49 thoughts on “Movies 2018

  1. Bright (2017)
    Dir. David Ayer
    Starring: Will Smith, Joe Edgerton, etc.
    73/100

    I think Penny would like this, and probably Grace, at least a little. I’m not sure about others like Mitchell, Don, Joel, or Jill, but I suspect they’ll like it at least a little. I think their reaction will depend on their expectations. For what it’s worth, Larri and I had really low expectations. (Larri liked it.)

    **
    Undoubtedly, those low expectations contributed significantly to my enjoyment. (For what it’s worth, my score probably reflects my enjoyment more than a more intersubjective evaluation of the film.) I feel like others would sympathize with me, if you’ve seen the trailer. Smith is an LA police officer, who is paired with an orc partner. Yes, orc as in Lord of the Rings orc. In my view the premise doesn’t seem promising, and the trailer did little to disabuse me of that feeling.

    But how do I explain my enjoyment of the film? I’m not sure I can adequately explain it, but I would mention a few things. First of all, I mentioned Lord of the Rings. Imagine our world now, if Middle Earth and similar events from Tolkien’s books actually occurred thousands of years ago. That describes the world of the film. I suspect that won’t really convince anyone. I guess I would say that the film makes the premise work, or at least avoids appearing ridiculous.

    Another reason I liked this has to do with some of the characters, particularly the villains. They were quite good in this in my opinion. Finally, I liked the story line and one aspect of that involves the fantasy element. I’ll say more in the next paragraph.

    Two thousand years ago a battle of nine armies (like in The Hobbit occurred, involving a Dark Lord (which sounds like Sauron). The orcs decided to side with the Dark Lord, and all of them were defeated via the use of magic. The orcs are now social outcasts because of this incident. In the present day, three elves plan to bring the Dark Lord back, and they’ll do so using magic wands. These wands have the power to grant wishes, but only special individuals known as “Brights” can wield the wands. Smith and his partner get themselves caught up in this.

  2. I don’t know if this is really a movie, more like a TV program, but whatever it was, it was a list of the fifty worst movies of all time. The production was kinda shoddy, almost as like a local TV movie critic putting the whole thing together. Anyway, I wanted to mention one of the movies on the list, Smokey and the Bandit III. I knew there was a sequel, and I vaguely recalled a part 3. Burt Reynold’s isn’t in this film, but Jackie Gleason is, reprising his role as Sherriff Bufford T. Justice. But here’s what I didn’t know: Jackie Gleason originally also played the role of Bandit! That is so outrageous, a part of me is really curious to see the film. Unfortunately, at some point, the filmmakers changed their minds (came to their senses?) and had Jerry Reed, who played the Snowman in the first two films, play the part of Bandit. Still kinda weird, but not as much.

  3. Abacus: Small Enough to Jail (2017)
    Dir. Steve James
    68/100

    This is a Frontline documentary about the only bank the federal government prosecuted after the 2008 financial crash. One bank employee committed fraud in this bank–Abacus, a small bank serving mostly Chinese-Americans, run by a Chinese-American family, and while the immediately fired the employee, quickly reported the incident to regulators, and cooperate with the U.S. District Attorney, the latter eventually prosecuted them. The film chronicles what happened, including the trial of the Abacus.

    ***
    Some comments:

    1. Based on what I saw, I think the prosecution made a big mistake, failing to use a sense of proportionality when deciding whether to prosecute the bank. Here’s how I understand a sense of proportionality and why it’s important. First, while many crimes are committed, the criminal justice system cannot prosecute all crimes, due to limited resources. Because of that, prioritizing which cases to pursue is the most sensible response to this reality. To do this, one has to look at several factors–the most serious crimes, causing the most harm; the practicality of successful prosecution, etc. The fact that laws were broken become far less important; every case the criminal justice system prosecutes would presumably involve law breaking. But since the system can’t prosecute every case, they have to prioritize. In this case, the U.S. Attorney really seemed to fail in this sort of calculation and analysis. To wit, Abacus’s loans were extremely dependable–Fanny Mae or their investors didn’t suffer any harm. On the other hand, bigger banks did cause a lot of damage.

    2. I’m curious about James’s decision to associate the Sung family with the Bailey’s in It’s a Wonderful Life as a comparison. I’m hoping he felt absolutely confident that this association was appropriate and accurate.

  4. Black Panther (2018)
    Dir. Ryan Coogler
    74/100

    This is one of the better superhero movies–or, more specifically, one of the more enjoyable ones that I’ve seen in a long time. (Then again, I liked Civil War.)

    Some general comments below.

    ***
    I really like the costumes/clothing in this.

    I liked the casting of Bozeman and Jordan–Jordan was especially effective I thought.

    I think this would have made for a great TV series–which would allow the filmmakers to create and explore richer, more complex characters and themes. I could definitely see certain moral questions explored a lot more. If they were ambitious they could also develop the culture, civilization of Wakanda (something like a Tolkien treatment would have been awesome).

    This is a terrific film for African-American viewers, especially young people. Also, I think it could be a positive experience for young female viewers.

    Edit

    One other thing. The non-superhero aspects of the film were the most interesting to me.

  5. Cloverfield Paradox (2018)
    Dir. Julius Onah
    65/100

    I actually enjoyed the film a little more than the score indicates–which is both something weird and something I can’t explain. I’d say it’s a decent Saturday night TV movie.

    Earth has a major energy crisis. To solve it a group of scientists are working on an experiment that will lead to almost unlimited energy source. The problem is that doing so could create strange disturbances in space and time.

    One of the things I liked about the film was the way it indirectly connects with the other Cloverfield movies.

  6. We often disagree, but I think we agree more than you think–especially you think the occasions of our agreement are near zero.

  7. This is not my real review, but something I shared for a thing at work. Might as well post it since I don’t seem to be writing reviews lately. Ugh.

    Black Panther (2018)

    The world thinks Wakanda is among the poorest nations on the planet, but this is a deception by Wakanda to protect a secret: it is a technologically advanced country with enormous natural wealth hidden aggressively from outsiders. “Black Panther” is the story of how T’Challa becomes the new king of Wakanda, fends off challengers to the throne, and struggles with unpleasant truths about his country’s relationships with other nations.

    As stories go, it’s on the north end of okay. Yet it looks and feels unlike anything in theaters, possibly ever. “Black Panther” is fresh creativity spray-painted over every surface and into every cranny of a film when people of different cultures, ages, backgrounds, and artistic sensibilities are (finally!) given the freedom to make something cool. The costumes, makeup, effects, dialogue, characters, acting, and music testify to untapped, underrepresented resources for movies that don’t look or feel like everything else in theaters.

    73 out of 100 from me because of my first paragraph, but see it because of my second.

  8. Yet it looks and feels unlike anything in theaters, possibly ever.

    At first this took me a little by surprise, as it’s not one of the impressions of the film that comes to mind. But the more I think about it, the more I sympathize with this. I’m not sure if we’re thinking of this in the same way, but this is a Hollywood blockbuster movie that invests a significant amount of pride and glory in African-American. If the role of blacks and whites were reversed in our country, this might be a typical Hollywood blockbuster. I can’t think of another Hollywood blockbuster that puts African-Americans at the center of the film and celebrates them to the degree that this film does. This is one of the thing I liked most about the movie.

    I sort of agree with you about the story, but I like T’challa and his family and the Michael B. Jordan as Killmonger. I think the story and character development could have been better, especially if had the time of a TV series.

  9. Mute (2018)
    Dir. Duncan Jones
    48/100

    I really liked Moon and Source Code, so I was excited to see this, especially since I read that this was the film Jones really wanted to make. (In my experience this is not necessarily a good thing, but I always seem to forget this.)

    In an Bladerunner landscape, a mute, former-Amish bartender searches for his lover, a waitress that may have a sketchy past. It’s an interesting idea, and both of these characters and their love for each other were fairly compelling. Some of the villains in this weren’t very effective, especially the casting of Paul Rudd. I couldn’t really understand why the film spend the time it did on those characters.

  10. Not my real review, but last night I settled in to watch a DVD at home for the first time since the end of January. It’s been a crazy busy late winter for me.

    I saw Destin Daniel Cretton’s The Glass Castle (2017), which I moved to the top of my queue because somehow it slipped my notice that Cretton and Brie Larson had worked together again (he directed her in Short Term 12, which I was fond of).

    Critics pretty universally called it a mixed bag and I have to agree, although I’ll cut the director a little bit of slack where the critics didn’t. Larson, Woody Harrelson are really good in this, and Naomi Watts is maybe just a notch below but still solid. I can’t say I recommend it, but I wouldn’t steer anyone away from it, especially if they want to give some Hawaii love (or as in my case, hapa love) to the director. I’m probably giving it a 68 or 69 when I write my review.

    I’m eager to see Larson as Captain Marvel.

  11. Valerian and the City of a Thousand Planets (2016)
    Dir. Luc Besson
    58/100

    I heard bad things about this, which wasn’t hard to believe. But for the first third of the film was a quite good action-sci-fi film. There’s one point where the film takes a wrong turn, and then never really recovers from that point. The two leads are also meh, but they weren’t ruining the film, not in the beginning anyway.

    The visuals were and action set pieces were quite good early on. In terms of the former, it had a Heavy Metal feel that I liked.

  12. Ready Player One (2018)
    Dir. Steven Spielberg
    51/100

    After reading the novel, I was a little puzzled about the desire to make a film adaptation–at least not without some significant changes. Interestingly, the film makes the type of changes I had in mind, but ends up leaving me dissatisfied.

    Overall, the film felt flat, and fairly lifeless. Except for a few moments, even the visuals aren’t very interesting in my opinion.

    As is often the case, I’d recommend reading the book, at least before seeing the film.

  13. Columbus (2017)
    Dir. Kogonada
    73/100

    **
    Koganada, a pen name, which refers to a screenwriter for Ozu, has also made a film about Richard Linklater. Both details are apt because this film feels like a Linklater film that has an Ozu influence. Another loose comparison might be Lost in Translation, specifically with the nature of the relationship between the two leads played by John Cho and Haley Lu Richardson.

    As I alluded to, the film is a quiet, character-driven film–independent, but also accessible. The film takes place in Columbus, Ohio. Richardson’s character, Casey, is a fan of architecture, and Cho’s Jin, comes to Columbus to see his bed-laden father, a famous architecture critic. Both characters meet, walk, and talk–at first about architecture and then gradually about more personal matters.

    The writing and acting is solid in this for the most part, as if the cinematography.

  14. The Square (2017)
    Dir. Ruben Ostlund
    76/100

    I’m not really motivated to analyze this film, which is a shame, because I think it deserves the effort. This is a Swedish(?) film that revolves the director of a modern art museum. I almost want to say that there really isn’t one main story, but a series of sub-plots and sometimes skits–all of which touch on themes relating to modern art and social issues. To be more precise, the film skewers liberals and art lovers, exposing the hypocrisy and pretentiousness. While I found the critique hilarious (with special nod the acting of Claes Bang, who I really liked), there were almost several moments that were genuinely uncomfortable and disturbing.

  15. Beyond Skyline (2017)
    Dir. Liam O’Donnell
    Starring: Frank Grillo, etc.
    56/100

    Sci-fi action/thriller/horror (light on the latter) involving an alien invasion. It’s kind of a mess, specifically with improbable resolutions to tight situations. There are few good ideas in this, but I think it would need massive changes to turn into a good film.

    Grillo is an appealing lead.

  16. Columbus intrigues me. Might check it out.

    I’ve been on a slow project to watch films written by Mark Levin and Jennifer Flackett. They wrote Madeline (starring Frances McDormand), Wimbledon, Little Manhattan, Nim’s Island, and Journey to the Center of the Earth, and I really admire their work. Haven’t seen Wimbledon and Journey yet, but they’re up soon. I’ve had Nim’s Island on repeat for the past week or so (directors’ commentary and actors’ commentary), and it’s probably the weakest of the films I’ve seen. Still, even in that one, they’re very creative, and they find that really tough space where they neither condescend to kids nor make kids essentially little grownups.

    And even in such a seemingly safe and innocent story as Madeline, they work in a little bit of subversion. My kind of approach.

  17. I’d be surprised if you didn’t like Columbus, mildly at least.

    I don’t think I’ve heard of Levin and Flackett, although I’ve seen Wimbledon. (The one with Paul Bettany, right?)

  18. A Quiet Place (2018)
    Emily Blunt, John Krasinski, Millicent Simmonds, Noah Jupe. Directed by John Krasinski.

    If you dislike horror movies, as I do, you might still consider seeing A Quiet Place. People are calling it a horror flick, but there’s very little horror in it. There’s no gore, there’s less blood than in a typical episode of CSI, and there are only a few jump-scares. If you can handle The X-Files, you can handle this movie.

    Emily Blunt and John Krasinski are parents to three children in rural New York. Strange, blind creatures have pretty much destroyed normal civilization around the world. While they can’t see, they have superhuman hearing, so making noise of any kind is almost certain death. Those who survive have learned to live in silence.

    A Quiet Place is so shockingly quiet that audiences monitor their own snack-eating sounds, and if someone comes into the theater late, every footstep on the hard floor is an affront to everyone else’s experience. The interesting side-effect of all this silence is that the visuals become super-effective, especially in one scene where Millicent Simmonds, playing the couple’s deaf daughter, has a close encounter with one of the monsters.

    It is suspenseful as heck, and there’s one scene where I closed my eyes. Still, it’s worth the 90 minutes of tension and discomfort because it is so different from pretty much everything I’ve seen. Add a few themes of empowerment for women and you get a satisfying (if not enjoyable) movie-going experience.

    82 out of 100.
    8/10

  19. I’m kinda interested in seeing that, so I didn’t really read your review. I did see that you would recommend it even one doesn’t like horror movies, so that’s a positive sign. I also saw that the movie is really suspenseful, which is not a good sign. (My ability to cope with suspense has dropped dramatically over time.)

  20. Come Back to the Five and Dime, Jimmy Dean, Jimmy Dean (1982)
    Sandy Dennis, Cher, Karen Black, Sudie Bond, Kathy Bates, Mark Patton. Written by Ed Graczyk. Directed by Robert Altman.

    It’s September 30, 1975 in a small Texas town not far from where James Dean once filmed Giant, and it’s the twenty-year anniversary of Dean’s death in a car accident. The all-female James Dean fan club in this town reunites in the old Woolworth’s store where they used to meet. Some have been in regular contact, while others haven’t been seen in a very long time.

    It’s a great setup, and the title all by itself demands at least one viewing, no matter what the film is about.

    At first, it’s pretty impressive. The acting and actors are interesting, with Cher reminding you first that she’s far too talented for her smallish filmography, then Sandy Dennis and Kathy Bates sending you to IMDb to see what else they were in. Seriously, Altman does a really good job of framing the characters and actors in a way that really gets you involved.


    The narrative switches between 1975 and 1955, with Altman using a mirror and some camera tricks to indicate the time segues. At first it’s a neat effect, but it becomes tiresome about midway through. The entire film does the same thing. What starts as a bunch of interesting characters and impressive acting becomes a your-turn-my-turn exchange of revelations and overwrought delivery that might have played well on stage but is exhausting on screen. After the first ninety minutes, I just wanted it to end already.

    I’ll say one thing that surprised me was Mark Patton as Joe, a homosexual friend of the James Dean Disciples in 1955. Patton is the star of A Nightmare on Elm Street 2: Freddy’s Revenge, and the reason I was spurred to finally seeing this film. Patton is gay, and that second Freddy Krueger film has all kinds of homosexual subtext, and the actor’s career is a really interesting story. Turns out the guy’s a pretty good actor. At least in the first half of this movie.

    While I admire Cher enough to see just about anything she’s in, this is not the best example of her work. Or anyone else’s.

    48/100
    4/10

  21. 48? Wow, I’m surprised by that. I haven’t seen the film in about twenty years, but I remember liking it a lot more.

  22. Nim’s Island (2008)
    Abigail Breslin, Jodie Foster, Gerard Butler. Written by Mark Levin and Jennifer Flackett, based on the novel by Wendy Orr. Directed by Mark Levin and Jennifer Flackett.


    Nim is an eleven-year-old girl living alone with her father on a tiny, remote island in the Pacific. Her father Jack is a marine biologist searching for a new species of protozoa. Jack’s boat is hit by a huge storm while on a short expedition, and Nim is left to wonder what’s happened to him. With help from her pets on the island (a bearded dragon and a sea lion), she fends off an Australian tour company looking to turn her island into a resort, but when things get rough, she reaches out to her favorite author, an adventurer named Alex Rover, for help.

    What nobody knows except Rover’s publisher and assistant is that Alex Rover is actually Alexandra Rover (played wonderfully by Jodie Foster), a germophobic agoraphobe who hasn’t ventured outside her house in San Francisco for years. But heck: Nim is a little girl all alone on an island, so Alexandra screws her courage to the sticking place and ventures out to save her.


    This kids movie is too cutesy by about half, but this can be forgiven because of the filmmakers’ creativity and conscience in telling an interesting story about a tweener who’s neither a helpless baby nor a grownup in a kid’s body. Yes, she’s smart because she has been raised by a smart father, and yes she’s tough because she’s lived her whole life doing things for herself. But she’s also scared, not because she can’t take care of herself, but because where the heck is her father?

    Parents are unlikely to love the story as much as their kids love it, but they may (as I) find the storytelling creative and thoughtful. Gerard Butler as Jack plays two roles in a way that’s far from gimmicky. Rather, this casting decision holds the entire film together for each of its three principal characters. Other technical decisions, such as the way Nim immerses herself in the stories she reads, and a considered but fairly indistinguishable reliance on CGI make this almost a great movie.


    Where it falls short for me are where Levin and Flackett go to moviemaking shorthand in places where it’s senseless and unnecessary. I’m no vulcanologist, but I suspect the volcano on Nim’s island behaves in a decidely unrealistic way, which perhaps I wouldn’t mind so much if it weren’t a movie about a girl whose parents are scientists. And there is a scene at what is supposed to be the airport on Rarotonga that is straight out of movies from a less enlightened time, including chickens in bamboo cages and a gate attendant with a heavy Asian accent.

    I wouldn’t mind the Asian woman with the Asian accent, because if the gate attendants in Honolulu can be accented Asian women, why not the attendants in Rarotonga? By itself it doesn’t bother me, but combined with the other silly (and frankly uneducational and unhelpful) stereotype-preserving decisions in this section of the film, it feels like nothing more than a device to give the illusion of being somewhere foreign. Writers like Levin and Flackett are smart enough to have thought of a better way, and it’s the kind of thing they generally avoid in their films. In the directors’ commentary on the DVD, they even say right up front at the beginning of the scene, “This is not what the airport in Rarotonga looks like! It’s actually lovely.” A huge disappointment.


    One neat trick the directors employ is to let us see what the world looks and feels like to Alexandra, then to show us what it’s like to everyone else. Why not frame the silly exaggerated primitiveness of the Rarotonga airport as Alexandra’s perception, then show us what it really looks like?

    If it seems I’m going on at excessive length about one semi-insignificant portion of the film, it’s because it’s the most representative of a few craw-sticking flaws. I expect this from lesser artists. Levin and Flackett have already demonstrated that they are not lesser artists.

    Still, this is a film I would gladly watch with my kids, if they weren’t as imaginary as Alex Rover. Butler, Foster, and Breslin are perfectly cast, and there’s a commentary track on the DVD by Foster and Breslin that’s actually aimed at a young audience, with the actors talking about how much fun it was to make a movie, and some of the amazing things they learned about animals and islands during the film’s production. Another great idea.

    71/100 but could have been a lot higher.
    7/10

  23. The Glass Castle (2017)
    Brie Larson, Woody Harrelson, Naomi Watts. Written by Destin Daniel Cretton, Andrew Lanham, and Marti Noxon (based on the memoir by Jeannete Walls). Directed by Destin Daniel Cretton.

    I admired Destin Daniel Cretton’s Short Term 12, largely for its character-driven approach, realistic portrayal of life in a juvenile care home, and excellent acting by Brie Larson. Something about the director’s style appeals to me, and I’ve since become an even greater admirer of Larson, who won a Best Actress Oscar for her excellent performance in Room.

    The Glass Castle reunites Larson with Cretton, and it’s a good pairing. Larson is very good as Jeannette Walls, a twenty-something society columnist for a New York magazine. Told in flashback, her story of growing up in extreme poverty with an artist mother and alcoholic father is heartbreaking and somewhat inspiring. Jeannette and her three siblings understand that they don’t have money, but while they’re still very young, they seem to appreciate that they’re blessed in other ways.

    More than anything, Rex Walls (Woody Harrelson) cherishes his freedom. While he’s more than capable of earning an honest living, he and his wife Rose Mary (Naomi Watts) love being able to get into a car and go anywhere, whenever they want, and set up temporary homes wherever they can find some space. Sure, these moves are often spurred by mounting debts the family has no hope of repaying, but they do a good job of communicating to their kids that as long as they have the stars at night, each other all the time, and freedom from obligations, they’re pretty wealthy.

    It might have worked out, if Rex weren’t an alcoholic and a dreamer of impossible dreams. He’s a good man in the complicated way that most good men are, and he has demons his children only become aware of as they grow old enough to understand them. For many reasons, they’re willing to write him a pass, sort of, but there comes a point at which negligence becomes malice, and malice against children is abuse.

    This is really the story of how Jeannette—clearly her father’s favorite, at least as this story is told—grows through stages of relating to and understanding her father. I find it a satisfying arc, although whether you will find it satisfying probably depends on how strongly you condemn Rex. Many critics seem to believe that Rex’s offenses are too great for any kind of redemption, let alone the weakly granted redemption he’s given. Since the film is told through Jeannette’s eyes, I say there’s a place where maybe we don’t feel at all satisfied for Jeannette and her siblings but can accept that they’re satisfied themselves. This is their father, and what good will it do any of them not to forgive?

    This is not a great film, but the acting is solid. In addition to the leads, the two actresses who play eight-year-old Jeannette and eleven-year-old Jeannette (Chandler Head and Ella Anderson, respectively) are pretty wonderful. Larson and Harrelson do a very nice job of developing the daughter-father relationship so that the end feels like the right end, whether it’s what we wish for or not.

    This may be something of a spoiler, but viewers sensitive to themes of sexual abuse should probably stay away.

    73/100
    7/10

  24. A Nightmare on Elm Street 2: Freddy’s Revenge (1985)
    Mark Patton, Kim Myers, Robert Rusler, Clug Gulager, Hope Lange, Robert Englund. Written by David Caskin. Directed by Jack Sholder.

    On a budget of three million dollars, A Nightmare on Elm Street 2: Freddy’s Revenge made just shy of thirty million dollars at the box office. While that’s far from blockbuster status, its investors probably didn’t complain about that kind of return, which explains the nine films in this series. They don’t have to be gigantic: they just have to be big enough.

    And this sequel to Wes Craven’s A Nightmare on Elm Street is good enough. Good enough to sell an adequate number of tickets, good enough not to feel gypped, good enough to warrant a third film, and good enough for me to add the third film to my queue.

    Except for Robert Englund in the title role, none of the actors returns for this one, which is set in the same house in the same town. Five years after Nancy Thompson defeated Freddy Krueger, Jesse Walsh and his family move into the Thompsons’ old house. Jesse has nightmares of being stalked, of course, and he discovers the diary where Nancy recorded her dreams.

    Freddy possesses Jesse, so now real-world victims don’t have to dream about him in order for Freddy to do his damage. He takes control of Jesse’s wakeful body to kill Jesse’s gym teacher, schoolmates, and others, but he cannot kill Lisa, the girl Jesse has a crush on. Lisa realizes that Jesse’s fear gives Freddy his power.

    About midway through the movie’s eighty-five minutes, I was struck with a weird sense that this movie was more thoughtful than it needed to be. I expected something slightly less than its predecessor, since that was written by Wes Craven, a person whose name I know, while this was written by David Caskin, whom I had never heard of.

    Without Wikipedia’s breakdown, I don’t know that I would have identified the film’s homoerotic themes, but I definitely picked up the intimacy between Jesse and the other male characters in the film, especially his friend Ron and Freddy himself. I’m not saying A Nightmare on Elm Street 2 is The Great Gatsby for its deep explorations of the American identity or whatever, but even a little bit of thoughtfulness about subtext is more than I expected. It gives this movie a bit more to recommend it than just its slasher sensibilities.

    I said a bit.

    50/100
    5/10

  25. Breakin’ 2: Electric Boogaloo (1984)
    Lucinda Dickey, Adolfo “Shabba Doo” Quiñones, Michael “Boogaloo Shrimp” Chambers, Ice-T. Directed by Sam Firstenberg.

    “The evil developers are going to tear down our community youth center. We need a whole lot of money to buy the property, or this is going to become a mall!” “I know! Let’s put on a show to raise the funds!”

    I try not to judge a movie for recycling this plot, not because it’s not tired and cliche, but because I have to admit I’ve enjoyed it from time to time. Of course, I was fourteen, and the movies starred young Judy Garland and Mickey Rooney, but whatever. Maybe Breakin’ 2: Electric Boogaloo is someone else’s Babes on Broadway.

    At first this film is exactly what I expected, a lot of bad dialogue constructed to tie the dance numbers together. Only it’s worse, because the dance numbers are boring. But then, beginning about midway through, they get creative and interesting, including a fun number with dancing on the walls and ceiling, and a hospital number with brooms or mops (my memory’s hazy and it was very late at night when I watched this).

    I found myself kind of liking most of the central characters, too, which I cannot explain, because they pretty much come right out of the stock characters assembly kit. Shout-out to Sabrina Garcia, who plays a Spanish-speaking love interest and is maybe the prettiest actress I’ve seen in any hip hop film, and I’ve seen Rae Dawn Chong in Beat Street. The music is unmemorable but after the first couple of numbers, it’s not bad.

    This is supposed to be the good movie in the Breakin’ trilogy. Now I have to see how much worse the others could be.

    Seriously, not a bad watch.

    51/100
    5/10

  26. Avengers: Infinity War (2018)
    Robert Downey Jr., Chris Hemsworth, Mark Ruffalo, Chris Evans, Scarlett Johansson, Benedict Cumberbatch, Don Cheadle, Tom Holland, Chadwick Boseman, Paul Bettany, Elizabeth Olsen, Anthony Mackie, Sebastian Stan, Danai Gurira, Letitia Wright, Dave Bautista, Zoe Saldana, Josh Brolin, Chris Pratt, Tom Hiddleston, Idris Elba, Peter Dinklage, Benedict Wong, Pom Lementieff, Karen Gillan, Vin Diesel, Bradley Cooper, Gwyneth Paltrow, Benicio Del Toro, Josh Brolin.  Written by Christopher Markus and Stephen McFeely.  Directed by Anthony Russo and Joe Russo.

    However you may feel about comic book adaptations, there is something admirable about the concept and execution of films in the Marvel Cinematic Universe leading to Avengers: Inifinity War, and ostensibly concluding with its sequel in 2019. This is the nineteenth film in the series, with at least three to go in this cycle. Unlike other interminable series, which (with rare exception) at most plan ahead for two sequels, simply adding to the body with movie after movie according to the market’s demand, the MCU films have been driving toward this film seemingly since the beginning.

    Whether the next Avengers movie is meant to be a conclusion or not, this one certainly feels like a pulling together of all the threads toward a final something. Although of course I assume that’s just part of the pattern for most long-running comic books.

    Followers of the series are already aware of the Infinity Stones, MacGuffin devices containing unearthly power. Individually, they give their bearers amazing power. Combined, their power is insurmountable.

    Thanos is determined to bring them together so that he might alleviate the universe of its greatest ills. Overpopulation has led to all troubles everywhere, so Thanos hopes arbitrarily to wipe out half the living beings, a terrible solution, but a last resort where one is needed. And since it is the only cure for what ails the universe, Thanos of course must let nothing or nobody get in his way.

    The Avengers, the Guardians of the Galaxy, the citizens of Wakanda, Doctor Strange, and Spiderman try to get in his way.

    It’s a huge, far-flung plot involving a ridiculous number of important, charismatic characters with really only one villain, and it mostly works. It’s difficult to point to any one character and say, “That one didn’t get his or her fair share of screen time,” although at least three heroes are noticeably absent. I’m partial to Scarlet Witch and would have liked more of her, but everyone pretty much gets a nice, important part to play.

    I really like the score, too.

    I’ve heard criticism of the film’s pacing, but jumps in action from one set of heroes working on one part of the Infinity War to other sets of heroes working on their parts provide interesting scenery changes that pace the seemingly nonstop action rather well.  It’s a fun, engaging, cool (wait ‘til you see Thor’s weapon) movie, and much better than the first two Avengers films.

    78/100
    7/10

  27. Evil Genius (2018)
    Dir. Barbara Schroeder
    69/100

    **
    True crime documentary broken into four 50 minute sections. What’s distinctive about this film is the nature of the crime: a pizza delivery guy robs a bank wearing a collar bomb. He claims that someone put it on him at a pizza delivery, and if he doesn’t deliver the money in a certain amount of time the bomb will go off. If that appeals to you, I’d probably recommend the film.

    The film kept my attention, but for some reason I’m not fully satisfied, and I’m not sure why. I’m not as interested in these type of movie, so that must be part of it.

    ***
    One spoiler comment. The various interviewees frequently mention how smart individuals are, and the word “genius” is obviously used in the title. But those claims seem overstated. I’m not denying that the individuals are intelligence to some degree, but if they were really intelligent–especially on a genius level–would they really have tried to implement such a scheme? It’s so elaborate, and even if the plan worked, they would only have received several thousand dollars, far less than the $250,000 they seemed to want. A genius would not only get that money, but would choose a far less convoluted way of doing it. In some ways, it seems kinda a comical.

  28. Tully (2018)
    Charlize Theron, Mackenzie Davis, Ron Livingston, Mark Duplass. Written by Diablo Cody. Directed by Jason Reitman.

    Sometimes a movie must be reviewed for how it addresses big, important issues, and the more the reviewer knows about these issues, the more credible the review.

    I’m part of the intended audience who is completely unqualified to hold the film up against these big issues, so I cannot comment on how intelligently, fairly, accurately, or radically it faces them. But I am part of the intended audience, so I am qualified to respond to it as art, bringing what I bring — namely my maleness and my no-marriage-no-kids status.

    So this is how a middle-aged, never-married-never-had-kids man, knowing full well he will never relate to a huge chunk of the art’s purpose, receives Tully, a movie about a middle-aged woman dealing with post-childbirth life as a mother and wife.

    When a writer, director, and actor attempt to create something that doesn’t look or feel like everything else, it can be as wonderfully original and satisfying as Juno or as uneven as Young Adult. Tully is somewhere between them, much closer to Young Adult in edginess and mood.

    Charlize Theron is excellent as Marlo, a middle-aged mother of three dealing with the pressures of perceived good parenting, at times (and in retrospect) stunning. It’s too early in the year to say this, but she should be considered for a Best Actress Oscar at year’s end. She makes it easy for the other actors, although Mackenzie Davis as her “night nanny” Tully is really good too.

    Tully’s job is to take care of Marlo’s newborn at night, waking Marlo for feedings but otherwise leaving her to sleep while Tully takes care of changing the baby, cleaning up after the baby, and rocking the baby to sleep. The extra rest does wonders for Marlo, who suddenly has time and energy to do many of the good-mommy things she feels she’s neglected lately, like preparing family meals that don’t come out of the freezer.

    More than the extra rest, Tully provides companionship and understanding, an incredible source of sympathy Marlo has been lacking. Marlo finds a listening ear and wise counsel about taking care of herself, her family, and her husband, whose love is not questionable but whose contribution to running the household is. In one unforgettable scene, Tully asks Marlo to open up about her sex life, and Marlo is inspired to get things in the bedroom heated up again.

    Marlo needs rest and time, but she also needs help, and she needs to be healthy in mind and body. Tully makes it all possible, and Marlo’s reemergence is lovely to see.

    But the movie is about something else, something best left to the viewer to realize. I offer a trigger warning for anyone sensitive to issues of postpartum depression. If there’s any question, read a spoiler review, of which several can easily be found. If not, see it for yourself and watch a movie start off about one thing but then become something else.

    8/10
    80/100

  29. The Room (2003)
    Tommy Wiseau, Juliette Danielle, Greg Sestero, Phiip Haldiman, Carolyn Minnott, Robyn Paris. Written by Tommy Wiseau. Directed by Tommy Wiseau.

    Apparently, sometime in the past fifteen years without anyone’s consulting me, 2003’s The Room supplanted Plan 9 from Outer Space as the worst movie ever made. I didn’t even know this film existed until I saw the hype leading up to the release of James Franco’s 2017 The Disaster Artist.

    Yet descriptions could not be believed. I had to see it myself. And midway through my first viewing, all I could think was that while I was utterly fascinated at the amazingly bad movie playing before me, it was so bad that I couldn’t sit through all of it. I had to spread it out over three evenings.

    When you talk about how awful Plan 9 from Outer Space is, you can point to twenty things, and your listener will get it. Bella Lugosi died midway through shooting, so they replaced him with someone who didn’t look anything like Lugosi. Director Ed Wood solved this by having Lugosi walk around with his cape covering his face for the rest of the film. In one scene set in a graveyard, the gravestones wobble and topple over, revealing them to be the cardboard stand-up props they are. One woman screams and two different-voices come out of her mouth at the same time.

    The Room is so bizarrely, bafflingly bad that describing it doesn’t communicate how utterly bad it is. Take one awful, popular favorite scene. Main character Johnny (played by writer-director-producer Tommy Wiseau) walks into a flower shop, wearing sunglasses. He says, “Hi.” The woman behind the counter says, “Can I help you?” Tommy says, “Yeah, can I have a dozen red roses please?” The woman says, “Oh, hi Johnny. I didn’t know it was you. Here you go.” She hands him the roses, already wrapped in cellophane. “That’s me,” he replies in a friendly, sing-song voice, and “How much is it?” “It’ll be eighteen dollars,” she replies before he’s finished asking the question. “Here you go. Keep the change,” says Johnny before the woman finishes telling him the price, followed by “Hi doggie,” as he pats the head of a bulldog sitting on the counter. “You’re my favorite customer,” says the woman. Johnny says, “Thanks a lot,” and leaves.

    See? It doesn’t sound very interesting, but neither does it sound really bad, unless you’re seeing it for maybe the second or third time, in context. You don’t realize that “Oh, hi ______” is a recurring line popping up in completely arbitrary places, or that it’s absurd for the woman at the flower shop not to recognize her favorite customer when nobody on the planet could possibly be mistaken for Johnny, except Tommy Wiseau.

    And yeah. The whole movie is pretty much just like that.

    For the uninitiated, a quick breakdown. Tommy Wiseau wrote, starred in, directed, and produced this film by himself, paying the six-million-dollar production costs. Wiseau doesn’t tell anyone (anyone!) where he’s from, how old he is, or where he acquired his wealth, and he has a bizarre accent that sounds vaguely eastern European, but you probably wouldn’t put money on it. To hype the film, Wiseau rented a billboard for $5000 per month, and kept it there for five years despite the film playing in only one theater for only two weeks, bringing in $1800 at the box office.

    A film critic saw it during its original run and became an instant fan. Word of mouth turned it into a midnight movie hit at one theater in Los Angeles, where it played once a month at midnight for eight years, often selling out. Among the movie’s fans are Paul Rudd, David Cross, Will Arnett, Patton Oswalt, Seth Rogen, Kristen Bell, James Franco, and Dave Franco. The Francos star together in The Disaster Artist, a film about The Room directed by James.

    I’ve seen the film three times. Each time it was more charming and more watchable than the previous, but seriously, I can’t just sit and watch it all the way through. I can have it on while I get some work done, while I make dinner, or while I’m goofing off online. It continues to be a horrible, terrible movie with only two things to recommend it on its own merit (and without irony).

    The female lead, Juliette Danielle, puts herself fully into a role that she must have known was ridiculous. There is no self-awareness and no wink at the camera, something I have to say I admire. She’s also pretty not in a Hollywood way, but in a prettiest-barista-at-the-cafe way, the kind of pretty movies should make more of an effort to cast because it’s so much closer to real life. Supporting actress Robyn Paris comes across as the only real actor in the film, someone I would seriously think of casting if I ever made a movie.

    Holy cow. I have to say this is the worst movie I’ve ever seen, but I kind of like it, and for that reason I can’t give it the lowest score.  I’d rather watch ten hours of The Room than a single minute of Event Horizon.

    2/10
    25/100

    1. I’ve seen the film three times.

      Wait, to be clear, you saw the movie in its entirety three separate times, or is the above in reference to three attempts it took to complete one viewing of the film?

      I have no desire to see this, but I found this review, like others about really bad films, strangely compelling.

  30. I watched it attentively once across three nights. Then I watched it semi-atttentively twice more in one sitting each a week or so later.

    1. What possessed you to watch it two more times? Would you say it’s a good-bad movie? (Actually, I don’t get that impression from your review.)

      1. It’s the worst movie I’ve ever seen.

        I watched it twice more because I wasn’t watching it to be entertained. I was watching it to understand its appeal to those who say it’s their favorite movie. People celebrate certain things in the film that I never noticed the first time through, like the strange, framed photo of a spoon on a living room end table. Or a weird lump that shows up on a character’s neck, something the actor says she’s tried to duplicate but can neither explain nor do again.

        I also watched it twice more because I saw The Disaster Artist after my first viewing, so the James Franco film gave me a bit of insight into some of the scenes, which I wanted to see again now that I had historical context.

        People say it’s the best worst movie ever. I might go that far, but it’s sooooo bad that I don’t know if I can give it any credit for being good-bad.

        1. People celebrate certain things in the film that I never noticed the first time through, like the strange, framed photo of a spoon on a living room end table. Or a weird lump that shows up on a character’s neck, something the actor says she’s tried to duplicate but can neither explain nor do again.

          That is intriguing, and I never heard that before. So did you gain insight into why those things were celebrated?

  31. Lady Bird (2017)
    Dir. Greta Gerwig
    77/100

    I thought this was a solid film, and I laughed quite a bit and got emotional in some of the scenes. What stood out for me were the characters and performances, Ronan first and Laurie Metcalf second. (I had no idea Metcalf was the mother.) Ronan brought a vitality, subtle quirkiness and winning quality to the character that I liked. I also liked the way Gerwig handled the relationship between Lady Bird and her mother. Gerwig did a good job directing this, and I’m interested in seeing her future releases.

  32. You didn’t know Laurie Metcalf’s character was Lady Bird’s mom?

    Saoirse Ronan is a really good actress. You might consider changing your mind about seeing Brooklyn if she impressed you.

    1. I didn’t know the Laurie Metcalf was the actor who played the mother. She just looked totally different from who she looked in Roseanne.

      1. Oh, okay. Yeah. She’s played a recurring character on The Big Bang Theory so it wasn’t that much of a stretch from that character.

  33. Words and Pictures (2013)
    Dir. Fred Schepisi
    Starring: Clive Owen, Juliet Binoche, etc.
    61/100

    **
    The two leads and the premise–a romance, drama involving an English teacher (Owen) and an art teacher (Binoche) getting to a school wide battle involving arts versus words–made me interested in seeing this. However, I had never really heard of this film, and it seemed like a straight to video/streaming movie. Such movies can be hit-or-miss, often the latter. Specifically, I find films like this have an interesting script that attracts A-list actors, but some significant flaws in the script or maybe direction really hurt the film.

    In a way, I think that’s what happened here. I’ll say more in the next section.

    ***
    Here’s the major problem I had with the film. The alcoholism and other problematic aspects of Owen’s character (Jack Marcus) seemed unnecessary. I understand the plot point involving his Jack’s job being in jeopardy as a way to explain the reason Jack’s motivated to wage this war between words and pictures, but they expand on Jack’s foibles, allowing to steer the plot in specific directions that felt unnecessary. For example, the filmmakers could have thought of other reasons Jacks job was in jeopardy. Maybe he lost the spark of teaching, and the arrival of the new art teacher reignited that spark–first starting with something personal between them, leading to this competitive expression in the school setting, and then ultimately leading to romance. Maybe that’s predictable, but if executed well, I think it would have been satisfying. (The story/plot wasn’t all that original or unpredictable.)

    Having said that, I’m not sure Owen would have made this different story-line. He seemed well-suited for this broken down, flawed individual, but I don’t know if he had the best chemistry with Binoche.

    By the way, some of the ideas expressed about art and literature appealed to me, and kept my interest in the film.

  34. Deadpool 2 (2018)
    Ryan Reynolds, Josh Brolin, Morena Baccarin, Julian Dennison, Zazie Beetz, T.J. Miller. Written by Rhett Reese, Paul Wernick, and Ryan Reynolds. Directed by David Leitch.

    The problem with an unexpectedly good movie like Deadpool is that it creates fair but lofty kinds of expectation for its sequel. The first Ice Age and Shrek films did the same thing, and their follow-ups suffered for it.

    It isn’t that Deadpool 2 is bad. It’s just positioned to deliver more of the same: more cleverness, more irreverence, more vulgarity, more compassion for its main character, and more unexpectedness. Either that or it might have found new ways to be equally all these things. It’s too much to ask, and this sequel isn’t up to it.

    It’s still clever, irreverent, vulgar, compassionate toward its main character. It’s just not unexpected, and it’s not enough.

    Even the structure of the film is pretty much the same. This is no origin story, but the movie opens in medias res, then flashes back, works its way forward and continues to the end. I guess if a thing works, you just do it again.

    Colossus and Negasonic Teenage Warhead return, and they are joined by an interesting menagerie of mutants (including a few who’ve appeared in X-Men films) as Wade Wilson attempts to help a mutant boy manage his anger before he turns evil. It’s best not to overthink it and just go along for the ride, which is fun, funny, entertaining, and even charming. Just not as much as the first movie.

    7/10
    68/100

  35. Solo: A Star Wars Story (2018)
    Alden Ehrenreich, Woody Harrelson, Emilia Clarke, Donald Glover, Thandie Newton, Phoebe Waller-Bridge, Joonas Suotamo, Paul Bettany.

    It’s another standalone Star Wars story, and after Rogue One I have to say I was amped to see it. Alden Ehrenreich is a terrific actor, and his “Would that it were so simple” dialogue with Ralph Fiennes in Hail, Caesar! is one of the most laugh-aloud funny scenes I’ve seen in years, so nobody needed to persuade me to buy him as Solo. I was already bought.

    Solo: A Star Wars Story traces Han Solo’s early life, beginning with an escape from some kind of child labor camp (or something!) and ending somewhere vaguely familiar but nonspecific in our knowledge of the Star Wars universe. As it unfolds, we see the development of Han’s story in the years before we meet him in Episode IV.

    It’s a standalone movie, but of course it’s a standalone movie about a beloved character. The writers, actors, and director have to walk a delicate line between just telling a good story and being true to both canon and spirit, and they walk it well. Although some of my female friends disagree, Ehrenreich has the swagger and cunning of the Han Solo we know. If he’s not as ruggedly handsome or seductive, he shows signs of becoming that guy. We should expect him to be a bit raw and even innocent, two words we’d never use in describing the character as played by Harrison Ford. Young Han Solo has seen things, but not that many things.

    The other major, less doubtful question is whether Donald Glover could pull off Lando Calrissian. I feel very confident in assessing his performance as better than anyone could have hoped. He’s not only perfect, he’s somehow better than that, so charismatic, morally ambiguous, and charming that he almost steals the movie from Ehrenreich.

    Add Woody Harrelson, a new droid named L3-37, a love interest named Qi’ra, and of course Chewbacca, and you have a solid cast for what should be the first movie in a trilogy. Honestly, it’s a stronger set of actors than we thought we had after episodes IV and I, and if the story is not quite as good as some of the best in the series, it can be excused for spending more time on character development than plot.

    This is not to suggest the plot is terrible. It’s decent space western stuff with unanswered questions enough to keep the audience guessing as it awaits word on a sequel. I found enough to chew on that I waited only a week before getting back to the theater to see it again. I’m fully down with this Solo, this Calrissian, and this nested series. I’ve got a good feeling about this.

    8/10
    81/100

  36. Fever Pitch (2005)
    Drew Barrymore, Jimmy Fallon, Ione Skye. Written by Lowell Ganz and Babaloo Mandel. Directed by Peter Farrelly and Bobby Farrelly.

    It’s frustrating when a movie has the right pieces, a good concept, well-imagined characters, and a lazy script. Bill Simmons, perhaps America’s most famous Red Sox fan, has famously said he hates Fever Pitch because Ben, the main character played by Jimmy Fallon, does something near the end that no Red Sox fan would ever do.

    Simmons misses the point, because knowing that no Red Sox fan would ever do what Ben does is what supposedly makes his actions reflective of the change of heart he experiences, which of course results in our happily ever after. If this were a sports movie, perhaps Simmons would have a good point, but even he says that this is no baseball movie. This, he insists, is a chick flick.

    I’ll see Simmons’s insistance and raise him one more: not only is this not a baseball movie, but neither is it a romantic comedy. Oh, it wants to be a romantic comedy, but Ben’s transformation is so lazily handled that it’s more magic than romance. It tries to be a romantic comedy, but it avoids the messiness of two people working through something real and complicated, leaving us instead with an eye-opening moment for Lindsey, the main character played by Drew Barrymore.

    Perhaps the writers think they’re doing something clever by focusing the pit-of-despair moments on Ben, but Ben is mostly the culprit here. Yes, we should see him wallow, but what’s Lindsey going through while it’s happening? We don’t see that she’s miserable, lonely, stuck with some a-hole of a new guy, or in any way struggling with the tension central to the movie’s plot. How does a relationship work out when one person is married to her work and the other is married to a baseball team?

    “You have always loved the Red Sox,” says one character to Ben, “but have the Red Sox ever loved you back?” It’s wisdom, but it’s not the kind of wisdom that should open up the clouds so sunbeams can fall only on Ben, because we’ve already seen what Ben gets out of his fandom: some really good stuff, stuff that Lindsey knows is important.

    The film avoids dealing with this conflict, and while I can totally be here for two people saying, “We have a huge problem but we love each other enough to deal with it,” why not deal with it in the movie? In even a bad romantic comedy, some kind of relationship figuring-out should happen, but we get none of it. It’s a real shame, because the film does a really, really good job of setting up and executing Lindsey’s heartbreak. Yet we get nothing of her recovery: it’s all just magic, and this is why Fever Pitch is neither baseball film nor romantic comedy, but romance flick of the annoying kind.

    Ben is a high-school teacher. Lindsey is an executive of some undefined, generic sort. They are adorable together. Early scenes where they get to know each other make you think you’re seeing a very good film. In the first two-thirds of the film, I love just about every scene they’re in together and dislike almost every scene where they’re with their respective groups of friends. But this is winter Ben. Summer Ben is a different creature, which he is honest about just before summer Ben awakens from hibernation.

    So far so good! This could work! At first, it does. Then the level of Ben’s fanaticism really does become a problem, as it should, and the relationship believably comes crashing down until it’s rock bottom for Ben and who knows what for Lindsey?

    If a movie has a bad setup but a great finish, you can split the difference and give it an average rating. If it goes the other way, with a great setup and terrible finish, you have to slide it toward the neg. There’s a reason Reggie Jackson was Mr. October, and there’s a reason George Steinbrenner called Dave Winfield Mr. May. Fever Pitch is no Reggie Jackson.

    4/10
    46/100

  37. The Pitcher and the Pin-Up (2003)
    Drew Johnson, Corinna Harney. Written by Drew Johnson and David A. Burr. Directed by Drew Johnson.

    Twelve minutes into The Pitcher and the Pin-Up (originally released as The Road Home), I said on social media, “This may be the worst movie I’ve ever seen.”

    My feelings didn’t change through the first half, but there’s some college baseball action in the middle that doesn’t suck. The acting doesn’t suck, the editing doesn’t suck, the lighting and sound don’t suck, and the music doesn’t suck. The only thing that sucks is the writing, and the writing reeeeeeeally sucks.

    The story isn’t just loaded with cliché; it’s an uninterrupted string of clichés from beginning to end. I recently declared The Room the worst movie I’ve ever seen, but at least The Room is packed with stuff you’ve never seen before. I’d much rather watch The Room again. You might have to pay me to spend another evening with The Pitcher and the Pin-Up.

    Danny and Melissa are childhood friends who clearly love each other but act like they don’t. They drift apart when one goes to college on a baseball scholarship while the other poses nude for a magazine, hoping it will launch a modeling career, although what she really wants to be is a poet. Someone plays in the College World Series. Someone marries a jerk. They get closer; they grow apart. Life is rather cruel to both, but in their brokenness they discover they have always loved each other.

    Worst baseball movie I’ve ever seen, and I’ve seen The Bad News Bears Go to Japan.

    2/10
    27/100

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *