Dune

Spoiler-free!

The most immediate thought that springs to mind when I think of how to break down Denis Villeneuve's adaptation of Dune into something that can qualify how I recommend it, is that it's a movie for fans. It doesn't gatekeep; anyone can be a fan. But you must be willing to invest, and to pay attention. If it does its job right, it will bring the uninitiated into the fold, and endow satisfied customers with a desire for more—whether that comes in book form or in eagerness for a sequel. But no matter if you came as a fan, or are made into one by the experience, casual viewing is the riskiest way of journeying into Dune's vast, sandy landscape. 

I find it all a bit overwhelming even after reading the book and watching the '84 film (twice.) 

If you're not willing to invest the mental energy it takes to remember all the weird scifi names and terms, keep track of the medieval space politics, or care about characters who don't see their journey's end by the time the credits roll, then the only thing you're likely to get out of this film is a treat of big-budget visuals portraying the immense, looming and extreme fictional world. That alone is worth witnessing once, so I guess my recommendation is won. Still, with Villeneuve directing, great visuals were a shoo-in. My fear was that focus would be put on the wow-factor to the point where story and characters would suffer from boredom or pretentiousness. But no. Conversation drives the story, yet I wasn't bored for one second. And visual awe is turned up to the max, with dedication to relaying the character side of things keeping easily in stride.

My biggest worry of all was the casting of indie darling Timothée Chalamet as the film's lead. I know he's an actor who actually puts stock into acting but there's no predicting my reaction to his roles and performances. And a Paul who comes across wrong is a fatal flaw. I was skeptical. But he proves to be a good casting choice, portraying an accurate Paul who is neither bland nor annoying. He reminded me of the book version and gives a lot, even through Villeneuve's style of preferring to film his characters still and stoic. Once I wasn't worried about the lead anymore, I knew I was in for something good, but the movie doesn't stop there.

Though it's giant, it's dedicated down to the details.

Rebecca Ferguson is a force as Lady Jessica, as she should be; everything always bubbling just under her surface, always strong; always on the edge of breaking down. She walks a beautiful line. From the outset she was my favorite casting decision and that holds. Her elegant but worn looks are perfect for the part. She's captivating. Oscar Isaac works in a role that's probably difficult to correctly balance. Stellan Skarsgård's ominously droll voice and face pairs with the intimidating character design of the villain to great effect. Jason Momoa is a surprise standout for me, his charismatic energy a welcome highlight against his subdued surroundings. Josh Brolin biding his time in my favorite book character; Javier Bardem is in full character acting mode; Zendaya has the right amount of grounded girlishness. Characters I confused with others in the book have clear personalities and outstanding looks to help differentiate. The cast is near-perfect.

The only cast member who doesn't fit into the subtle but refined vibe is Dave Bautista, whose character can be summed up as "angry" and who passively yells his lines to convey that single dimension. This is a small negative, though there aren't many more that could be called bigger. Mostly, I wished for more, though I realize that's an unreasonable ask considering the film is two and a half hours long. I wish they could have included the whole of the first book without cutting out anything or increasing the epic, steady pace (which felt to me like watching a massive river or flood flowing from a high distance—beautiful and serene even with the obvious turmoil and force on display). I think Villeneuve chose the lesser of the evils and I hope it pays off.

The scale conveyed is so enormous it's a little hard to grasp.

This is my personal favorite work from Villeneuve, though I have never considered myself a huge fan. Part of me knows his penchant for enormous scale, robust scifi worldbuilding, and calculated way of storytelling makes him ideal for trying such a difficult piece of adapting. At the same time, I've never been deeply moved by his work. And the same is true here. Seeing the scale of the world, and seeing the book transposed so cleanly to the screen, made me smile, but it didn't bring me to love the story or characters any more. The book didn't bring much emotional attachment either, so maybe it's simply not that kind of story. But a small part of me wonders if the neatness of the work, and the cool, stoic style, are holding me back from tipping from this pleased admiration into something more freely adoring.

How much more astounding would this movie be if it could be everything it is, plus be wild, visceral, and psychedelic? Still, I don't want to complain. Dune had me smiling, enraptured, and dreading it ending—which it did far too soon. It was clearly thoughtfully adapted, keeping everything from the book it could while expanding it in some details, such as the vibrating, liquefying sand under the sandworms' attacks. I loved that. I loved the way The Voice is portrayed, as well as the way the book's heavy inner dialogue is adapted without the characters having literal inner dialogues. The plot was clear. The characters were given room to breathe and grow and the actors given opportunities to break out of the stoicism to have a bit of fun or bring extra intensity. And the special effects are so good I can't differentiate in-camera effects from CGI.

I don't care about fight or action scenes but there were several good ones of those, too.

I have a growing list of favorite scenes, moments, and little details, and have as much a desire to see this again (which I will, probably before I post this) as I do to see what the sequels have to hold. Dune is expansive, grand, and epic filmmaking on an unreal scale. An alien behemoth that can be approached from many angles, but my recommendation is simply that you let it sweep you along in its vast currents of sand to see the mesmerizing world it proudly and boldly puts on display for our appreciation. At the very, very least, it's an impressive and skillful craft of filmmaking.

Avengers: Endgame

Spoilers.

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

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

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

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

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

Throwback to when these two were the GOAT.

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

Upcoming Movie Roundup - June

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

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


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




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




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




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




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




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




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




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




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




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




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




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




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




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




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




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

Deadpool 2

Spoiler-free!

The Merc with a Mouth is back and better than ever. Who says sequels aren't a good idea? While the first one felt like a dirty, joyless slog, this one finds its feet and a healthy relationship with the comics to produce a blast of a romp of a joyride that is what I've always hoped and envisioned a Deadpool movie could be.

Suddenly I'm not so tired of superhero movies anymore!

This time there's actually a plot, as Wade Wilson (Ryan Reynolds) sets out to protect a troubled young mutant Russell, aka Firefist (Julian Dennison) from Cable (Josh Brolin) a time-traveler from the future looking to kill the kid. It's The Terminator, it's Back to the Future, it's X-Men: Days of Future Past -- only it goes about it such a confident and straight-forward way, that though you may call it cliched, in my eyes it became a main reason the film worked so well.

As an action-comedy, plot originality and complexity shouldn't be all that high on the priority list. This plot serves the movies genre. Action; comedy. The time-travel element particularly lends itself to some exceptional hilarity, and the solid action beats it calls for are fundamental and easy to follow. On that level its basic, straightforward entertainment. But then, it builds on that, with character arcs, complete with depth, emotion, empathy, morals and themes; all woven together seamlessly, complementing and working with the plot. This isn't a character piece, but they are far from neglected.

Directed by David Leitch, who didn't direct the first one, and that makes a lot of sense.

I knew avocado-faced Wade had it in him to be an empathetic character, and I knew Reynolds could play drama and not have it come out dumb and cheesy, and I'm so glad they didn't spend the whole film relentlessly cracking jokes. The ebb and flow between humor and drama here is nearly indistinguishable, and at times played simultaneously, neither interfering, but actually enhancing each other. It is a comedy, so laugh-out-loud punch lines are as common as the CGI, but the movie doesn't force loud humor into where it doesn't belong, and strangely for R-rated fare, there's plenty of soft, warm-hearted and subtle humor too.

The humor is often not appropriate, but it is used appropriately. Ironically, the ruder the jokes got, the more likely to be forced they seemed to be. Like the priority of jokes tended more toward being "R" than fitting the moment, and sometimes they just weren't funny but were used because of how "R" they were. That seemed to happen with the F-words too. Jokes can be funny with, and even enhanced by foul language, but adding random words to an awkwardly-delivered F-bomb doesn't automatically make it hilarious.

That's just f---tastically stupid.

The dirty rudeness was the low point for me, but at the same time, they delivered so much humor that did hit, with such joy and aplomb, that I felt it would've been extremely ungrateful of me to not grant them a little room for potty-mouth fans. Forgiving their indulgence was, I found, super easy. Even as one particular joke dragged on for minutes that I wasn't finding all that funny, I couldn't help but smile, because it was clear that those involved were having a blast with it, and the good-humored fun was contagious even when the jokes didn't land.

I'm trying my hardest not to directly compare this film with Infinity War, but I'm pausing now to say that though the plot was basic, and humor was the main goal, Deadpool still involved me more, made it easy to care, and I wish Disney/Marvel could get back to being this gleefully entertaining. Also, there was one death scene that was miles better than anything Infinity War failed to contrive. And that leads me to Josh Brolin, because he was in both these movies -- as a villain -- who's meant to be sympathetic.

What a legend.

An absolute legend.

I don't suppose it was his fault that Cable beats Thanos with a stick. A ripped, scarred old man with a Winter Solider arm is automatically better than a grape with a chin, but even with half the time devoted, Cable practically bursts with nuance and gritty sympathy. And he's just cool. There's no other way to describe it. Then Wade is all goof and charm, and the mixture is a goldmine of epic fan moments. The banter; the chemistry; the fights. It's enough to make you giddy as the entertainment level leaps off the chart.

Julian Dennison as Russell was a great addition, proving it wasn't at all a fluke how funny and dramatic he could be in Hunt for the Wilderpeople. Morena Baccarin returns as Vanessa, and was lovely and charming, and the romance in this movie was so much better than it had any right to be. I'd try to tell Deadpool that he can't possibly do everything well and should pick a genre, but clearly, I would be the wrong party in that argument. I was sad to see so little of Bill Skarsgård, but hey, it was Bill Skarsgård. And Zazie Beetz as Domino. Such a cinematic superpower, my goodness. And her cheerfully sassy personality fit right in.

Hardcore, awesome, super lucky -- what's not to be cheerful about?

It was nice that references were topical -- mentions of debated issues such as cultural appropriation -- but remained apolitical about it all. Never setting out to take sides or genuinely insult, but to poke fun at modern culture in general. This movie is all-inclusive. Deadpool even insists that it's a family film, and it is about family, in a genuine and heartfelt way. Though if he wanted kids to see it, he should've rethought all those expletives and that all-out gory violence.

And thank your lucky stars (or maybe Domino?) for those fourth-wall breaks. From "Look guys, I'm breaking the fourth wall! Aren't I funny?" in the last movie, to actually, really breaking the fourth wall, and in clever and nuanced ways. It's so casual and underplayed it never jolts you out of the movie experience, but instead it's like the real-world is drawn into the film. And the film is funnier and more wide-open for it.

Obviously this movie knows how to have fun.

If anything holds Deadpool back, it's its R-rating. An R-rating is natural, but there's a sense of strict obligation here that could be done without. It did away with the superhero obligation that Disney/Marvel has created; each new superhero flick needing to build on top of the last one for bigger, better, fresher; more, more, more! It's gotten so bad that now, this normal superhero flick, that doesn't feel like it's holding back when it never destroys an entire city, is the one that's breaking the mold.

Even with its irreverence, and its carefree attitude, this film focuses small and intimate, letting us get to know and care for its characters. It delivers clear-cut battles with brutal glee, wildly entertaining choreography, and an extra-large side of comic violence. It takes time to set up jokes; it slows down for moments of real drama; and it comes out the other side with a strikingly positive message for a movie about anti-heroes.

It hits you right on the X.

I can only conclude that Deadpool must actually care about being a great, fun, entertaining film. And no matter where or how it might misstep, that is the greatest complement I can give any movie of its kind. It puts in the effort. The maximum effort.

Upcoming Movie Roundup - May

Wow. It's May already! I got to three movies on my list last month. A Quiet Place was the best of them, an excellent genre film. (Review here!) I watched Marrowbone off Amazon, and it was... complicated. (Review here.) And then of course, there was Avengers: Infinity War. Le sigh. I was painfully accurate in my predictions about this movie in all ways except one (and even that one is potentially arguable). I'm still a Marvel fan which is half of why I still go to these movies, but I feel like they've left me behind. The movies are barely even movies anymore, and not meant for the likes of me. (Review here.)

I also finally saw The Death Cure (Yay!) and it was a little more disappointing than I was hoping (Boo.) but it was still a worthwhile watch. (Review here.) And I hadn't posted my Ready Player One review yet last time, so if you missed that, check it here!

I think permanently missed Thoroughbreds in theaters, but I'm still wondering about Lean on Pete -- did I miss it, or is it never coming to a theater in my area? Whatever, I'll be sure to get both of those asap. I feel like I'm missing all the hidden gems of this year, and that feeling has been amplified by the joyless dominating event that is Infinity War.

This month doesn't actually have much going for it, but here's what we've got!:



The Cleanse
May 4th (limited); R
This one looks so strange. I little cheaply made maybe, but practical effects, so making good use of what they have. It's a horror comedy, and it looks both weirdly terrifying and strangely amusing, so I have to say I'm interested enough to keep an eye on how it does critically.




Terminal
May 11th (limited); R
They had me at Margo Robbie and Simon Pegg. And then I found out it's got a neon-noir style to it! I can't tell what the plot is from the trailer, but it sure does look good. Looks more than a little inappropriate for me too, but I have an app for that, so we'll see what happens.




The Seagull
May 11th (limited); PG-13
Based on a play I don't think I've ever heard of, but it's by Anton Chekhov, so I'd guess it's good. I like the period and the look, and the cast too, so I'll probably give it a go whenever it's becomes convenient from my living room. Anyone know the story?




Deadpool 2
May 18th; NR
This is an interesting situation. As you may know, I didn't like the first one at all, but I am a fan of the comic Deadpool, so I'm willing to give him as many chances as he wants to take. The first trailer gave me hope it might be an improvement, and the second trailer took all that hope away. Now this final trailer has restored hope again, and I'm not sure what to think. The trailer makes me laugh, and it appears to have a real plot this time. I won't speculate, but I am definitely interested to see and see how it goes. Domino is probably going to be awesome. And I spy with my little eye, someone who's name is Bill Skarsgård! No mpaa rating yet, but that one's not a hard guess. (On that note, language warning for this trailer.)




First Reformed
May 18th (limited); R
One of those trailers that looks all intriguing and artsy with a lot to say, but the only way to find out if you'll like it and what it has to say is to watch it. Ethan Hawke looks good. And Amanda Seyfried is in it, too.




Solo: A Star Wars Story
May 25th; PG-13
You know, I'd be 100% on board for this movie, hyped and actually excited -- if only his name wasn't Han Solo. Of course if he wasn't Han, then Emilia Clark would be the main character (that's the rule) and Donald Glover wouldn't get to be Lando, and then what would the point even be? This was such a bad idea. Poor Alden Ehrenreich. If he's a good Han he'll be underused what with all those supporting characters, and if he's bad -- he's bad. They just need to own it. Be like, "I'm Han Freakin' Solo. Deal with it." and let the haters hate. But the movie seems ashamed of him. Like they know this is a terrible idea. From the concept, to firing the directors, to the cast (except Glover and probably Paul Bettany) to the cliched "we're putting together a team" plot, all reeks of disaster. But visually, it looks great. Coloring, lighting, framing; it looks like it'll be visually pleasant. And as for the rest -- I'm not determined to hate it. I'm mostly just curious to see.

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.

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.

Hail, Caesar!

Essentially a day-in-the-life movie about a film studio producer and "fixer," Hail, Caesar! follows Eddie Mannix (a guy whose name and vocation is true to real life -- who knows about the rest) played by Josh Brolin as he goes busily to and fro various movie sets, smoothing wrinkles and covering up scandals.

Hail, Hollywood!

Set inside of Hollywood's golden age of bright cheesiness, 1951, this latest caper from the Coen Brothers has gobs and gobs of distraction on it's surface. So much so that you might not even notice that it actually is about something underneath all that cheese and glam. Mannix is mulling over the idea of leaving his hard job of long hours for something else that is tempting, but he feels is lacking in some way. Then one of the studio's biggest actors (and star of their new epic "Hail Caesar," a story of Christ told from the perspective of a Roman soldier), Baird Whitlock, (George Clooney) goes missing! He's actually been kidnapped by commies -- a bunch of Hollywood writers who came up with a ransom scheme to get the money they believe they deserve. They sit around and fill Baird's head with communism while Mannix continues to take one problem at a time.

This one thing at a time attitude is where the distraction comes in. Every time Mannix visits a different film set, we get a lengthy view into the world of filmmaking, which may or may not be your cup of tea, but it sure was mine. Water sets, tap dancing scenes, cowboy flicks, period drama romances, all with their own thing going on and their own problems. Played for comedy, and really quite amusing. I was almost disappointed at times when we didn't get to see a second take -- or the third take -- and instead had to move along. Here we are introduced to the film's wide spread of big-name talent, most of whom are really no more than a fun cameo. Like Jonah Hill's very amusing part, or Ralph Fiennes' humorously refined but irritated director. Everyone is some stereotype or another. Scarlett Johansson was unexpected in a part that reminded me slightly of Lena Lamont of Singing in the Rain. Tilda Swinton's duel-role was brilliant. And Channing Tatum was... well, more then I expected.

Hail to the guy who leads?

Some of the characters felt unnecessary if you think about it. But, at the same time, I wonder if you go even deeper, would they all eventually make some kind of sense? I certainly get the feeling that the film is very purposeful; more purposeful than meets the eye. To get to the theme and the message of the story I had to go deeper than I expected to considering the style of the storytelling and the fun and quirky atmosphere, but there it is. Maybe Tilda Swinton didn't need to play one, let alone two characters, maybe she did, but some of these characters do play into a purpose, and drive home a rather abstract, but interesting idea.

Of course this is most obviously found in our lead Mannix. Josh Brolin hits the perfect key with this guy, by the way -- as he always does. He's a great lead, and the character is a powerful guy; he has respect and authority, but he also is very religious going to confession every day. He tries very hard to make people happy, especially his wife (Zelda Fitz-- I mean Alison Pill) who wants him to quit smoking. He seems very much like the boss, but of course he has a boss of his own, albeit an absent one. Then there's Baird. He's not a really likable character and Clooney plays him well in that vein. He's a huge actor. Mention his name and people go "Ohhh!" But he's an empty coconut if ever there was one. He has an influential voice but his words are given to him -- by a script, or by a commie, or couple hard slaps upside the head. He's importance in on the surface only.

Hail to the guy who looks like the leader?

Then there's the guy who you wouldn't think is important but really is. That's Alden Ehrenreich as Hobie Doyle. Hobie is a smaller-time lead; the cowboy guy. He's always in the pursuit of doing something right, whether it be a handstand on a horse, or, when he's moved over to the posh romantic drama, saying that line just as he's supposed to. Maybe he doesn't have the talent for certain things, but he's a dedicated worker and does everything he's given to do the very best that he can. And in the end that devotion makes him a pivotal character to the plot. Ehrenreich of course is a delight to watch which helps even more -- he has that screen presence that makes everything he does twice as interesting, and then he actually does quite a lot of interesting things! He's a dedicated performer himself, learning those lasso tricks. And he was the movie's scene-stealer, hands down.

And Mannix himself, as high up as he is, is only a background worker. The movie studio would fall apart without him, but he gets very little of the glory. However he (and we) discover the importance of the way things work, and get a reinvigorated belief in the importance of the work being done. (A little bit of a love-letter to film never hurts!) The movie's multiple layers of the movie within the movie is neat and draws some interesting parallels, but at the same time, there is a jumbled aspect going on that is difficult to see through, with all those distractions of so many films being placed together in this one. I was impressed at how neatly everything tied together though, in the end. I expected it to be more pointless going in.

If only it were so simple. If only it were so simple. If only...

I can certainly understand criticism of this film, as it is very unusual, and not what one might naturally expect it to be. It has the plot of, I guess, I popcorn flick, with it's bright-and-breezy entertainment qualities, and what seems like a main arc of trying to recover the missing actor. That's something that could very easily go action-y in the final act, but instead the film at the surface stays the same; light and inconsequential. Underneath builds the mildly abstract and not exactly prominent ideas of power, authority, and dedication that is driven by characters; characters, who, for the most part, don't get it any more than we do. For them, it's just another eventful day. But it was an important day, and this film does have some interesting things to say, in typical, understated Coen fashion. It may not a be a masterpiece, but if you want more from it than a plethora of quirky performances, hearty laughs and light, colorful entertainment, it's there for you to find.

Upcoming Movie Roundup - February

January saw no surprises, and I was so busy that I didn't even get out to a third Star Wars viewing! I enjoyed Sherlock: The Abominable Bride at home, and am currently enjoying Agent Carter's second season. February has a few movies to talk about and a few movies I'd like to see at home sometime, but it seems that I can just copy and paste my theater plans from last month: if I go to the theater, it'll probably be for The Force Awakens. And that's fine by me!

Pride and Prejudice and Zombies
Feb 5th; PG-13
Ugh, I feel like such a bad Jane Austen fan for even mentioning this. But look: I love Jane Austen. I love zombies. I have already seen many Austen-knock-off movies (Lost in Austen, Jane Austen Book Club, Austenland, etc.) and they were all their very own special brand of terrible. Some more so than others. If I were to not watch this movie, it would be because I'm be afraid that it would ruin my enjoyment of the good, 1995 P&P. But I've already been subjected to all those knock-offs, and the 2005 P&P, which didn't ruin the other one, and how much worse could it be with zombies? Not much -- at least there's no Keira Knightley! It might be dumb and terrible and disrespectful, but it'll also have zombies, so it's not supposed to be taken seriously. Plus, it's got Lily James! And Matt Smith! And Sam Riley! (And wow, I'm actually kinda sad this isn't just a regular P&P adaptation...) So that's my explanation for this next sentence: I want to see this movie. Help.




Hail, Caesar!
Feb 5th; PG-13
WELL -- the Coen Brother's new movie looks like a win! (It's got a comma and an exclamation point in its title, so you know it's gonna be good!) This trailer is downright brilliant, and I would watch it if the whole movie was like that even without a plot. The Coens always seem to be doing something new, and totally out-of-the-box, and this one fits the bill more than ever. It even almost feels like a Wes Anderson film from the trailer, though with a distinctly Coen's sense of humor. This total oddball throws back to Hollywood's Golden Age, and follows around a Hollywood "Fixer" (Josh Brolin) as he... fixes.... things.... ... The whole cast is absolutely giant -- George Clooney, Ralph Fiennes, Tilda Swinton, Scarlett Johansson, Canning Tatum, Jonah Hill... It doesn't really matter to me whether the movie is generally considered bad or good. I want to see it. That cast, those directors, the 50's, Hollywood -- I just must see it. But, if I were to venture a guess, I would think it'd certainly be on the good side.




The Choice
Feb 5th; PG-13
Okay, anyone who knows me know that I am not in any way a Nicholas Sparks fan. But, anyone who knows me well knows that I surprisingly often watch movies based on his novels anyway. When it comes to sappy romantic drama, there is nothing better. And I really do meant that; these movies are tear-jerking, squishy, cheesy cry-fests, but they are of a very high quality. So high, in fact, that actors I like very often get cast in them. Like this one, for instance, stars Teresa Palmer of Warm Bodies and Benjamin Walker of Abraham Lincoln: Vampire Hunter. The zombie killer and the vampire killer come together for a little Southern romance. Nicholas Sparks or not, that's interesting enough -- maybe even if someone winds up dead! Maybe.




Deadpool
Feb 12th; R
[Rant] Not watching Deadpool will probably be one of the most disappointing moments in my movie-watching career. I love Deadpool. When I saw X-Men Origins: Wolverine I didn't even know who he was, but since this movie became a thing I've looking into him and found out more about him than any other superhero yet. The strips he's in are absolutely hilarious, and his powers are brilliantly gory. But this movie... I guess I knew from the first trailer when I actually had to specify "green band trailer" in order to find the appropriate one, but this movie goes beyond what I'll allow myself to watch, and in fact, what I want to watch. It's rated R. No duh. But let me break it down: Violence -- okay, that's good. Deadpool would probably be terrible without R violence. Language -- "language throughout" specifically. That'll be about 100 f-bombs. Whew. I can brave language, but even then it usually detracts from the movie. All I see here is 100 times someone could have said something original. Sexual content -- yep, can I just ask, WHY? Why does the movie need this? Answer: it actually doesn't. And here's the real kicker: Graphic nudity -- that takes the cake. And that brings me to my point which encapsulates the whole problem I have with this movie. This movie is not out to make a good, fun, original Deadpool movie. It's all about the shock and awe. It wants to push the envelope as far over the edge of edginess as it will go, and see how many fans eat it up like so much grocery store birthday cake. If I'm right about this movie, it won't be funny, it won't be original, and it certainly won't be well-acted, but if I'm right, everyone will still believe it is. If you're excited for this movie and plan to see it (and if you see it and love it) I'm sorry to be so harsh, but I've thought on this subject a lot and have some pretty passionate opinions about it. I'm just really disappointed right now. [/rant]




Gods of Egypt
Feb 26th; PG-13
Huge monsters. Ancient heroes. Cheesy, low quality dialogue, and gobs and gobs of visual effects that aren't-really-that-impressive. It looks like the new class of Clash of the Titans is here! Which means it'll probably be a fun popcorn watch, but I would never pay to see it. But, since it also has Rufus Sewell in it, I'll watch it as soon as I can for free.



How's the month of February looking for you?

True Grit

The film opens with a Bible verse: The wicked flee when none pursueth,... Proverbs 28:1. Then a dark, snowy shot of a man lying dead on the ground as his murderer gallops away with his horse, and his two California gold pieces. The dead man's daughter, and our heroine, Mattie Ross explains that the killer could've walked the horse out of town, because no one could be bothered to chase him. At fourteen years old, she must take matters into her own hands. She does this by hiring the meanest US Marshal available to help her track down the half-witted killer Tom Chaney, and have him hanged to avenge her fathers murder. Rooster Cogburn is the Marshal of her choice because she heard he had grit. A Texas Ranger, LeBeouf, a rather ridiculous man who jingles when he walks, wants the fugitive too, and eventually, the odd trio set out together on an adventure that would forever change the lot of them.

Let me just go ahead and say right now; I'm having a very hard time thinking of something I didn't like about this movie. This is the sort of movie I decide to watch for whatever reason, but once it's over, I only want to watch it more than before it began. I  know it's strange, but it's true, and mildly annoying. And for me, this almost magical and annoying feeling qualifies a movie as great, then I just have to figure out why. This is for sure one of those movies. The why? Well, everything. From the usual things like acting and cinematography, to details like costumes, and every individual line, True Grit has my official stamp of approval. And there's no way I'll be able to list all the little details that are included in why I like it so much, but I'll see what I can do.

The first thing that strikes me about this movie is the wonderful acting and the deep characters it creates. Every time I watch this movie I notice, or discover something different, or go a little deeper into the characters and plot. One thing I've always known though, is that Mattie is the one with the true grit. Cogburn looks and acts like it, and LeBeouf brags about it, but Mattie's truly got it. And Hailee Steinfeld does a perfect job conveying exactly that. Her honesty and pure determination is amazing, but you always believe she's a fourteen year old girl, however remarkable. Rooster is gritty in his appearance, always dirty and scraggly, drunk, and bellowing out witty insults or mumbling on about nothing. He's good at what he does and probably thought something of himself until Mattie came along and showed him up. But he's got a heart of gold underneath... somewhere. Jeff Bridges was of course, perfectly cast for this part, and is hilarious in it. Who would have thought they'd ever enjoy watching a drunk one-eyed man stumbling around and shooting things at random? The Texas Ranger, Lebeouf, is seriously puffed-up, and thinks he's all that, but really doesn't have a clue. He gets put in his place several times by his companions, but somehow always manages to recollect his pride again, until the next put-down. Matt Damon here is playing a man who only thinks he's as cool and suave as Damon's usual characters, like Bourne, and that is rather fun to see. I'd like to mention two more people briefly, the first being Josh Brolin as Tom Chaney, who doesn't have much screen time, but is quite satisfactory, most certainly a dim-wit, and I appreciate the time he gets. And the other is Barry Pepper as Lucky Ned Pepper, leader of the group of outlaws Chaney falls in with, who is great, and has the most amazing teeth. I really enjoyed watching spittle fly from his mouth and he yelled too.

I haven't seen many of the Coen brothers' movies, but I have a lot of respect for them as directors and writers. Especially as a team, they always seem to create something that is at the very least worth watching. Their style is a very specific kind of strange, and usually thought-provoking with just the right kind, and amount of violence and humor for the particular film. And True Grit is no exception. The realistic violence is shown without shame, but at the same time it isn't blatant; it's there because the story requires it, and I appreciate that. And the humor is wonderfully dry, and worthy of a real laugh, but sometimes has a interesting serious side to it. I love that about the movie; it's entertaining on the most shallow level, but if you want, you can look deeper and deeper, and see some really great truths about life, and the human character. Which, in my opinion, only makes the movie better every time you see it, and find something new buried there.

Also making the movie better, each in their own way are the smaller, but by no means less important details. Like LeBeoufs ridiculous outfit. The cinematography is absolutely breathtaking too, I especially liked the first shot, and of course the scenery. And the score is lovely, but appropriate, regularly going back to the theme of the hymn, "Leaning on the Everlasting Arms."

As I said, I liked the first shot of the movie, where Mattie's father lies dead in the newly falling snow, the frame ever so slowly moves toward him as she begins to tell us the sad tale of his murder, at the appropriate moment, said murderer breaks through the shot, sending snow flying, and making his getaway, however temporary. This pairs wonderfully with the last shot. A now much older Mattie stands alone by her avenged fathers grave, as she finishes telling us her story, she turns and walks away. A western-accented woman gravely sings the theme hymn, as we watch our heroine slowly shrink into the distance. Successfully wrapping up this beautifully gritty film in a neat, re- and re-watchable package.

-5/5 stars

Men in Black III

Who would have thought they'd ever make another Men in Black movie? Sure, we all loved the first one, and were disappointed in, but still watched the second. And the premise is just so original, and J and K work so well together at catching creepy aliens and being hilarious. So it does make sense. But I confess, I was surprised when I saw they were making a third one. A good surprised though. And when I watched the trailer...

... I honestly thought that was Tommy Lee Jones at the end. For second I thought they must have pasted his face on a younger person, like Jeff Bridges in Tron Legacy. Then I saw Josh Brolin was cast as Young Agent K. Then, of course, my mind was blown, and I was incredibly impressed.

For the third round of this extra-terrestrial action comedy a very evil, and appropriately ugly alien Boris the Animal (Jemaine Clement) escapes from prison and time travels back 40 years to the day he was captured, where he helps himself kill the MiB agent who would arrest him; Agent K (Tommy Lee Jones older, and Josh Brolin, younger). Agent J (Will Smith) in the present is somehow the only person who notices something is wrong. He remembers K being alive just yesterday! Now, he must travel back in time to save the life of his grumpy partner, and kill Boris instead of arresting him, setting everything back to the way it should be.

But with Brolin playing everyone's favorite deadpan Man in Black, for at least half the movie, will we feel cheated out of seeing Tommy, the man who made the character so lovable in the first place? Lets see... that would be a no. Josh Brolin does do an amazing Tommy Lee Jones impression, but that's not what he's doing in this movie. He plays K. Just as well as Jones did I might add, spot on every time, and exactly how anyone would've imaged he'd be as a young man. With a little help from the make-up and prosthetic department (his ears and nose at least are fake) he turned out a totally real and round performance that blended perfectly with Jones' K, He even manages to have the same chemistry with Will Smith. And that is what makes the movie.

But that doesn't mean it was the only good part. Quite the contrary. Will Smith is as good and funny as ever, but no one would ever expect him not to be. He and Mr. Jones have still got it. I also enjoyed the addition of Agent O (older and younger, Emma Thompson, and Alice Eve respectively) And the baddie, Boris, is just as original, and just as classic as he ought to be. Speaking of original and classic, the plot was that as well. When in doubt, always go for time travel. It is a little cliched, but they pull it off, connecting it with the first one almost as if it was planned all along. And the time traveling aspect wasn't confusing like so many other time-jumping films, that fry your brain as you try to make sense of it all.

It's funny, it's action-packed, it has plot, it has visuals, it keeps you on your toes, er, the edge of your seat, and it's full of fine performances, with Brolin outstanding. A fun ride that respects, and brings you back to the original, while still going it's own way. If you're a fan of the franchise, it's a must-see, and even if you're not... everybody except nobody can appreciate a good Tommy Lee Jones impersonation, and that alone is worth the ticket price!
- 4/5 stars