Tag Archives: adaptation

Our Kind of Traitor

[3.5 stars]

Most John le Carré adaptations, like A Most Wanted Man or even The Night Manager, are slow, intense burns, usually from the perspective of the criminal or an abandoned spy. Out Kind of Traitor, however, is from the perspective of a basically normal couple, Ewan McGregor (T2: Trainspotting) and Naomi Watts (Rampage), who get caught up in a hot mess…due to a criminal and an abandoned spy. OK, some things don’t change.

Stellan Skarsgård (Cinderella) puts together a delightfully over-the-top Russian mobster that becomes the pivot for the tale. He manages to swing between affable and homicidal without blinking, but remains sympathetic throughout. Even Damian Lewis (Billions), as a disgraced and desperate MI-6 agent, manages to create an understandable, if often despicable human being.

However Hossein Amin’s (The Snowman) script and Susanna White’s (Bleak House) direction manage to keep it as a suspense drama while inching it along with more an action-film pace. The story is unrelenting in its tension, which starts with something marital and quickly expands to something more deadly.

Is it perfect? No. There are some foolish errors in the script (can we talk cell phones, procedures, and monologuing?) but it still works rather well and will keep you guessing as to whether this will end as a triumph or a tragedy. If you enjoy tight spy tales, this is one you should have in your list.

Our Kind of Traitor

Ant-Man and the Wasp

[4 stars]

After the intensity of Avengers: Infinity War, Ant-Man and the Wasp is a welcome romp. Of course, the big question going into this latest Marvel Phase III movie was where it was going to fit with Avengers: Infinity War. Would we get answers? Would we get hints? So let’s get it out of the way: this tale takes place between Civil War and Infinity War. The logic to keep them all separate from the global goings-on is a bit tortured and led, comedy-forward, by Randall Park (The Hollars). It takes a bit to piece together the situation, but director Peyton Reed (Ant-Man) returns to nicely expand the world of this lesser-known and slightly weird character and fill us in.

For instance, we get a lot more on Michael Douglas’s (Unlocked) Pym, and it is far from complimentary. Evangeline Lilly (The Hobbit: The Battle of the Five Armies) also gets to kick a lot more butt and drive a lot more story. Even the comic trio led by Michael Peña (Collateral Beauty) gets to move on to some new situations, though their humor and characters are more or less the same.

Some of the better aspects of casting were the addition of Michelle Pfeiffer (Murder on the Orient Express) and Hannah John-Kamen (Ready Player One), who bring some welcome female strength and some interesting characters to the MCU. Laurence Fishburne (Passengers) also has a few nice moments and an important role to play.

Interestingly, Paul Rudd (Mute) is more a passenger in this installment. It isn’t that he doesn’t do a lot, but his character doesn’t really expand…he is more the foil for everyone else, even his screen-daughter Abby Ryder Fortson. He’s a solid foil, but don’t expect a lot of character growth.

The story of Ant-Man and Wasp is somewhat expected based on the first movie, but the use of the technology has taken some inventive and considered leaps. The fights, in particular, really think through the possibilities and have great fun using it.

As a summer snack while we wait for more on Infinity War and as a set-up for yet more tales and more characters, this is great fun if still not the strongest character line in the MCU. Of course, there is a tag (or two). Stay for them if you want to know more.

[Sidenote: This is the first film (or at least major film) where I’ve seen the San Francisco skyline redefined by the Salesforce Tower. For decades, the Golden Gate Bridge, Fisherman’s Warf, and the Transamerica Building were the indicators for the city. With Ant-Man and the Wasp, the establishing shots focused on the skyline’s new tower. It isn’t often a city gets redefined; just interesting to note.]

Ant-Man and the Wasp

I Kill Giants

[3 stars]

First to give this movie its props: it is almost an entirely female cast; men are, at best, incidental. And in the lead, teen actor Madison Wolfe (Zoo) dominates I Kill Giants with unexpected strength through most of the film. She assails assumptions and delivers someone very different from what you expect when the film opens.

Wolfe is assisted nicely by Zoe Saldana (The Terminal, Avengers: Infinity Warand Sydney Wade (Una). Supporting bits by Noel Clarke (Mute) and Imogen Poots (The Look of Love) help fill out the world with some nice brush strokes.

However, what starts strong and interesting loses steam as the final third of the story opens up. Saldana’s character, whose training is suspect from the outset, loses credibility quickly and Wolfe’s steadfast efforts wilt too rapidly under pressure. In other words, the ending is rushed and the world a little too under-researched to maintain full believability.

As a first feature, Anders Walter controls a rather complex challenge presented by Joe Kelly and JM Ken Niimura’s original graphic novel and their self-adapted script. He manages some very nice blending of real world and fantasy and slowly reveals the potential truths under events without denying the fantastical.

It is impossible not to compare it as a riff on A Monster Calls which navigates similar ground from similar source material. Monster suffers some of the same issues, though navigates to the end more completely and satisfyingly for me. But each of these movies has their charm, message, and unique flavor. And both are emotionally effective, even with the issues they run into trying to maintain a positive message in the face of tragic circumstances and issues. It may not have been everything I hoped for when it started, but I wasn’t sorry to have spent time in its world and getting to see Wolfe’s and Walter’s early efforts.

I Kill Giants

Double Lover (L’amant double)

[3 stars]

Writer/director François Ozon (Potiche) has created a highly tense, psychological drama delivered with deft visual and editing craft. The result is something like The Square meets Dead Ringers by way of Tully…maybe even a dash of Antichrist or mother! with an echo of Blue Velvet thrown in.  How’s that for a heady cocktail? Double Lover is full of incredible visual shots, with some expected elements that skirt horror, and with an unsure foundation of reality. Basically, this is not an easy movie to watch without squirming quite a bit as it unfolds.

The entire film is held in the capable hands of the young Marine Vacth (Young and Beautiful). From the outset, she is a complex and vulnerable woman in search of answers, but also with a poor sense of boundaries and choices. She is literally and figuratively laid open to us. Opposite her, Jérémie Renier (Saint Laurent) provides balance and reflection (an ongoing theme) as they battle and regroup emotionally and physically. The movie is really these two characters locked in a tarantella that is as fascinating as it is disturbing. There is also a small, but nice role for Jacqueline Bisset (Dancing on the Edge).

Ozon admits this is “freely adapted” from a Joyce Carol Oates tale. Not having read the short story I can’t say how freely, but I suspect it isn’t very true to that narrative. Unfortunately for Ozon, it also is rather violent toward women, making it fairly tone-deaf for the times. The intent is certainly more complex than that simple statement, but it will make many too uncomfortable to sit through the story to understand the action. I also think that the film is about 20-30 minutes too long to support its intent…at least for me. Some compression in the narrative might have improved the impact and pacing.

Ozon is no stranger to complex relationships, dark subjects, raw sexuality, and strong women. He is a very capable filmmaker with visual flare and little fear. This film struggles a bit to find a satisfying balance between the purposefully provocative and the honestly emotional. That is part of the point, but it will leave a percentage of the audience angry. This is especially true because of how long it takes to pay off the setup. This is a film for a night you feel patient and want to be challenged.

Double Lover

Robinson Crusoe on Mars

[3 stars]

50 years before The Martian, this piece of survival adventure was brought to screen by director and special effects great Byron Haskin (War of the Worlds). But where The Martian was all about sciencing the hell of out of stuff, Robinson Crusoe is more like Cast Away, surviving on luck, happenstance, and a serious dose of colonial mentality. OK, not all of that is Cast Away, I was referring mostly to the surviving parts.

While Crusoe won’t win any science, or even acting awards, there is something compelling in its portrayal, especially given when it was made. Paul Mantee must solve challenge after challenge to survive on Mars after being stranded. You’d be forgiven thinking the lead for this tale was going to be Adam West as he is much more recognizable in the current times thanks to Batman and Family Guy. In addition to being a familiar face, for some reason he also dominates the opening of the film which is weird structurally.

Given the title, it should be no surprise that Friday shows up in the guise of Victor Lundin. He, along with the surviving monkey who, for some reason got to take a trip to Mars with Mantee and West for experiments, fight the elements and unseen enemies to make it to a rather abrupt and unlikely conclusion. Friday’s role is subtle, pushing back against some of the colonialism in Mantee and the audience in quiet ways, but never really rising above the noble savage in the script.

So why spend time with this you ask? Well first, the Criterion restoration is pretty incredible; the visuals are crisp and clean, though, admittedly, some of the sound levels are a bit loud. The story itself is universal, in terms of survival against the elements and the unknown. And, perhaps because of the highly clinical response to the dangers, the result is less melodramatic and more a fascinating puzzle. Certainly to modern audiences aspects of the discoveries and solutions are laughable, but this film was made after we’d barely gotten into orbit and not long after the Cuban Missile Crisis. We really didn’t know much about Mars at the time, though more than the script might suggest, and we were deep into the Cold War. While it is admittedly more a curio than a great film, the experience is a fascinating look back to a time not all that long ago and, honestly, not a bad evening for popcorn.

Robinson Crusoe on Mars

Jurassic World: Fallen Kingdom

[3-ish stars]

Ok, Fallen Kingdom’s prequel, Jurassic World, was no great piece of cinema, despite its ridiculously high box-office gross. This sequel, however, made it look like Pulitzer material in many ways. Honestly, I’m fine with escapist silliness when it is done well, but I don’t like having my intelligence insulted.

There is exactly one adult, thoughtful moment in this entire film. It comes near the end and it is a good one too. The moment, and its resolution, actually reflect the core of the story that is buried in the bones of this popcorn trifle. The rest of the action and plot are predictable and, frankly, frustrating. Evil people are evil. Good people are good. Old men are foolish. Dinosaurs with big eyes are cute. Humans are greedy. Dinosaurs with big teeth are… well, you get the idea. You know what you’re walking into; there are no shades of gray, it is all black and white which leaves no room for any real lasting or surprising emotions or experience.

I will grant director J.A. Bayona (A Monster Calls) one thing: he kept the slaughter on screen to a minimum, though there is no shortage of comeuppance by the final credits. But Fallen Kingdom is merely a bridge to the third movie that Universal really wanted to make, which is hinted at in the tag after the credits. They realized that leap would have been too much to do straight from the end of the previous movie, so they made a nod at taking the time to tell it right. Unfortunately Trevorrow and Connolly’s follow-up script to their previous is even more rife with time, science, and character problems. Oh, let’s call it what it is: generally bad writing.

Will most people care? Probably not. They haven’t in previous installments, which were no better at times (including going all the way back to the beginning). It is a visual romp and the effects are, as always, pretty astounding. If you must see it, see it on a big screen and maybe even 3D to get the most you can out of the amusement park ride it is. In traditional 2D the fact that it is aimed squarely at pre-teens is unavoidable.

I expect more from my entertainment. Even when I want to turn my brain off it needs to be occupied rather than irritated to enjoy itself. I can suspend disbelief as long as things are consistent, honest, and marginally believable. Fallen Kingdom came close to those requirements, but, at least for me, missed just enough to leave me less entertained and more annoyed. As they say, your mileage may vary (and probably will).

Jurassic World: Fallen Kingdom

The City & The City

[3 stars]

Much like the title and conceit of the story, I had two simultaneous reactions to this story. First, I was awed watching the impossible being brought to screen. At the same time I was led down a path of disappointment in support of the purpose and the plot.

I’ll come back to that, but be assured there is a great ride for a long part of the series. A good part of that success goes to David Morrissey (Extant, Doctor Who). He is subtle but intense in his role, which is highly flavored with an East European flare. Mandeep Dhillon (Whitechapel), as his sidekick, is energizing and entertaining and far from superfluous. Maria Schrader (Fortitude), as another associate, brings a very different type of intensity to help it all along. And Lara Pulver (Electric Dreams) is a great Macguffin for the tale, slowly peeling back layers and history for Morrissey. And that’s just a sampling of the characters. You may have  noticed that despite the male lead, this story is dominated by strong women. In smaller, pivotal roles, Christian Camargo (Europa Report) and Danny Webb (A Little Chaos) are a bit less believable, but still serve their purposes.

Now, back to the plot. The first three episodes of the four installment series are brilliant and engaging. The combination of writing, directing, and cinematography walk you through a challenging set of ideas in a convoluted world. But in the fourth episode, after a promising start, it all falls apart into either an odd political polemic or disappointing bit of naturalism. I haven’t read China Miéville’s book of the same name yet, so can’t speak as to whether it follows the source closely, but I can believe it does; the flavor of the ending matches Miéville’s sensibilities.

But here’s the thing about The City & The City, you’ll get to the end and, probably, be annoyed. But you will keep thinking about this show and its  points and implications. In fact, it may not even land at first, but will keep poking at your brain demanding to be acknowledged; the metaphors are incredibly powerful. However, that doesn’t make it satisfying, only poignant. I think that it would have done better as an episode in an anthology series or a one-shot film rather than a four-part series that seems to lead in one direction only to veer off into another. Forewarned, it is likely a better experience than going in blind. So take this as your heads-up and then make time for the series, it really is worth it just for the brilliant execution of the near-impossible by director Tom Shankland (The Fades) and writer Tony Grisoni .

The Mountain Between Us

[3 stars]

Two great actors and an indefatigable dog make this a hard movie not to like. Kate Winslet (Wonder Wheel) and Idris Elba (Molly’s Game) make an interesting pair, in acting chops and romantically. The story goes from the mundane to the extreme quickly, though some of the character secrets are held back more by force than logic. Small parts by Beau Bridges (Bloodline) and Dermot Mulroney (Sleepless) help round out the tale…and, of course, the aforementioned dog.

The script is a departure for Chris Weitz (About a Boy, Cinderella, Rogue One) who is more often on the light fantasy side of things. But he was balanced by J. Mills Goodloe (Age of Adaline, Pride) who tends to stick closer to romance and more real-world relationships. But it is director Hany Abu-Assad, whose pension for depicting desire in the midst of adversity, who takes it all over the finish line.

The survival tale is a good one, and relatively credible. But, in reality, this is more a long metaphor for love and relationships…and on that level it gets a little strained, however on the mark it may be. And I get the sense the dog’s story got lost or his import somehow drained out on the cutting room floor. In the final cut, he is entertaining, but superfluous other than as additional color. Both of these aspects lower the final assessment of the movie for me, despite the successful building of the delicate relationship and aftermath of the adventure.

All that said, the scenery is gorgeous. The tension and dangers palpable. And the interplay is well done. The movie is worth your time when you’re in the mood for either a story of survival or of relationships forged from shared experiences and needs. The tight focus on the two main characters for the majority of the film is intense; it is rare you get to see that kind of talent with little distraction around it. But do bring a blanket…watching all that snow and ice really gets to your bones.

The Mountain Between Us

Solo: A Star Wars Story

[3 stars]

Solo marks the first attempt at a really new direction for Star Wars since the end of the first trilogy. Episodes 1-3 and 7-9 are all echos of of 4-6…a bit by design and a lot by laziness and inability to write good stories. The fact that this story overlaps with the worst of the triple trilogy and dovetails into that morass is a different matter.

There is also a lot of cultural weight pressing down on these characters. Solo and Chewy are two of most recognizable and beloved of the many movies. Alden Ehrenreich (Hail, Caesar!) had huge shoes to fill…and his feet are almost the right size, but not quite. He doesn’t have the same charisma nor the acting ability to help me see Harrison Ford the way that, say, Josh Brolin did for Tommy Lee Jones in MIB III or the entire cast of Star Trek did for that prequel. Donald Glover (Spider-Man: Homecoming) came a bit closer for Lando, but there was more leeway there, even if the script made him a bit more craven than swashbuckling. Also, all that talk of pan-sexuality for Lando in this incarnation is utter bull.

The real standouts in this story are Emilia Clarke (Me Before You, Game of Thrones), Paul Bettany (Avengers: Infinity War, Transcendance), and the very unexpected scene-stealing showing by Phoebe Waller-Bridge (Flea Bag, Goodbye Christopher Robin). The three new characters they brought actually had some depth and interest. OK mostly that was only Clarke. Bettany was interesting, but not very deep…bit more of a cookie-cutter psycho. And Waller-Bridge was quite amusing, but not with a lot of impact, despite the plot attempts to elevate her. Woody Harrelson (Three Billboards Outside Ebbing, Missouri) was not bad, but again, just didn’t really rise above what you’d expect in this adventure. Jon Favreau’s (Spider-Man: Homecoming) and Thandie Newton’s (Westworld) characters also stood out and had promise, but the story never did anything with them.

The real issue with this film is two fold. First, the script by the father/son Kasdan duo is predictable and without any risk whatsoever. Second, Ron Howard’s (Inferno) directing is just empty. That Howard came late to this project and still managed to save its release is impressive, especially having reshot more than 70% of the film after his arrival. But the film is flat. There are no great highs, though there are fun and funny moments. There are no great surprises, though there are one or two surprising moments. Even the music avoids the emotional touchstone of the series until the very end. I actually think that last bit could have been a good thing since it provides some breathing room for what is set to become a new branch of the canon. But no one was clapping or excited at the end in my theater. I’ve never seen that at a Star Wars film. Even Rogue One, the only other standalone to date, had chatter and at least light applause as the credits rolled.

So here’s what you get for your ticket. Huge effects. Beautiful scenery. Some interesting background. A couple of new characters. Some potentially classically comic moments. Some answers to some questions. Two and a half hours of distraction. Worth it on the big screen? Yes. Good as a movie? Eh. I admit I am not a rabid fan any longer (Episodes 1-3 took care of that), but I was willing to be won back. Apparently I left the theater un-wooed, but not entirely un-entertained. I just wasn’t wow’ed the way I wanted to be or certainly expected after the Avengers summer kickoff.

Solo: A Star Wars Story

Deadpool 2

[4.5 stars]

Despite having one of the best posters and some of the worst cover art (see below) Deadpool 2 is as funny as the first, if not quite as surprising now that we know the shtick. In fact, it might have the highest ratio of referential jokes per minute ever (I’d love to see a counter on the disc when it is released akin to the original Taken’s body count meter).

Ryan Reynolds (The Hitman’s Bodyguard) continues to rip up the screen and unequivocally supply the energy for the film. His returning cast from the original Deadpool have fun as well, though there was far too little of Morena Baccarin  and Leslie Uggams for me. I will say that T.J. Miller lost some of his game this round, though Karan Soni got to up his in some ways. On the other hand, Brianna Hildebrand had a similarly minor role but made more of it this time. And Stefan Kapicic’s Collosus got to have a bit more fun than his last outing.

As much fun as it was to see the old gang strutting their stuff, Zazie Beetz (Geostorm), Shioli Kutsuna (The Outsider), Eddie Marsan (The Limehouse Golem) and a smattering of fun surprise guests provide the real zazz to the remix. And Josh Brolin (Avengers: Infinity War) not only delivers, but gets to be part of another of the biggest films this summer; talk about great career choices. And speaking of great choices, perhaps the most surprising addition was Julian Dennison (Hunt for the Wilderpeople), who is probably very new to most audiences but who proved he could handle a major motion picture leap without blinking.

Reynolds joined Reese and Wernick in writing this sequel, which may explain the extreme density of the jokes, and director David Leitch (Atomic Blonde) took the franchise reigns well in this sequel. The overall effect isn’t quite as polished or paced as the original, but it acquits itself well by the end; it just has a rather long setup. And, it should be noted, in Marvel tradition, it has little gifts up through the end of the final credits. They also are continuing another more recent Marvel tradition of wickedly funny (and at times astute) music queues. If I have any real gripe with the script and character it is that Deadpool is still a bit more homophobic than the pansexual, which has more to do with current society than the original material.

So is it all you hoped for? Yes. Is it a worthy sequel? Yes. Does it set up yet more stories? Of course it does. Should you see it on big screen? You bet your red-clad ass. In fact, you may have to see it more than once to catch all the references. Deadpool is the perfect pallet cleanser for the avalanche of serious super hero stories. It reminds us you can have fun and carnage and even a certain amount of intelligence while it is all going on.

 Deadpool 2