. It is -- a little bit too much. Superheroes, practically by definition, are people who can act outside the law and remain good, but this movie challenges that, putting our heroes under the harsh judgment of our reality. The result is that the plot is not fundamentally conducive to the genre. It's like if Pirates of the Caribbean 5 were a courtroom drama where Jack stands trail for all his misdeeds. The film struggles to find footing at the beginning, forced to scrounge around for some contrived situations to justify the plot; some that sacrifice character and sense in the effort.
At first Iron Man is only antagonistic and it works alright. He was pressured and emotionally coerced into believing he needed someone to put him in check, and imposed his beliefs on everyone else. But no matter what that self-righteous, cruel, finger-pointing woman by the elevator wrongly says, Tony is not a murderer, and I hate that they made him buy into that lie. He created Ultron, yes, but ultimately, Ultron was an intelligent being that made decisions for himself. What he chose to do isn't on Tony. And that's something Tony would know if the movie didn't require otherwise. Most of the characters have the drama work for them -- as it should -- but someone had to be made the villain, and Tony got the short straw in a lot that shouldn't have existed.
 |
| After five films, Tony is no stranger to putting himself in check, but suddenly now he needs someone else to do it for him? |
Eventually it reaches a point where if they'd have just stopped and talked about things for a few seconds everything would have been cleared up. Cap has evidence that Bucky was framed and they attempt to go off after Zemo. But Tony and co. (Rhodey (Don Cheadle), Romanoff (Scarlett Johansson), and Vision (Paul Bettany) with the help of T'Challa, aka Black Panther, and some kid named Peter (Tom Holland)) are under orders to arrest Cap and co. (Bucky, Sam (Anthony Mackie), Wanda (Elizabeth Olsen), Barton (Jeremy Renner), and newly recruited Scott Lang (Paul Rudd)), and they battle it out instead. This was one of the most fun sequences in the movie though, so of course they couldn't just bypass it with a simple exchange of information. Still I reserve the right to be annoyed that that's all it would have taken.
After that Tony discovers the truth for himself and goes off to help Cap and Bucky. Great, right? They team up and prevail against the villain, right? It's a glorious reuniting of friends almost torn apart joining together and putting aside their differences to fight evil, right? Nope -- instead, the villain reveals his plan to them, and shows video footage of Bucky as the Winter Soldier, under the influence of mind control, killing Tony's parents. Tony flips back over in his rage and actually becomes a villain. Not just a misguided and uninformed antagonist -- as irking as that was -- but a villain, uncharacteristically intent on causing harm to the innocent. There are so many things wrong with this; I hardly know where to begin.
 |
| It did endear Bucky to me a lot more, so it's arguably worth it. I wasn't ever a huge Iron Man fan anyway. And I'm sure he'll be back to hero status in no time... |
Tony knows that Bucky killed his parents because of mind control. And this is not a new issue; Barton killed several people under mind control in The Avengers, but once he came back, no one batted an eyelash. They said it wasn't him, and they were right. Here Cap says the same, and Tony doesn't care, trying to kill Bucky in revenge. (Yet he didn't even blame anyone for Rhodey's injury?) They pick and choose what pushes Tony's buttons based on where the plot wanted to go, instead of the other way around as it should be. He knows he's innocent and he doesn't care -- but not killing innocents was exactly his whole agenda in the first place!
In the end Cap defeats Iron Man physically, but it's really Zemo who wins the day. He didn't succeed in making them kill each other, but he divided them, and the results of Steve's attempts to heal the breach are left ambiguous. Also, it's sad that Zemo's family dies, but it doesn't justify his villainy; it makes it a double standard. He murders in order to orchestrate murder, and his revenge is directed at the people who stopped the one really responsible. These plot lines are the foundation of the movie, and are almost nothing but nonsensical hogwash, and I couldn't buy it. This whole movie was contrived into existence, and characters were bent and broken to its whims all for a nice, swift kick of maddeningly lazy drama that moved nowhere before being resolved by nothing.
 |
| I guess one thing this movie portrays well is the folly of revenge. |
Remember that heartbreaking moment in the trailer, where Cap seems to have abandoned his friendship with Tony? "He's my friend" he says of Bucky. And Tony replies sadly, "So was I." I don't know if the same take was used in the trailer and the finished film, but the difference the context made was incredible. Once we see that Cap is at that moment keeping Tony from committing emotionally driven unjustified murderous revenge on his friend, that "So was I" comes across in the exact opposite way. Suddenly Cap is the one we feel for, ever the man who will stand up for what he knows is right, and has his friends turn on him for it. That's noble.
And Bucky -- the movie's main focus in on Bucky, and he was the main redeeming factor that kept the film afloat. Bucky regrets the things he was forced to do, and even though he doesn't blame himself, he takes himself out of the equation, giving up on living a life he deserves until he knows he can live it without inadvertently putting others in danger. Like Iron Man, he recognizes that his existence is dangerous, but he takes it upon himself to prevent that danger. That is noble. That is what superheroes do. Iron Man's only spark of nobility here is only perhaps in his motivations of wanting to keep people safe. His actions do a poor job of reflecting that desire if it's true though, and I wonder if really he was only interested in dulling his misguided guilt. In past movies he's been the noble character, but not here, and that doesn't sit right.
 |
| So -- that concludes the main point of what is wrong with this movie. On to what is good. Here's to my ability to express it in a more condensed fashion! |
Next, I need to devote a whole section to Spider-Man, (Forget condensed!) because his part in this film felt like a whole different film. He didn't really fit, but I was glad he was there. The scenes he has with Iron Man were the only times in the movie that I actually liked Iron Man, and the fight sequence at the airport was fun (uncharacteristically so) because of him -- and Ant-Man. I knew Tom Holland was going to be my favorite Spider-Man, but he didn't let me down even one bit in his short amount of screen time. He tell his origins with a mere "It's a long story," and explains his version of "with great power comes great responsibility" earnestly and simply, like a teenager would. His place in the movie was obviously contrived, but that didn't dampen the exciting appeal of his presence at all.
But even when Spidey is absent the fights are still the most effective distractions from the occasionally insulting drama the movie gives. The choreography is just as great as The Winter Soldier, and though there isn't exactly an equivalent of the elevator scene, Civil War makes up for it by having lots more fights, and lots of fights featuring Bucky. Bucky was great wherever he went. The stairwell fight and the sequence when Zemo activates Bucky stand out as the best and most memorable. I did miss Cap though. It was his movie in name, but he was slightly overshadowed by the long list of a-list co-stars whose characters had bigger issues than Cap did. Cap's problems didn't carry as much weight as they should because all he had to do was the right thing, and that's the one thing he always does. It's why we love him.
 |
| Cap trying to hold the movie together... |
Acting all around was as good as ever, and not hindered by the plot's often confused and illogical nature. Even Robert Downey Jr. pushed a very impressive performance through his character's sludge. Everyone I've previously mentioned had a solid moment to display their chops, and so did Martin Freeman, Emily VanCamp, and even Frank Grillo in a disappointingly short-lived stint as post-Winter Soldier Crossbones. Vision and Wanda's dynamic was quite strange and oddly cute. Not much was new with Hawkeye when he wasn't given much to do but left a mark anyway. Chadwick Boseman makes a great first impression as Black Panther. And Bucky is steadily and ever-increasing in my affections. This movie's moments of organic drama were almost exclusively his. (Any chance he'll make an appearance in Black Panther, you think?
Marvel films at this point have become well-oiled machines, and it's beginning to show in less-than-appealing ways. They know how to cater to an audience, and know what kind of moments will serve fans the most and stoke their fandom fires. In the moment, it's a blast, but it's not a good thing at heart. The stories are becoming less and less personal as a result; and more and more familiar. Civil War goes through the motions of what made The Winter Soldier and Age of Ultron successful, doling out high-caliber, production-line thrills, but slacking off when it came to the stamp of originality, confident that the heroes turning on each other would be enough. I prefer a handcrafted story that respects character foremost, even if it has flaws in the execution.
 |
| This movie didn't seem personal to anyone besides its characters. |
I doubt I will ever not notice the plot holes and contrivances that allowed for this film's existence, but I know that I will sit through them again for the parts that catered to my action-loving side and appealed to my love of character. This film is not the ground-breaking, tide-turning event it wanted to be and thinks it is, but, as a Marvel film, and as a Captain America film, and as a preview of what a Russo Brothers Avenger film might be like -- not to mention an introduction film for Black Panther and Spider-Man, and a continuation of the Winter Soldier's story -- it's got something of everything. Civil War is so packed with so much that it could hardly have done anything that would've neutralized its addictive fun, or seriously dampened the effect of the chaotically, colorfully intense and exciting blockbuster that it is.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)