Tag Archives: YourChoice

Tolkien

[3 stars]

Where Rocketman and Bohemian Rhapsody each used fantasy as a way to tell their realities, Tolkien went the other route: it uses reality to tell the fantasy. Well, about the fantasy, at any rate. The movie is a bit of a confused mess, but it does eventually come together to its point.

Nicholas Hoult (The Favourite) is really quite good at negotiating both the complex emotional challenge and the age challenge of his role as the story unfolds. Lily Collins (Okja), likewise, gets to work a lot of levels, not all of which are comfortable. The rest of the cast is servicable, with folks like Derek Jacobi (Tomb Raider) and Patrick Gibson (The Darkest Minds) probably standing out the most. But, frankly, no one really matters outside the main couple.

The main challenge with this film is that it isn’t very focused. It jumps back and forth in time attempting to show the connections in Tolkien’s life that led him to author his stories. But the narrative is a little forced as we follow him through the trenches while his febrile brain keeps triggering memories. It wasn’t sustainable for the whole movie, so the approach ends about two thirds of the way through. A more chronological telling may have been more effective for the majority of the story; or, perhaps, a more complete commitment to the flashback. The mix and unbalance of the two leaves the rhythm of the film uneven and confused.

Director Dome Karukoski (Tom of Finland) certainly took care with his portrayal. And writers David Gleeson and Stephen Beresford (Pride) were likewise sympathetic. It doesn’t feel like a real biography or look at the man, but rather an homage to him and the work he left behind. And perhaps that is the better way to view the movie: as a biography of The Hobbit and The Fellowship of the Ring rather than of Tolkien himself. On that level it succeeds quite a bit more than as an historical recounting.

Pet Sematary

[3 stars]

Unlike It, Pet Sematary is a very simple, straight-forward bit of Stephen King horror. That made it a fun read and and kitschy movie in the 80s (when King’s brand was both riding high and getting generally destroyed by Hollywood), but it doesn’t give it a lot of meat for what is just a clever retelling of The Monkey’s Paw.

But there are some nice effects employed, and a few moments to make you jump. Fortunately, the real focus was on suspense rather than splashy gore and cheap surprises. Jason Clarke (The Aftermath), John Lithgow (Late Night) and Amy Seimetz (Alien: Covenant) have been given some intense backstories to help drive the tale, but none are really effective. However, the young Jeté Laurence (The Snowman) makes a solid impression and has great fun through her arc. In fact, the little blighter can put on an angry face that will freeze your blood.

Co-directors Kevin Kölsch and Dennis Widmyer did a fine job with their actors and the visual telling of the story. But it was still a simple story that may have worked better as a one hour drama than a 100 minute feature. Jeff Buhler’s (Nightflyers) script tried to provide depth, but it all felt rather forced. However, it managed to maintain the original material’s intent while still finding its own way…eventually.

I’ll admit that by the time the movie diverged radically from the book, I had sort of checked out emotionally, which was a shame. The last 10 minutes are mostly predictable, but very well done. And the final frame is delightfully chilling. It isn’t the best film, but if you’re a fan of King’s ouvre, it’s a nice translation from the book. I think it is mostly hurt by its timing against It and even Us, Halloween, Hereditary, or Get Out, that are moving the horror genre into a more complex space even when staying squarely in their box.

Greta

[3.5 stars]

Up for some intense suspense and a truly well-done, credible stalking movie? Then you’re in luck. Chloë Grace Moretz (The Miseducation of Cameron Post) spars with the wonderful Isabelle Huppert in this story of friendship, loneliness, obsession…and just a little insanity. It is a fun tango of pain and desired connection.

With Maika Monroe (Tau), the three form and interesting triangle of female empowerment and connection. There are also Colm Feore (Umbrella Academy) and Stephen Rea (Utopia) hanging about the edges of their story, but it is the women who drive it all. And though written by two men, the script rarely falls into the trap of making them stereotypes. Each is strong in their own ways.

As both co-writer and director, Neil Jordan (Byzantium) is in his element with intense relationships and tales of suspense. He and co-writer Ray Wright (The Crazies) helps pull you along through small moments and decisions, each adding up to inevitable danger and tragedy. It really is one of those films you cringe through as it unfolds in the only way it can, but that you’re unable to look away from because you have to know how it will resolve. But that very tension is why it may not be a movie for everyone, even though it is done well. So, tackle this one only if you can stand the stress.

Ad Astra

[3 stars]

Despite what your eyes may be telling your brain, this is not a science fiction epic…it’s an allegory. And, as an allegory, it is about 30 minutes too long, though given the story framework James Gray (Lost City of Z) stuck himself with, it is probably about right for hitting all the plot points.

The movie is pretty much a one man show for Brad Pitt (The Big Short). It is told tightly from his point of view and with him narrating his inner thoughts. That narration dominates; the psychology of Ad Astra is the unifying center of the solar system spanning story.

Pitt isn’t alone, but most of the rest of the characters have short scenes or cameos. Only Tommy Lee Jones (Shock and Awe), Ruth Negga (Loving), and Donald Sutherland (The Leisure Seeker) get any added depth. Negga and Sutherland are gone too soon, and Jones’s depth is a very shallow pool.

Most disappointingly for me, the science throughout the movie is fairly weak, or adjusted for convenience. I can forgive the latter, but the former made me itch a bit. And after Gravity, I expect depictions of space to be a little more accurate (at least in terms of the effects of movement and weight).

Certainly this is a pretty film. And it has style and mood. But it isn’t what it purports to be. The movie is a weird cross between Contact and Solaris; a very personal story amidst the isolation of space with the thin framework of the search for intelligent life, all told at a leisurely pace. The truth is, this same story could have been told if Jones had buggered off to Africa or South America and disappeared for 18 years. In other words, there was no scientific center that was necessary to tell this story, which is why it isn’t science fiction…it is simply an artistic choice to frame a question and emotional journey.

If you have an interest in seeing it, do see it on a big screen as it won’t translate nicely to small. But be prepared to let go of what you think it may be about and just go with it.

Family

[3 stars]

The original descriptions of this first directorial outing by Laura Steinel (Red Oaks) left me utterly uninterested in exploring its twisted view of suburbia and work life. After chancing across a trailer, however, I gave it a shot and was surprised.

It is far from a great film, but when it stops trying to be funny, it actually is. And it comes together into a sweet tale of growing up…no matter your age. The story is told through Taylor Schilling’s (The Titan) point of view…a woman made of the cliche character fodder that made Tina Fey a star. But Bryn Vale (Red Band Society) works well with her and, almost steals the film with her lost, disaffected youth. There are also a few surprise supporting roles peppered throughout the story that were fun to pick out.

I can’t say Insane Clown Posse was ever high on my musical like lists, but this movie certainly shifted my perspective of their Juggalo followers (some history on the term here if you’re interested). And while this isn’t the greatest film you’ll see, it is unexpected. It isn’t a bad way to spend an evening if you’re looking for a bit of heart-warming humor.

The Hummingbird Project

[3 stars]

Well, this is no Big Short, but it tries hard to make an audacious effort interesting through the personal journeys around it. Unfortunately, writer/director Kim Nguyen (Bellevue) never quite gets us to buy into that effort, nor the people, enough to invest in the human aspect of the story. And neither does the overall metaphor really drive the experience. But, just in case you missed it, he drives it all home in the end to be sure you got the message.

Jesse Eisenberg (Cafe Society) top-lines and drives the movie’s plot, but it’s Alexander Skarsgård (The Aftermath) who runs away with this movie. It is an unusual role for him in many ways…not the least of it being his partially shaved head. I must admit this last aspect was incredibly distracting for me because it was so out of place for the actor I recognized. However, his performance was solid and complex.

Salma Hayek (How to be a Latin Lover) was also interesting in a supporting role, but I could never decide if I believed her or not. The world of Finance exposed in the story is specific and rarefied. Many of the choices around her were good, but there was something lacking either in the story or her performance to completely sell it for me. The movie didn’t grab me enough to make me dig too deeply into that lack to better define it. Michael Mando (Spider-Man: Homecoming), on the other hand, brought in a completely believable engineer and crew chief. He had the most thankless of the parts in the cast, but is very much the glue that holds it all together.

The bones of the plot are based on very real challenges and fights that continue to go on in the trading world. And while it affects everyone, nearly no one is aware or wants to be aware. On Nguyen’s side, I think that’s why he took this niche aspect as a wedge to a bigger truth in today’s society. He just doesn’t manage to balance it all to permit both aspects to come through with impact.

Carnival Row

[3 stars]

If Ripper Street and Copper had a magical baby, this is pretty much what you’d get. For me, however, the poor child took on the worse qualities of both parents. A shame as it had the potential to tackle the current issues of immigration and xenophobia sweeping a good part of the globe.

In the end, Carnival Row is a marginally thought-through bit of genre, full of strife and demons (personal as well as real). It is a by-the-numbers fantasy with few surprises and cliche characters; the pacing commensurate with its genre, which is to say: slow.

The show isn’t helped by its female lead in Cara Delevingne (Tulip Fever), who has the look of a Fae, but the emotional credibility of cardboard. Despite Orlando Bloom’s (S.M.A.R.T. Chase) backing her, and with some interesting tension between them, she just never became real for me. Even the host of solid supporting actors are generally forced into tiny boxes of behavior, by script and directing, that does little to show off their talents.

Ultimately, I’m still not sure if I enjoyed this first season or not. It is clear that the it was built around the first episode and final moments in the last…with a whole bunch of stretched out filler in-between. It is, in fact, more of a prologue or setup for a story to come. You may find it more engaging than I did, but despite the grand production values, I found myself frustrated far too often to settle into the tale and become a fan.

Time for Two and Two For Time

Without planning, there were two time travel/paradox stories that hit my plate this week. One was quite good. The other was interesting, but more as a logic experiment than as a quality entertainment.

Let’s face it, a good time travel story is hard to find. So often it is simply a trope to tell another story. But stories that really think it all through…or as much as possible as paradoxes inevitably create challenges…are rare and fun to find. Predestination, Timecrimes, or even Terminator: Genisys were the last movie attempts to do this well that I’ve seen. And no one has managed to top Looper yet on screen (or Blink on the small screen). Still, at least both of these new offerings make time travel integral to the plot.

I’ll Follow You Down [3 stars]

This movie has its issues, but it definitely has some solid thinking in it that allows me to recommend it.

In addition to the good story, it also has a good cast. Rufus Sewell (Dangerous Beauty, The Man in the High Castle) and Gillian Anderson (Crooked House) catch attention as the parents to Haley Joel Osment (Tusk). Osment is the real lead in this tale, with some nice support by Victor Garber (Sicario) and Susanna Fournier (Being Human (US)). Osment has some great moments, but his performance is uneven and, at times, forced or false. There are plot moments that just clunk like a tin can rolling down stairs. But they are just moments in the midst of some solid acting and well considered issues.

Absent that roller-coaster of belief, I’ll Follow You Down would have been great instead of just good. Director/writer Richie Mehta (Delhli Crime) has certainly peaked my curiosity to see what may come next in his opus. And if you like movies with a bit of intellect behind them, this one pays off nicely.

Excursion [2.5 stars]

Martin Grof’s first feature as writer and director is loaded with ideas. Unfortunately these ideas are often discussed at length by the characters rather than showing us or just trusting the audience. It is primarily a political diatribe blended with a bit of black humor and clever historical revisionism.

To make this kind of script and story work, though, you need a very talented cast. This cast isn’t really up to the task. Other than Johnny Mindlin and Jeryl Burgess, they are often stiff and completely without credibility. And even these two bright spots for naturalism are a little forced at times.

As a curio, this is interesting. Not brilliant, but interesting. However, save it for a time when you’ve nothing else and about 80 minutes to spare. You may find the approach more engaging than I did.

Devil’s Gate

[2.5 stars]

I fully admit, I came to this based almost entirely on the cast…just pure curiosity. And, if I’m completely honest, my curiosity led me a bit astray here.

But the top-line cast of Shawn Ashmore (Conviction) and Milo Ventimiglia (Second Act) in a horror film was just too intriguing to skip. They’re joined by Amanda Schull (Suits) and Bridget Regan (Legend of the Seeker, White Collar). And, as an additional surprise, Jonathan Frakes  even steps out in front of the camera  briefly.

Clay Staub’s first feature production as director (as well as a first feature script, co-written with Peter Aperlo) demonstrates some solid potential. The team’s willingness to seek something new in a tired genre is admirable. Their ability to examine their own logic and make the tale cohesive is a little less so. In some ways it reminds me of a less capable, and  slightly reversed (genre-wise), Brightburn…though that may just be all the farmhouse footage.

This is, at best, a B-grade movie. It is mainly kept at that level by its cast, which isn’t too surprising given their chops. It makes a game run at bringing a fresh voice to screen, but Staub and Aperlo both need some more practice. I’d be willing to give them that seeing what they could do here. This is one of those rainy Saturday afternoon movies, and there is a place for such things in our lives if we enjoy that “genre.”

Ugly Dolls

[2.5 stars]

Ugly Dolls suffers from a number of issues, but the main challenge was not understanding how to construct a musical. For example, the movie begins by introducing us to a character being created in a factory…but then we lose a bunch of time jumping to who will really be our main character… who gets a huge song and dance number… which is interrupted by the arrival of the first character and then continues… but then first character just sort of fades away as a bit part for the rest of the tale. I get the strong sense that something happened in the editing or the story breakdown that was just never fixed.

The truth is that Kelly Clarkson’s Moxy is infectious and sweet. And sure, like much of the cast, the woman has pipes. And while the songs are close to bubblegum pop, there is some nice effort on the lyrics to keep them from being too mind numbing.

For a young audience, say under 14, this flick will probably entertain, at least a little. Above that, it starts to wear thin in its relentless optimism and simplified view of the world, not to mention its generally unsurprising storyline.