Aquaman

       I so wanted ‘Aquaman’ to be great.  It was getting so much hype as the savior of the DC extend universe that I should have known  it would never live up to the hype.  DC is smacking of desperation with putting so much pressure on each new offering to repeat the success they had with Wonder Woman.  In fairness, films like Batman vs Superman and Justice League have made money, but they aren’t capturing the hearts and minds of fans the way Marvel movies have.  It shows there is a built in audience thirsting for these films to be good, but once again, studio heads trying to replicate and copy the Marvel business model have no idea what connects super heroes to fans.  You can see them trying hard by throwing explosions, and great battle scenes, and humor, and over proportioned heroes, but what they lack is the character depth and humanity that Marvel captures in each one of its’ characters.  Marvel puts story first, then builds all the fun around it.  People who don’t connect with the super hero world don’t realize that and just focus on the superficial.  It’s not about the costume or the powers, it’s about the people.  Bless ‘Aquaman’ for trying hard…really, really hard, but this film fails to find its’ heart and tone and just comes out as a mish-mash of hurried scenes and story lines that some producer thinks the audience wants to see.

The lack of respect for the character of Aquaman has been so much of a running joke among comic fans that it has almost become a cultural phenomenon.  Despite his strength and ability to communicate with aquatic life, he has largely been viewed as the most useless member of the Justice League.  Writers have taken on the challenge in the comic world to take on reboot after reboot to somehow gain the character some respect but, despite some valiant attempts, have failed to give the poor King of Atlantis the stature he deserves (or rather was created to have). The Studio Execs at Warner decided to totally shake things up by casting the currently popular and ruggedly handsome Jason Momoa in the title role.  While I respect taking chances, the biker cool-dude shagginess of Momoa is a complete miscasting of what is supposed to be a more regal and dignified role.  The film also struggled to find a consistent tone.  One moment it tries to be operatic and then silly and goofy the next.  Jokes are randomly thrown in that fall flat (because Marvel has jokes in their movies) and elements are taken from other successful movies that also seemed haphazard.  Everything from Star Wars to Avatar to, most blatantly, Thor were all exploited if not out right copied. And most painful of all was the leaden chemistry between lead Jason Momoa and leading lady Amber Heard.  I don’t know what their screen test looked like, but I wish someone would have caught their complete lack of interplay before offering the roles.

The key elements of the hero torn between land and sea are there.  In fact, the story of his mother (a surprising casting of Nicole Kidman) the exiled Queen of Atlantis and his father, the lighthouse keeper who rescued her was probably one of the highlights of the film.  The improbable romance that somehow produced a super powered off-spring had heart.  Much like Iron man was tailored to Robert Downy Jr’s personality, so was Aquaman adjusted to fit Jason Momoa’s.  The problem was it didn’t fit.  The immediate onslaught of CGI battle scenes, wondrous underwater cityscapes, and convoluted family drama came at the sacrifice of creating a fully developed character.  

I will say that any film that puts Dolph Lundgren and Willem Dafoe in the same movie together has my attention, but their underwater acting seemed awkward at best.  Patrick Wilson tried to recreate Tom Hiddleston’s evil brother act as Aquaman’s evil half-brother Ocean Master.  He failed to match Loki’s multi-nuanced silver tongue performance and just came across as an effeminate hand wringing villain.  And then there’s Aquaman’s love interest, Mira (played with the aforementioned wooden intensity by Amber Heard).  How the main romance can go unexplained and undeveloped is unfathomable to me.  They were either exchanging quip filled bickering or staring doe eyed into each other’s eyes depending on the scene with no real explanation of transitions.  Despite the sporadic story telling there were zero surprises with most scenes being cliches.  Training montages, grudge matches, the ‘only person who can take on the monster’ scenes.  How many times can we see a ‘There can be only one’ scene and remain engaged?

My final complaint is that they way over powered Aquaman.  Bullet proof and able to lift submarines?  He’s not Superman.  More isn’t always better in these movies and that was what this movie was all about… More!  To the point of over the top. Despite all my grumblings, I can’t say that I hated it.  It was more disappointment at something that could have been so much better.  DC has to find their own vision apart from Marvel.  Until that happens they will always be in their shadow.  No matter how much the film makes.

I give this film ** stars out of five

Aquaman trailer

Spider-Man: Into the Spider-Verse

       It’s been awhile, but I felt the need to post a review of ‘Spider-man: Into the Spider-verse’ because of how impressed I was by the latest offering into the over commercialized and saturated Spider-Man (and super-hero) movie world.  It seems like a Spider-man movie or reboot is released every year.  I will state from the outset that this film is a gift to the comic nerd community and may not be for everyone. Due to film copyright issues, Sony has tried to cash in on the Marvel success by attempting to create a Spider-man shared cinematic universe franchise of their own and each offering has been increasingly dismal.  I felt after this year’s horrific ‘Venom’ (where Spider-man wasn’t even mentioned) that they had truly hit rock bottom and were counting their blessings that Marvel’s studio acquisition of their film division would end their hardships.  The Spider-Man franchise descent truly is an example of a movie Studio that had no concept of what makes super-hero movies magic and the only respect they had for the iconic property was the money they thought it could generate.

So I digress:  A recent trend in comics has been the advent of SJW writers and artists who have sought to diversify comics (That is a worthy goal, but not by destroying iconic characters IMHO).  There has been everything from female Thors to Asian Hulks to a multitude of Captain America personas.  The momentary uptick in sales for each title, based on the novelty, quickly fades and the result is Marvel increasingly struggling with sales and angry fans who don’t like Marvel canon being messed with.  The notable exception to this was the introduction of Miles Morales as an African-hispanic Spider-Man.  One cannot predict how or when mojo will strike when creating characters, but Miles struck a cord and has been a popular part of the Marvel universe ever since.  Again, IMHO, the vast majority of people don’t care whether a character is politically correct or what their ethnic background is, they care whether or not the story is engaging and the character is endearing.  Miles Morales ascended from this quagmire virtue signaling to where Sony decided to try him out in his own movie (albeit it an animated one separate from the rest of the continuum).

I will grant that one of Marvel’s biggest current flaws with it’s iconic characters is that they were mostly invented in the 60’s and 70’s.  Their origin stories are starting to lose relevance and connection with audiences that are now several generations removed.  What I feel the Miles Morales character does effectively is modernize the Spider-Man story while maintaining what made Spider-Man so relatable in the past.  And I love that they resisted the urge to go dark with the storylines which all other franchises seems to be doing.  Miles reflects the original Spider-Man’s hopeful and youthful exuberance that made the comic fun to read.

I’m not a big fan of animation and the strides in effects over the last couple decades have been so incredible that nothing from an animation point of view really impresses me anymore.  That being said, I approached this with some trepidation.  I’m glad to say ‘Spider-man: Into the Spider-verse’ exceeded my expectations and I’m thrilled that the franchise found a unique voice outside what they have been trying to do.  This does not feel like a Marvel movie.  As much as I love what Marvel has done, this is a fresh take and feel that still delivers on all the action, humor, and emotion one comes to expect from Marvel.  I must say this is a unique style of animation, which I found initially distracting, but I soon was able to get past that and release myself into the story.

The concept of the ‘multi-verse’ was created, so writers would have freedom to create storylines and characters outside the normal continuum of the shared universe concept.  You can make new characters, or have interesting twists of events, or explore all sorts of ‘What if’ possibilities. Eventually, some stories became so popular that fans would want them to cross over into the normal Marvel universe.  Miles Morales was one such character from the Ultimates universe.  Miles Morales offered a more modern and diverse take on modern New York that rang truer than the traditional Spider-man.

The origin story is similar, but in ‘Spider-man-Into the Spider-verse’ we see an aging and disillusioned Peter Parker finding himself drawn into another universe by a device created by the Kingpin who is trying to bring back his lost wife and child (sounds complicated I know, but it makes sense when you are watching it). Peter immediately identifies with Miles, his other universe counter part, and reluctantly takes on the role of mentor.  To make matters more fun and confusing, a variety of other Spider heroes are drawn from other universes.  From the charming, to the silly, to the down right weird, they all team up to take on the Kingpin and his henchmen to prevent the ultimate destruction of their universes and to find a way back to each of their own universes.  Like I said, it sounds complicated, but makes sense as you watch.

This is one case where I hope Marvel passes the Spider-Man mantle on to Miles from the ‘Archie comicsesque’ storyline of the original.  I think this film is a good start at introducing the new character to the masses and do it in a unique way that doesn’t affect the current MCU storyline.  I hope Marvel explore other options like this that is separate from the style and current storylines of the current universe they have created.  Comics has rich and varied genres and the movies should reflect that freedom.  Sincere gratitude for being able to breathe fresh life into a stale property.

I giver this film *** 1/2 stars out of 5

Spider-Man: Into the Spider-Verse trailer

Venom

     I went into ‘Venom’ with low expectations and about 20 minutes into this film I realized I set them too high.  I often walk away from films disappointed, but rarely angry.  ‘Venom’ is everything wrong about Hollywood Studios and Directors who try to make movies in a genre they are not inherently fans of. Only a true comic fanboy(girl) understands what makes comics magic and even then they have a difficult time trying to translate that magic to the big screen.  Marvel has making great superhero films so down to a science that we forget that it is not the norm.  ‘Venom’ proves that not every comic character is meant for the big screen and just because it’s a superhero movie doesn’t mean it’s going to be a hit.  This film is a train wreck from beginning to end and it pains me to say that as Tom Hardy and Michelle Williams are two of the best actors out there today. The fault lies entirely in the vision, direction, and Studio oversight.

WARNING: Boring behind the scenes stuff:  As comic nerds know, Sony Pictures owns the movie rights to Spider-man and all of it’s related characters, not the über-successful Marvel Studios.  Sony, in trying to capture a piece of the current Marvel super-hero money train, is trying to create their own inter-connected universe around Spider-Man characters..a Spider-verse if you will.  Venom is probably Spider-man’s most popular arch-nemesis and the Studio sought to bring the anti-hero to the screen as the first non-Spider-man centric film in the franchise. ‘Venom’ is a painful exercise in genericism where CGI is used to the point of exhaustion over a good story line.  I’ve read a few reviews where they try to say something positive like “it’s so bad, it’s good”.  No!  It’s just bad.  In the comics, Venom was created during the legendary run of Todd MacFarlane on ‘The Amazing Spider-Man’ series. At the time, MacFarlane and his character Venom helped breathe new life in what had become a stale series.  However, Venom worked uniquely with MacFarlane’s art and story telling style.  Afterwards, most other artists and writers never seemed to capture what MacFarlane brought to life.  It seems that it is even more difficult to bring the vision on Venom to the big screen.

The general story line is about an investigative reporter named Eddie Brock (Tom Hardy) who uncovers a secret plot by the Elon Muskish mega-billionaire type Carlton Drake (Riz Ahmed) to bring alien life forms to earth in order to use them to save the human race.  The evil twist is that these aliens are ‘symbiotes’: Creatures who need to bond with a human host in order to survive.  The symbiosis grants the human host super human-powers and, in-effect, an evil internal voice.   Again, everything about this is just so generic.  Even Eddie’s ex-girlfriend Anne, is a complete waste of the Oscar level talent of Michelle Williams.  Relegated mostly to the side-lines, I wondered why she was even in the movie.  Every step of the movie plot is predictable and just an excuse to provide some cheap laughs or the next video game style CGI effect.  It’s a shame because the English actor Tom Hardy mimics an impressive New York accent, but his character is so manic and over the top, it’s hard to form any type of connection with him. He achieves a level of over-acting that would shame William Shatner. The plot jumps around so illogically that it was hard to keep track of what is going on.  One moment Venom is here to lead an alien invasion of the earth, the next he decides to protect humanity from his kind for no apparent reason.  The logic of Carlton Drake’s scheme was equally scattered and it didn’t help that Riz Ahmed delivered his lines with all the passion of someone reading off a cue card.

From a comic nerd point of view, it was weird that Spider-man was never once mentioned. If this is supposed to expand the Sony Spider-verse wouldn’t even a mention be helpful (possibly a brief cameo)?  In the comics, the reason Venom looks like a macabre version of Spider-man is that Spider-man was Venom’s first host so he adopted his features.  Here, the Venom symbiotic looks a little like Spider-Man but with no explanation why.  I understand you have to be a comic nerd to be frustrated by that, but Hey! We’re the core audience.  I guess what I found most disappointing is that for people who hate Comic book based movies, this validates every one of their reasons for despising them.  I have no counter argument if this is the film used to judge. If you are a Studio Exec or a Director and you didn’t love comic books growing up, then pass off the project to someone else because you won’t be making a successful, or even a respectable, movie. 

Given that there wasn’t even a moment that I was entertained, and in fact, felt a swell of bitterness grow while watching Venom, I am going to give this film an unprecedented zero stars.  And “No!”, I won’t even grade it on the ‘it’s so bad, it’s good’ scale.

Zero Stars

Venom trailer

Crazy Rich Asians

        Let me start off by saying that there is nothing I find more tedious than formulaic movie plots with the possible exception of politically correct films designed to make one feel guilty if one doesn’t whole heartedly endorse the movie.  And if I’m being completely honest, I’m not a big fan of Rom Coms either.  I approached John Chu’s ‘Crazy Rich Asians’ with all these trepidations in hand, and I must confess, that I thoroughly enjoyed this film.  Even though everything I mentioned above is true about this film, it takes nothing away from the fact that this is just a good, multi-layered, culturally rich film that will having you laughing hysterically as often as it tugs at your heart strings. The fact that this is an all Asian cast film is being touted in the press and while it is certainly true, this is first and foremost a family story that all can universally relate too. 

Based on the best selling novel by Kevin Kwan, ‘Crazy Rich Asians’ follows the Cinderella story of New Yorker Rachel Chu (Constance Wu), if being an Economics Professor at NYU allows you to be put into the Cinderella category.  Rachel’s boyfriend Nick Young (the impossibly handsome and charming half-Brit Henry Golding) has decided he wants to bring her to his best friend’s wedding back in his homeland of Singapore.  He feels it’s time for her to meet his family.  Excited that this might lead to proposal for herself she readily accepts.  To her surprise, the accommodations on the way to Singapore are First class and to Rachels cautious surprise discovers that Nick is the heir to one of the wealthiest families in Asia.  I paused here as a simple Google search would have told Rachel how rich her boyfriend was, but I suppose we have to suspend disbelief.  As Rachel is introduced to Nick’s family, what follows is over-the -top wealth porn that has an almost fairy tale type menagerie of visual feasts.

Rachel’s introduction to the matriarchal structure of Nick’s family starts off with the cold pleasantries one would expect from the super wealthy, but Rachel soon feels the pressure of Nick’s overly possessive mother Eleanor (the still striking Michelle Yeoh) as well an assortment of caddy women envious of Rachels position as the soon-to-be fiancé of the Young Family’s heir apparent.  Sub-plots circle around various members of his family that are too numerous to mention, but all are uniquely asian, while at the same time resonating with universal struggles people of all backgrounds face. Nick’s sister Astrid (played by the impossibly beautiful Gemma Chan) is one of the more notable sub-stories showing that even someone who seems to have it all still struggles to find happiness.  By coincidence, Rachel’s best friend from school Piek Lin Goh lives in Singapore, and what Rom Com would be complete without the quirky best friend. Piek is great, but an under-utilized Ken Jeong who plays her father steals every scene he is in.

Of course, nothing can go according to plan, and the stress of Nick’s families disapproval puts a strain on their relationship, which Nick must rectify.  Despite the asian backdrop of this film there is nothing new to this kind of paint-by-the-numbers story line, but that doesn’t mean one can’t enjoy a well crafted story that provides escapism to make one laugh and cry and feel wonderment at the fairytale excesses.  It is also part travelog as there is an abundance of exploration of the famous Singapore food scene as well. Even the wedding scene, which tend to be a hallmark of these types of films was so well done that I only felt appreciation as opposed to my usual eye rolling.  

Something I love about films is that one sees stories and experiences from around the world, however it isn’t enough just to be different.  You have to have a story that resonates and draws you in.  Despite the exoticism of Singapore and the family dynamics within asian families, the struggles and triumphs ring true with everyone.  We spot our own family dynamics within the exaggerated stories of these ‘Crazy Rich Asians’.  It’s a fun ride we’ve all been on before, but there is nothing wrong with taking another turn on a ride we’ve thoroughly enjoyed. 

I give this film *** 1/2 stars

Crazy Rich Asians trailer

Solo: A Star Wars story

         So let me start off by saying that even though I am well acquainted with the Star Wars universe and, more often than not, enjoy the films when they come out, I am not what one would call a Star Wars fan.  I don’t eagerly await the release of each one, nor do I have strong opinions other than if I enjoyed the film or not.  I have immense respect for the franchise and the place it holds in film and even American history.  I say all of that to preface I feel I have no true bias in reviewing ‘Solo: A Star Wars Story’.  I smile as most Star Wars fanatics seem to anticipate each new installment with rabid zealotry, yet seem to relish in their almost mob like mentality in decrying how woefully inadequate the final product is over social media or to anyone who will listen to their rants.  I don’t think it’s always an entirely unwarranted criticism, but I feel the original trilogy has been so idolized in the minds of fans that nothing would be able to live up to their expectations.  I’m going to make a seemingly contradictory statement here in that I feel that ‘Solo’ is the least impressive of all the Star Wars movie, but the one I enjoyed the most.  Director Ron Howard brings us a smaller tale of the formative years of a young Hans Solo (Alden Ehrenreich).  There is none of the galactic battles where the universe hangs in the balance nor armadas clashing with armadas.  Much as the title indicates, this is simply a Star Wars tale and I am fine with that.

The film begins with Hans’ early life as a small time thief trying to escape his miserable existence.  He dreams of becoming a pilot and escaping with his love Qi’re (Emilia Clarke) to the stars.  Ehrenreich does a good enough job playing a roguish young thug, yet my primary complaint is that he never really captures Hans Solo charm or spirit.  Try as he might to mimic it, he comes across as more a star of a CW TV show than a movie star.  I was never able to get over my suspension of disbelief that this was THE Hans Solo. Conversely, Donald Glover completely channels Lando Cairissian’s suave charm and cool and has probably sealed his fate as a future movie star.  With those opinions firmly entrenched in my mind we follow as Hans eventually escapes his hell hole of a planet. Unfortunately, he is separated from his beloved Qi’ra in the process.  Hans enlists in the Imperial forces vowing to one day return and rescue his beloved.

Of course, order and discipline do not suit Hans and as soon as he is able he teams up with a motley group of thieves led by Beckett (Woody Harrelson also proving that TV sitcom stardom is in his distant past).  Hans idolizes Becketts roguish ways and soon earns his way into the team.  It is through Beckett and his grand heists that Hans meets Lando and of course his soon to be lifelong companion, Chewbacca.  Then of course, through Lando (as any good 'Empire Strikes Back’ nerd knows) we are introduced to the Millennium Falcon. Not the old rust bucket from the original movies, rather the Falcon in her prime.  Add to this the obligatory android L3-37 (voiced by Phoebe Waller-Bridge) and we have a team ready to take on any heist the galaxy can offer.  I will say, despite my previous comment, that L3-37 was probably one of the more interesting characters and I felt they left Lando’s unrequited love for “her” unexplored.  As weird as it sounds, it was one of the more interesting sub-plots that ended too soon.  

As stated earlier, this was not a majestic battle movie, rather a smaller heist movie with plenty (maybe too many) of twists and turns.  This type of Sci-fi is not Ron Howard’s forte, but I feel he respected the Star Wars canon while making it is own.  He skillfully linked references from previous films as well as littered plenty of cameos and foreshadowing.  I am interested to where Disney will take this franchise as they don’t seem to have a clear vision of what they want it to be (compared to say their Marvel franchise).  They left the ending open to future sequels, but they so far have given us independent stories with no common link other than the characters.  I’m not complaining, just curious of the future long-term plans (or do they even have any).  That being said, this is worth a see, if for nothing else than it’s just a good popcorn munching matinee.

I give this film *** stars out of five.

Solo: A Star Wars story trailer

Avengers: Infinity War

        Ten years in the making from the Marvel movie machine and after all the hype and over bloated expectations, Marvel delivers everything they promised and more with ‘Avengers: Infinity War’.  This will be a challenge to write about without giving away spoilers as almost every scene in this film contains spoilers.  It is action from beginning to end, yet never losing sight of the fact that these are fully fleshed out characters that we have come to love over the years.  How the characters from 22 different movies can all be squeezed into one feature is a miraculous logistical achievement in itself, but to have it feel that the flow is natural with everyone getting their screen time among frantic pacing is beyond miraculous.  The Russo brothers more than earned their paycheck in bringing this all together.

Marvel has always been criticized for having weak, one dimensional villains (with the exception of Loki).  Thanos is the Russo brothers answer to this critique.  They ,along with actor Josh Brolin (the actor behind the CGI), have created the baddest of the bad.  Truly an unstoppable monster, yet not one who acts evil for the sake of being evil. His quest is to gather the 6 Infinity Stones (which have been MacGuffins in most Marvel movies) and to assemble them in a gauntlet which will make him the most powerful force in the universe.  Despite the non-stop action, we delve into Thanos’s past and psyche to see what drives him to collect all the Infinity Stones.  One will be surprised that it isn’t sheer malevolence, but horrified at his plan of universal genocide.

‘Avengers: Infinity War’ opens directly following the events of ‘Thor: Ragnarok’.  The threat that Thanos represents is immediately made apparent as we feel traumatic losses within the first few minutes of the film. The movie also links directly to the aftermaths of ‘Black Panther’, ‘Dr Strange’, and 'Captain America: Civil War’.  All in perfect concert. The true joy of these ensemble cast movies is seeing the characters we know and love play off each other in different combinations.  Despite the film’s somber tone, the humor and wise cracks define our favorite characters and to see Thor and Rocket Raccoon or Tony Stark and Star Lord trading barbs is worth the price of admission alone. It’s also fascinating to see earth bound heroes such as Tony Stark and Captain America interact on a mystical or cosmic scale.  Kudos to the Russo brothers in creating a story where this seems plausible.

Have no doubt though, as we see the continuation of our favorite characters and their storylines, Thanos is the true star of this movie.  We’ve come to a point where CGI technology is so advance, that we forget we are watching a computer generated character. You actually feel Thanos is a living being, not just a wooden animation. Of course we fear Thanos, but Josh Brolin is able to bring the subtleties of expression and emotion to Thanos whereas we begin to understand him as a being, not just a monster.  We feel his unflappable singular desire to assemble the Infinity Gauntlet, so much so that he makes horrific choices. Even through his most heart wrenching choices, he feels that what he does is just.  Thanos views himself as a savior, not a villain, which makes him an even more unstoppable force.

Most of the action takes places with groups in three different places: Space, the planet Titan, and Earth.  Each of these story threads are woven perfectly to come together in a final battle for existence in Black Panther’s Wakanda.  The Battle Royale is indeed a Battle Royale with each hero demonstrating what makes them super-heroes.  All I will say, in terms of a semi-spoiler, is that the end is not what you expect (unless you are a comic nerd and know the story already).  After 2.5 hours, you will leave the theater dazed and confused, but still wanting more.  The Russos have created an action film with depth.  A finale (that concludes next year), that dazzles and amazes.  If you are not up-to-date on all the Marvel movies, you might be lost, but you will still enjoy the ride.

I give this film **** 1/2 out of 5 stars

Avengers: Infinity War trailer

A Quiet Place

    ‘A Quiet Place’ is the type of film I seek out.  Small in scale with a story to tell.  I’ve been hearing about this film for awhile and it was with both anticipation and trepidation that I looked forward to its’ release.  Written, Directed, and starring John Krasinsky, this is truly his passion project.  For myself (and many others I suspect), John Krasinsky will always be the affable ‘Jim’ from the tV show ‘The Office’.  I thought he would be doomed to this role casting for the rest of his career.  It wasn’t until the film ’13 Hours’ that I saw Krasinsky’s ability to have range beyond his role as Jim.  Much like Jordan Peele’s sleeper hit ‘Get Out’, John Krasinski has taken his career into his own hands and lifted himself above being a cult TV character.  He has officially arrived as a film maker with ‘A Quiet Place’.

I would be lying if I didn’t say the premise of ‘A Quiet Place’ gave me some pause as well.  The story centers around the Abbott family, who are trying to survive in a post-apocalyptic world where aliens have taken over the earth.  The aliens primary receptory sense is hearing (they are in effect blind) and they immediately slaughter any human who creates a sound above a whisper.  The trailers portray this as a horror film, and even though it is, it is so much more. Due to the premise of the film, ‘A Quiet Place’ has little dialogue.  Most communication occurs through sign language. I went in wondering if a film, that is almost a silent film, would be able to hold my attention.  Even though it starts a little slow, once one settles in, the tension ratchets up quickly and carries you through the film as it builds.

Set in rural farmland, Lee Abbott has set up a homestead with his wife Evelyn (starring his real life wife Emily Blunt) constructed to make as little sound as possible.  Walking barefoot every where, even as they scavenge for supplies in nearby ghost towns, they live in fear of making a sound loud enough for the alien monstrosities to hear and coming to be savagely torn apart.  After an early traumatic loss, Lee has dedicated his life to safeguarding his family and that of their unborn child.  The audience immediately understands the implications of Evelyn being pregnant as a crying infant would be the immediate end of their entire family.  The sense of hope at a new life in a post apocalyptic world and the impending doom of what a new born baby might bring down upon them makes for heightened dread.

John Krasinsky truly excels at making ‘less is more’ in this script.  Other than a few quick scenes to establish the terror and ferocity of the aliens, they are conspicuously absent throughout most of the film.  Their absence, rather the anticipation and dread of their presence, is at the visceral core of this film and is its’ driving force.  The possibility of their arrival is what causes the drama and tension and, at times, the sheer horror of the life the Abbotts are now leading.  We cringe at the sounds even the most mundane activities cause.  Lee attempts to sound proof the environment through sanding pathways and cushioning everything he can find that might make a noise.  He suspects, much like we do, that it is only a matter of time before a random sound will be the cause of their deaths.  

One of many ways this film diverts from the typical horror genre is that much about this story is about the love of family and the willingness of a mother and father to do anything in order for their children to survive.  One very touching moment is when Lee and Evelyn slow dance to a Neil Young song through shared headphones.  Something that would be out of place in a horror movie, but set just the right tone of family and love that Krasinski was going for with this story.  Even the small touches like one of their daughters being deaf (which explains how the family knows how to sign), makes this a film with characters that are fleshed out and full. This is not really a spoiler, but I felt the film ended with a cliched ending that only slightly brought down my appreciation, but overall this was a great achievement for John Krasinski and Emily Blunt.

While I will say I enjoyed this film more than I expected and that John Krasinski has made a new respected name for himself as both a Director and Actor of serious work, it doesn’t quite rise to the level of Jordan Peele’s ‘Get Out’, but that doesn’t mean it doesn’t have its’ own voice or artistic merit.  I always give kudos to artists who are able to define themselves by doing it themselves.  Krasinski could have spent a career of being typecast, yet he chose to not let himself be put in a box.  Much respect for his drive, ambition, and vision.  I’ll end surprising myself in saying that despite the horror aspect of this film, it really is a family film.  It’s about the love that binds a family and keeps them moving forward for each other despite horrific odds.  This film has my complete respect

I give this film *** out of 5 stars

A Quiet Place

Annihilation

        I was very much looking forward to ‘Annihilation’ as Writer/Director Alex Garland created one of my favorite under-rated films, ‘Ex-Machina’, only a few short years ago.  I find him gifted in both his skills as a writer and his ability to bring that vision to film.  ‘Annihilation’ is a difficult film for me to review as it intentionally tries to be many things, but ultimately it left me unsatisfied and feeling the vision was incomplete or maybe unresolved is a better word.  That is not to say that there isn’t much I respect about this film both visually and in its’ complex story telling style.  In fact, just the opposite, despite my lack of fulfillment, this film is an extraordinary work of art.  It just didn’t resonate with me.  I’m not one who feels every film must have a neatly wrapped ending or even a coherent story line that is fully understandable, but I do need purpose or even direction.  I felt ‘Annihilation’ lacked both of these.  I found it interesting that I could be both in awe of the beauty of the film, yet apprehensive and even cringe at its’ violent and disturbing imagery. 

This is a female centric film and much to the film’s credit it does not make a big deal out of it.  Lena (Natalie Portman) is a biologist who is still suffering from the loss of her special forces husband Kane (Oscar Isaacs) who disappeared on a mission over a year prior.  As she attempts to rebuild her life, Kane mysteriously shows up disoriented in their bedroom.  At first over-joyed, Lena soon begins to realize that something is terribly wrong with him. Just as she realizes that he is physically, in fact critically unwell, a swarm of government officials abduct them on the way to the hospital.  When she wakes up in a government facility, she is introduced to Dr. Ventress (Jennifer Jason Leigh) who sheds light on the mission in which  Kane and his team disappeared. 

A mysterious extra-terrestrial object fell to earth in south Florida and hit a light house creating a “singularity”. A growing “shimmering” zone surrounding the area sprang up and for the last several years, every one or team sent in never returned.  The growth is slow but steady and the government does not know for how much longer they can keep it a secret. Lena is grilled for information on what if anything explains her husbands mysterious return, but she knows as little as the government.  In fact, even less.  Dr Ventress explains the plan to send in a team of scientists this time as each time they sent in soldiers they never returned.  They are desperate and willing to try anything different.  As Lena realizes this is possibly an ‘end-of-the-world’ scenario, she volunteers her expertise to be part of the group.  The approach and entering into the shimmering zone is what keeps the viewer on edge.

Director Garland’s exploration of the shimmering zone is filled with dread for a variety of reasons, not the least of which is that we don’t know what to expect.  Right away one realizes the laws of reality don’t apply here.  While  filled with dread, one cannot help but to be simultaneously filled with wonder at the beauteous altered world inside the zone. Metamorphosis of both landscape and animals are almost fairy tale in nature, but one cannot help but be filled with apprehension as we remember no one has ever returned.  It’s here where I feel Garland cheapens the film by relying on the typical horror film tropes with monsters and “gotcha’ moments, but I suppose its’ necessary to maintain the level of fear in the magical land.

What I feel Garland gets right is the exploration of the individual women on the team.  All are damaged (most people volunteering for a suicide mission would be) and each has their own individual reasons for being there.  As they come to realize that they are starting to metamorpihize both physically and mentally, just like the zone, we learn more about each, even as they begin to be picked off one by one.  We also begin to learn the relationship between Lena and her husband isn’t necessarily what we thought and her reasons for volunteering weren’t as clear cut as it originally appeared. For me, these explorations that were outside the premise of the film were what I found most skillfully executed.

I’m not going to go into the third act as, not only do I not want to give away any spoilers, I felt the film led to a resolution both anti-climatic and un focused where there aren’t any true spoilers to give.  Like I said earlier, I don’t need everything wrapped up in a neat bow, but I do need some sort of coherence to latch onto and I felt this film relied more on cool imagery and vaguery to come to a conclusion. To my great regret, I cannot recommend this film.  Which is a shame because it contains a lot of beauty and visceral imagery.  In the end, it feels like a road that leads to no where and I lacked any sort of meaningful connection with it.

I give this film ** stars out of five.

Annihilation trailer

2018 Oscar predictions

        It’s that time a year again where I embarrass myself with my Oscar predictions. This year is particularly challenging as I feel there was a plethora of strong contenders in all categories.  I try to keep my personal feelings out of it and go with whom I think the Academy will choose, but it is difficult, especially when one has strong opinions or connections to certain films that they love.

That being said, I will try to keep my analytical rants to a minimum and just give the predictions.

Best Actor:  Slam dunk, it will be Gary Oldman in “Darkest Hour”. Daniel Day-Lewis gave an incredible performance in a clunker of a film, but it is also his self proclaimed last film, so you never know if there will be an upset

Timothée Chalamet, “Call Me by Your Name”
Daniel Day-Lewis, “Phantom Thread”
Daniel Kaluuya, “Get Out”
Gary Oldman, “Darkest Hour”
Denzel Washington, “Roman J. Israel, Esq.

Best Actress:  I think this is the toughest of all the categories this year as everyone was stellar.  If I was the sole vote in the Academy I would be torn between Frances McDormand and Margot Robbie, but I think the mojo is with ‘Shape of Water’ this season, so I predict Sally Hawkins goes home with the statue

Sally Hawkins, “The Shape of Water”
Frances McDormand, “Three Billboards Outside Ebbing, Missouri”
Margot Robbie, “I, Tonya”
Saoirse Ronan, “Lady Bird”
Meryl Streep, “The Post”

Best Supporting Actor:  Sam Rockwell will walk away with it (although I was shocked when Stallone didn’t win for ‘Creed’ because I was equally confidant). I do believe not enough has been talked about co-star Woody Harrelson’s performance.  Richard Jenkins actually gave the performance I would have chosen.

Willem Dafoe, “The Florida Project”
Woody Harrelson, “Three Billboards Outside Ebbing, Missouri”
Richard Jenkins, “The Shape of Water”
Christopher Plummer, “All the Money in the World”
Sam Rockwell, “Three Billboards Outside Ebbing, Missouri”

Best Supporting Actress:  Allison Janney will win.  Period! (or ‘.’).  Nothing else to discuss.

Mary J. Blige, “Mudbound”
Allison Janney, “I, Tonya”
Lesley Manville, “Phantom Thread”

Laurie Metcalf, “Lady Bird”
Octavia Spencer, “The Shape of Water”

Best Film:  Again, if I were the one choosing, I would be going back and forth between ‘Dunkirk’ and ‘Three Billboards..’.  Given that I am not, I think ‘Shape of Water’ will walk away with it given the mojo factor.  However, given last year’s ‘Moonlight’ controversy, it’s not a done deal.  ‘Get Out’ and ‘The Post’ may sneak in as last minute spoilers.

“Call Me by Your Name”
“Darkest Hour”
“Dunkirk”
“Get Out”
“Lady Bird”
“Phantom Thread”
“The Post”
“The Shape of Water”
“Three Billboards Outside Ebbing, Missouri”

Best Director:  Who should win?  Christopher Nolan or Jordan Peele (who had a career transformative year).  Who should be banned from movies and relegated to basic cable? Paul Thomas Anderson. I don’t care what the arthouse snobs are saying, “Phantom Thread” was painful to watch.  I think Guillermo del Toro will win.  Not my choice, but I will be satisfied and feel that it is deserved.  

“Dunkirk,” Christopher Nolan
“Get Out,” Jordan Peele
“Lady Bird,” Greta Gerwig
“Phantom Thread,” Paul Thomas Anderson
“The Shape of Water,” Guillermo del Toro

So there we have it.  It’s on record.  Despite my passionate opinions, this was a great year for innovative and Oscar calibre films and I enjoyed them all (except ‘Phantom Thread’).  I wish ‘The Disaster Artist’ would have made it in there somewhere, but we can’t have everything we want.