Film Critic, Movie Blog, Movie Reviews

The Prestige (2006)

The Prestige (2006)  Directed by: Christopher Nolan  Rated: PG-13  

Runtime: 2hr 10min    Based on: Novel by Christopher Priest

Studio: Warner Bros.  Screenwriter: Jonathan Nolan, Christopher Nolan

Cast: Christian Bale, Hugh Jackman, Michael Caine, Scarlett Johansson, David Bowie, Andy Serkis

At one point in human history, societies believed in magic. The supernatural. To be wooed and wondered by those who would dare wield it in a wide variety of ways over time. As mankind grew more intelligent or less gullible, depending on the century, the notion of the mystic arts or magic tricks became a tradecraft of sorts—the art of illusions.

In Christopher Nolan’s Prestige, the art of illusion is on full display in London during the late 1890s. A pair of competing magicians professionally try to one-up each other to be the best. This civil rivalry turns sour after a performance goes sideways, locking them in a dangerous loop of who is truly the best, no matter the costs or consequences. 

The Prestige is a detailed, dark drama ruled by magic, science, and obsession. It keeps you reeled in as you watch it. As you watch, you’re trying to figure out if you can see what’s coming, which is fair; this is a Christopher Nolan film. His films make you think, make you try and pay attention without missing that ‘it’ factor. That’s fitting considering the narrative that’s unfolding on screen.

Christian Bale & Hugh Jackman in ‘The Prestige.’ Image: Warner Bros.

Robert Angier (Jackman) is a magician with stage presence and lacks imagination. Alfred Borden (Bale) has nothing but imagination but can’t package it so that an audience will care. Their rivalry transcends professionalism; it’s a vendetta. Deserved or not-you understand why they act the way they do. Bale and Jackman’s energy into their respective characters is lovely; they play off one another so well. These performances are grounded by John Cutter (Caine) and Olivia’s (Johansson) additions. 

Cutter is Angier’s manager, and Olivia is his assistant until she’s not. Michael Caine, as always, is a phenomenal addition to any cast. Johansson does a good job with her character despite the century where a woman in her profession isn’t anything more than an attractive assistant, with no other women to interact with truly. However brief, David Bowie’s depiction of Nikola Tesla is eerily spot-on. The always talented Andy Serkis assists his character. 

David Bowie as Nikola Tesla in ‘The Prestige’ Image: Warner Bros.

Arthur C. Clarke said, “magic is just science that we don’t understand yet.” When watching a film like The Prestige or The Illusionist, which also came out in 2006, this statement is so fitting one might think that the screenwriters took it to heart when crafting these films. 

In creating this movie, the ingenuity that went into the settings, the costumes, and the props/setup for the tricks themselves are impressive. All these things, mixed with the film’s pace, drive the story forward in a manner that is quite enjoyable to watch. 

A well-acted story rooted in dark humor, drama, and the urge to know what happens next are what makes The Prestige worth a place on your watchlist. 

-A Pen Lady

Film Critic, Movie Blog, Movie Reviews

Eternals (2021)

Eternals (2021)

Director: Chloé Zhao   Runtime: 2 hr 36 mins  Rated: PG-13 

Studio: Marvel Studios  Screenwriter: Chloé Zhao, Patrick Burleigh, Ryan Firpo

Cast: Richard Madden, Gemma Chan, Angelina Jolie, Salma Hayek, Lauren Ridloff, Barry Keoghan, Lia McHugh, Brian Tyree Henry, Kumail Nanjiani, Ma Dong-seok, Kit Harington, Bill Skarsgård 

Eternals is everything a decade’s worth of MCU films couldn’t do; it tells a complete, complex, and compelling story, with a strong plot, from beginning to end. A story where you didn’t know how it or the characters would end up. When you spend a decade establishing characters, building up an ensemble to fight together, you expect them to win. You expect them to make it to the end of their respective standalone films, so there’s little mystery there. How you get from Iron Man to Endgame is largely spectacle. Flash over substance. 

Eternals is more substance over flash, and many movie-goers hate that. Over the years, the MCU model conditioned people to expect less story from Marvel films, which are padded with costumes, CGI, and action. Don’t despair. Eternals have plenty of CGI and action woven more intrinsically within this detailed, rich story. 

Perhaps this is part of what many disliked. Details. Being required to listen and pay attention; when it’s not a spectacle, that’s what films need. Perhaps it’s the openly gay couple with a kid? Get over yourselves. Maybe it’s the sex scene? Hm, that one is fair. Up to this point, you could take young kids to see their favorite superhero in what has been a G/PG rated aspect of this topic in the MCU thus far. Well, kids grow up. Comic characters are not just for kids, nor have they ever been. Eternals isn’t dark and deranged like Zack Snyder’s comic book character depictions. Eternals fall in the middle. I’ll grant you this tiny spoiler if you’re on the fence about this film based on this point. It’s tastefully done. Sure it’s clear at one point two of the characters are lying down and don’t have clothes on anymore, but it’s from the collarbones up. Take from that what you will. 

Image: Marvel Studios, composite by Kirsten Acuna/Insider.com

Exploring this further, Eternals has a well-rounded, diverse cast. There are black people; one of whom is deaf, white people, an Indian character, Asian characters, a Spanish character, and a kid. This large cast ticks off a bunch of boxes with ease and not for the sake of ticking off boxes. I appreciate a well-rounded, talented cast that lets the film be about the story-not character-specific. In prior MCU films, one or two characters always managed to show up even when it wasn’t their standalone film like the film wouldn’t work without their inclusion. While Eternals have costumes, you should consider them more as uniforms, extensions of their powers, and ship. In this manner, this ensemble is without the brightly colored spandex costumes and accompanying ego trips. It’s all the better for it. 

Fans, however, may not feel better about the film’s opening sequence. They’ll need to read the screen. This isn’t a bad thing! It certainly sets the tone for the movie and the upfront departure from every other MCU project to date. It provides needed backstory in a format that consumes less screen time and budget. This format will not resonate with every viewer, but it’s an essential blip in the overall runtime of the film. It’s hardly the first film to use this tactic. So, read it without complaint. It’s also an important reason to remember to show up and find a seat before the film starts! 

Celestial image from the MCU Image: Marvel via Screenrant.com

Eternals has gotten mixed reviews, and I’m going to point out why you should ignore the naysayers. 1. Marvel didn’t put nearly the marketing effort into hyping this movie as others. It’s like they didn’t know how because 2. They are obscure characters with no prior buildup 3. The teaser trailer did nothing for this movie. Please ignore it. 4. It’s not all Hulk-like smashing, gun-heavy violent 5. The box office sucked. On that last point, when American films come out usually, other countries see them first. China is an excellent example of this, and they opted not toallow Eternals into their theaters. When that happens, the studio will see fewer zeros from ticket sales. That’s just a fact. Couple that ban with still touchy post-Covid theater options, and it’s clear those previous metrics for evaluating a hit or flop need reassessment ASAP. With all that against it, tossing that all aside and Eternals should be considered a box office hit. 

Chloé Zhao did a bloody marvelous job bringing together a large ensemble that portrayed characters worth being invested in. A cast who have great chemistry and energy that are believable and meaningful. Full of details that make the plot move along at an incredible pace, with seamless cinematography. Zhao tells a consistent story whose themes are just right and impactful. The audience can understand their story, who they are, why they are on Earth, their purpose, and how it all fits together in the MCU, which is a fair point after Thanos. 

Kumail Nanjiani is Kingo in ‘Eternals’ Image: Marvel Studios via SYFYWire.com

Moving forward, I sincerely hope that the house of mouse doesn’t “Disney-fi” future work with the Eternals within the MCU because this fresh infusion of characters is a palate cleanser. The right amount of serious and grownup to intermix with the sassy, zany and quirky characters left doing projects with the MCU. 

Eternals is worth a spot on your watchlist and your time. Make sure to stick around for the two end credit scenes; one’s at the very end. Cheers!

-A Pen Lady

Film Critic, Movie Blog, Movie Reviews

I AM MOTHER (2019)

I AM MOTHER (2019)

Director: Grant Sputore  Rated: PG Runtime: 1 hr. 53 mins   

Studio: Rhea Films/Netflix   Screenwriter: Michael Lloyd-Green

Cast: Clara Rugaard, Rose Byrne, Hilary Swank

What is it with Netflix and robots? Is it just me? What is with the mass appeal of dystopian or apocalyptic premises in the last decade of screen media in general? Okay, if people didn’t like it or were sick of it, such projects wouldn’t get made. That doesn’t mean they all should. 

So here’s I AM MOTHER with robots and the end of the human race. Hardly an original concept. After some extinction-level event wipes man from the Earth, robots inherit it. “Mother” is a nanny bot, voiced by Rose Byrne. Mother’s function is to repopulate the human race from a secret bunker with over 60K human embryos. She grows one, a female, and calls her “daughter” (Rugaard). Why just one? Mother needs to practice being a good parent before going all out. Here’s my first question, how would she handle more than a few? She’s the only robot. Then again, I had Alien and Prometheus vibes (sans actual aliens), so what do I know. Over time Daughter grows into a teenager, fully educated by Mother and curious about the world beyond the bunker. Who wouldn’t be?

Hilary Swank in ‘I Am Mother’ Image: Netflix via theguardian.com

Daughter’s safety and sheltered existence are challenged one day upon “the wounded woman’s” (Swank) arrival. Seriously, Swank’s character isn’t even credited with a name, just a description. If you’re the last of your kind, do names matter? Unlike Daughter, who didn’t need one, Swank’s character is an adult and probably had one at some point, so it leans towards degrading. I digress on this point. 

Through a series of events, “the woman” ends up in the bunker (sorry, baby spoiler) and causes Daughter to question her life and Mother. The rest of the film is a letdown to the ideas planted of what viewers think is coming. Instead, it has strong echoes of the Alien franchise merged with Terminator and Star Trek’s Borg. As badass as that mashup implies, it culminates in nothing. It’s poached ideas that are left undercooked. 

Embryo from ‘I AM MOTHER’ Image: Netflix via Arstechnica.com

I AM MOTHER is a better-wrapped product than others whose packaging is recycled content. That’s all this film is. The script and performances were as flat as a sheet of paper. Watching this out of sheer boredom, I AM MOTHER has the appeal of lukewarm coffee, completely worth tossing aside. 

There are so many (better) original films out there to spend your time on, some I mentioned. This film, however, has no place on your watchlist- unless you like unoriginal crap.

-A Pen Lady

Film Critic, Movie Blog, Movie Reviews

Cast Away (2000)

Cast Away (2000)

Director: Robert Zemeckis   Runtime: 2 hr 23 mins.   Rated: PG-13

Studio: 20th Century Fox/Dreamworks   Screenwriter: William Broyles Jr. 

Cast: Tom Hanks, Helen Hunt, Wilson the Volleyball

FedEx executive Chuck Noland (Hanks) is an obsessively punctual, high-strung perfectionist of time. And an apparent workaholic. This film starts out days before Christmas 1995. Everyone who ships goods at that time of the year is probably temporarily high-strung. Except for Chuck, that’s his normal. Christmas night, Chuck sets out on a FedEx shipping plane bound for Malaysia when they get caught in a storm and knocked off course. 

The plane crashes, and Chuck is the sole survivor. He washes ashore on a small island. 

In Cast Away, Hanks gives an astonishing performance that displays a physical transformation and highlights the emotional and mental toll a person can suffer in isolation. 

We all hear background noises every day, noise pollution, and become almost accustomed to it. In Cast Away, the background noise is the ocean. The waves, coconuts dropping, or the storms during storm season- that’s it. That lack of noise is something Hank’s Noland has to learn to endure. A lack of sounds is just one form of Chuck’s isolation. In that way, the sound editing in this film is vital. 

At one point, Chuck makes it to the top of his island, and it is small. It highlights to Chuck, and the audience, how univocally screwed he is. How alone, and how little Chuck has in the way of resources. The shot emphasizes the ocean’s vastness and how utterly cut off he is. On top of the internal anguish, Chuck has to deal with, which is its own form of a co-star, he has the ocean and island. Both are his nemesis, along with time and the weather. That might be a bit deep for some, but it’s true. 

Tom Hanks in ‘Cast Away’ Image: 20th Century Fox via EntertainmentWeekly.com

Chuck isn’t the only thing that ends up washing ashore. Some of the FedEx packages do as well. This film is entirely fictional, so no real people lost goods to a guy named Chuck to utilize as he saw fit. That genius lies with the writer. Seriously if you were stuck on an island and could have one item, what would it be? I’d say the TARDIS. But screenwriter William Broyles Jr. was able to grant Chuck’s character multiple things that on their own are bizarre in a tropical island setting. That’s the beauty in it, how to be resourceful when you have little or nothing to work with from the start. 

In that resourcefulness, Chuck befriends Wilson. Wilson is the brand name of a volleyball he finds. If you end up talking to yourself and answering too, it’s less crazy if you feel like you are talking to someone/thing. And Wilson helps Chuck move along this incredible journey of being lost at sea, marooned on an island, and surviving; to deal with the isolation. The attention to detail to make the story believable is well thought out. The editing crafts the progression of time, creating a good pace. For a two-and-a-half-hour film, it moves along nicely. 

Tom Hanks and Wilson the volleyball in ‘Cast Away’ Image: 20th Century Fox via IMDb.com

Tom Hanks gives an energetic, compelling, emotional performance in that allotted time. Part of that time is on Chuck’s attempts to escape the island. So the purpose of his character isn’t just how to deal with isolation, but can he escape it? Does his character find resolution from his conflict? The answer also ties in with what makes this film different from others in its genre. 

What would you do if you were alone on an island? How would you endure? Cast Away makes the audience ponder these questions without directly asking. It’s a mark of a great film. Cast Away is an excellent film to add to your watchlist any time of the year. 

-A Pen Lady

Film Critic, Movie Blog, Movie Reviews

127 Hours (2010)

127 Hours (2010)

Director: Danny Boyle   Runtime: 1hr 34 mins   Rated: R

Studio: Pathé/Searchlight Pictures   Screenwriter: Danny Boyle, Simon Beaufoy 

Inspired by: Aron Ralston’s novel “Between a Rock and a Hard Place”

Cast: James Franco, Amber Tamblyn, Kate Mara, Clémence Poésy

127 Hours is a short film that aims to draw in audiences based on the appeal of its leading man and that it’s based on real-life events. In 2003 real-life Aron Ralston set out on a day trip in Utah’s Blue John Canyon and suffered an accident that pins his arm in-between the rock face and a boulder. Ralston records what he believes to be his last days explaining how he ended up in the state he was, for whoever finds him one day. 

Since this film is based on Ralston’s book about the incident, he lives. That’s not a spoiler. It would be if someone else wrote a book about Ralston’s accident. 

It isn’t easy to create a film where you have, essentially, one character. This character has what amounts to an exterior monologue the entire time. This dialogue conundrum is layered with the setting. The majority of the film centers around Aron (Franco), who’s stuck in a highly isolated canyon crack. From a cinematography perspective, Danny Boyle did an excellent job showing the landscape and how it related to Aron during the day and while he was trapped. It helped to cement the seriousness of his predicament for the audience. The director also recreates the real Ralston’s actual camera log. In doing so, we have a performance by Franco that is a one-man show. He has to physically work in a minimal space, on a rope, where he mentally and emotionally swings like a pendulum as time progresses. 

James Franco as Aron Ralston in ‘127 Hours’ Image: Pathé via IMDb.com

While Franco brings much-needed energy to this story and its underlying messages and themes, it would have been better as a TV movie. Today this type of film is more likely to be picked up by a company like Netflix, which didn’t start original content till 2013. 127 Hours isn’t a terrible movie, but it’s the kind of film you only watch once, in school on substitute day, or as an airplane film. Sadly, the trailer for the film gives too much away, leaving little to be surprised by.

While the messages and lessons of the film to the audience are important, so no one has a Ralston-like “oops” moment, 127 Hours is forgettable as a movie. Forgettable isn’t worth a watchlist spot. 

-A Pen Lady

Film Critic, Movie Blog, Movie Reviews

Snowpiercer (2013)

Snowpiercer (2013)

Director: Bong Joon-Ho   Runtime: 2 hr. 6 min   Rated:

Studio: Moho Films Screenwriter: Bong Joon-Ho, Kelly Masterson

Cast: Chris Evans, Ed Harris, John Hurt, Tilda Swinton, Octavia Spencer, Song Kang-ho, Ko Asung, Jamie Bell

Snowpiercer is a French comic brought to the big screen by South Korean director Bong Joon-ho. The year is 2031, and the entire world’s remaining population lives aboard a train that never stops moving, or everyone on it will freeze to death. Just like the rest of the world did almost two decades prior. Humanity is an endangered species, and the train is the Hotel California. You could check-in, but you’re never going to leave.

This train generates energy by constantly moving, and since the great freeze means it can never stop. It does one lap around the globe each year. The train, this snowpiercer, was created by a man called Wilford, who divided the train into three parts. The elite at the front, poorest at the end, and the workers in the middle who service the train. The inhabitants at the back endure much. They live off of gelatin-like “protein bars” and nothing else. They have their children taken, live in squalor, and are executed periodically to reduce the population. These individuals are never allowed beyond the train’s tail. So, surprise, they sometimes revolt. In Snowpiercer, they try again, with a new plan, to make it to the front and control the engine. After all, those that control the engine control the world, such as it is. 

I watched this film begrudgingly. I stopped it mid-film three times and took days in between to finish it. There needs to be more attention to detail for a plot like this to work on screen. Expand upon what’s not in the original material, or ignore it and make it better. He’d hardly be the first moviemaker to do so. This film has a trailer that holds up this movie to be far more exciting than it is. A film shouldn’t create so many questions and not answer them. 

‘Snowpiercer’ staring Chris Evans and Jamie Bell. Image: Moho Films via RogerEbert.com

The beginning of the film drops the audience into a story in progress. While it’s not difficult to catch on to the plight and goals of the characters, it is a little confusing. Utilizing this tactic is problematic because the viewer isn’t invested yet in the characters. Bong Joon-ho’s choice to cast Chris Evans as Curtis and Octavia Spencer as Tanya aren’t enough. Both are phenomenal actors, but their addition to this cast was to grab more Western viewers, not because actual acting was required. 

Initially, the director didn’t want to cast Chris Evans because he was too fit. Malnourished from living in poverty, it would be hard for anyone to believe he was from the tail car. All the people there are frail. So, instead, he’s covered in clothing to hide his bulk. On that logic, I’d like to point out that he cast Octavia Spencer! No disrespect to her, but she’s a heavy-set woman. It’s the reverse logic of not wanting a physically fit person cast. After almost two decades on a train in squalor-like conditions, she’d be thinner. She’s the only plus-sized person I saw in that section. So back to my point about more Western eyeballs. 

Child labor in ‘Snowpiercer’ Image: Moho Films via the Nerdist.com

The logic of this film makes zero sense. The train isn’t that big when you think about it or see shots of it. How is livestock raised or food for so many people aboard a train? How do you maintain the train? Where do the spare parts go, how do you make more? At what point do you run out of clothes, supplies in general, on a ride you can’t stop? How many people have to die every year to sustain everyone else? 

Now, cultures other than mine find eating insects acceptable, okay. What’s not okay is how it’s depicted in this film. Besides being excessively disgusting, where did they all come from? The squalor from the tail and the production/growth of food alone isn’t enough to generate that many insects frequently enough to be used as they are in this film. Remember, they are all dead outside the train. 

Protein bars for every meal in ‘Snowpiercer’ Image: CJ Entertainment via Filmschoolrejects.com

If I, or you, were boarding this life-saving train on day one, one of the many questions I would want to be answered is, what about the tracks? This train rides around on one gigantic loop around the Earth; what keeps the tracks from freezing so much the train doesn’t derail after months or years? Everyone dies if too much snow blocks a section and stops the train. These are no small questions, and someone could have dreamed up an answer and brought it up with relative ease, but no. Instead, the audience is dropped into a story where the plot is to take the engine car or die trying. In a gritty, difficult to watch (camera work), violent hail Mary to overthrow an authoritarian dictator and his lackeys. 

As dystopian, apocalyptic-like, fate of humanity films go, Snowpiercer is a dull, thinly plotted, implausible train wreck despite the otherwise talented ensemble. It’s not worth the hype many gave it nor a place on anyone’s watchlist. 

-A Pen Lady

Film Critic, Movie Blog, Movie Reviews

The Tomorrow War (2021)

The Tomorrow War (2021)  

Directed by: Chris McKay   Rated: PG-13   Runtime: 2 hrs 20 mins

Studio: Skydance, Paramount Pictures, Amazon   Screenwriter: Zach Dean

Cast: Chris Pratt, Yvonne Strahovski, J.K. Simmons

The Tomorrow War is a story about humanity dealing with an extinction-level event. The best way to avert it is by the world coming together. Okay. The threat is aliens. Tired and well used, but, still, okay. Then…

Solider’s from 2051 show up via a portal of some kind in 2021. Explaining and warning that “We are you, 30 years in the future.”… “In eleven months, all human beings in the future will be wiped from the face of the Earth.” Unless, of course, the humans of 2021 help. 

Director Chris McKay said in a Collider interview that he didn’t think about the time travel mechanics, as it didn’t matter to solving the issue of the story. That’s the gist of what he said anyway, and he couldn’t have been stupider for ignoring it. Just because the director doesn’t want to think about it doesn’t mean the audience won’t. Magically, all of the issues of time travel and creating paradoxes just vanish in his mind. Well, not in mine and not in others. Especially when the device which allows thousands or millions of people to travel through time and space is held together by the equivalent of tape and chicken wire. WTF? Do not beam me up, Scotty! 

The main problem is that writer Zach Dean created and left the line stating “…all human beings…” all humans will be dead in eleven months. Well, if all of humanity is dead, how are there still people around 30 years later to come to 2021 and warn humanity? Words are important. A viewer shouldn’t need to pause their film (in this case) to try and figure out what they’ve seen before that can logically explain this. 

Screenshot of device that allows time travel in ‘The Tomorrow War’ Credit: Paramount Pictures and Amazon

What should have been said is ‘almost all of humanity will be wiped from the face of the Earth.’ Maybe even giving an estimate of who’s left in eleven months. Then the audience can follow along with ease and still grasp the dire predicament. 


The entire world gets on board. Yeah! Like Independence Day

But the lack of logic and common sense is so prevalent it’s incredible this film got made. So, first, some military personnel are sent to the future, then everyday people are conscripted. They are given no training or actual gear. You have a motor mouth that can’t load a weapon and points it at himself. Other characters take spare ammo off the dead, which is a brilliant move, while others seem to never run out of ammo. Future humanity “needs” help yet firebombs its recruits just to kill the enemy. Past humans are no more than to-go fodder. It reeks of desperation and poor storytelling. 

‘The Tomorrow War’ alien Credit: Paramount Pictures and Amazon via Variety.com

Make no mistake, this shitty script is full of holes that leave it dull and irritatingly illogical to follow along with. Like a high school student with the answers to when, why, where, and how a plot point no one in the thirty years after him was able to figure out. Since when do we default to a teenager for “expert” information? That a plane, an American one at that, could just fly deep into Russian airspace undetected? Give me a break. That specific scientific components with alien DNA will *magically* be unlocked in less than a day? Should I continue? Sadly, I could.

Sadly, all of that isn’t a summary of the entire film. This movie clocks in at 2 hours and 20 minutes and feels double that. Just when you think the film is going to end, it keeps going. There were so many areas where the pace needed to pick up or be left out altogether. It’s not that The Tomorrow War doesn’t know what it wants to be or where it wants to go. It doesn’t have that problem. Its most significant issue is that it tries to be like every other sci-fi creation before it, all while being fresh. It’s not rotten, but it does stink. 

Jasmine Mathews, Chris Pratt in ‘The Tomorrow War’ Credit: Amazon and Paramount Pictures via SyfyWire.com

Perspective is critical in this film in that everything is from Dan Forester’s (Pratt) perception. How he processes the events unfolding around him, his take on solving it, everything. The filmmaker’s choice allows Pratt’s character to have a fuller story arc, which is well developed. Pratt actually does a great job of depicting a loving father, former soldier, teacher, and unwitting participant. However, the focal point being on him is at the expense of the other characters.

There are some impressive action sequences with the fighters and aliens in various places. The CGI isn’t terrible. The aliens at least look like something I haven’t seen before. Those are the best things I can say about this movie. 

The Tomorrow War was a waste of my time and brain cells. There are so many other films in the sci-fi realm worth seeing over this. Any of the movies this one rips as “inspiration,” such as Pacific Rim, Jumper, Alien, Independence Day, A Quiet Place, or War of the WorldsThe Tomorrow War is an illogical, tedious waste of effort that has no place on a watchlist. 


—a pen lady

Film Critic, Movie Blog, Movie Reviews

Thor: The Dark World (2013)

Thor: The Dark World (2013)

Directed by: Alan Taylor   Runtime: 1 hr 52 mins   Rated: PG-13

Screenwriter: Stephen McFeely, Christopher Yost, Christopher Markus

Studio: Marvel Studios

Cast: Chris Hemsworth, Tom Hiddleston, Natalie Portman, Idris Elba, Anthony Hopkins, Rene Russo, Christopher Eccleston, Jamie Alexander, Kat Dennings, Zachary Levi, Stellan Skarsgård, Ray Stevenson, Tadanobu Asano

Thor: The Dark World dives deeper into Asgard’s history and shows off more of what a stunning place it is. Full of detail and scope. 

The plot introduces The Dark Elves, led by Malekith (Eccleston). An ancient race of beings that ruled and thrived before Asgard came to lead the nine realms. Thought to be long gone, they reemerge as a vehicle for the aether’s introduction into the MCU. The substance is the Dark Elves’ most prized possession, one they will destroy worlds to reclaim. Alongside that, they want revenge for practically being exterminated eons prior. As reasons for retribution go, that’s a fair one. 

Malekith and the Dark Elves’ story is believable, but the premise is cut off at the legs by Marvel’s MCU goals. It could have been so much grander instead of petty. Christopher Eccleston’s performance as Malekith was as outstanding as the script allowed for. The fault isn’t with Eccleston’s depiction. He’s a talented actor who could have taken the character in any direction if he had been allowed. 

In Thor: The Dark World, anger, fear, guilt, pride, and sorrow are all passengers on the emotional roller coaster ride various characters must manage. All while the nine realms line up in a ‘convergence’ creating dangerous pockets of time and space. Wreaking havoc upon all. 

Idris Elba, Christopher Eccleston in ‘Thor: The Dark World’ Credit: Marvel Studios via ScreenCrush.com

To help stop the Dark Elves, Thor (Hemsworth) requires Loki’s (Hiddleston) help. Even after Thor arrested him for the attack on New York. Hiddleston’s performance is strong, comical at times, and a nice distraction from all the otherwise serious themes running their course. 

While Heimdall (Elba) doesn’t have a more important place in this film, the character’s contributions are still significant. He mentions how he can see things few others do, and it gives a sense of how powerful he is as gatekeeper. If a viewer hadn’t figured that already. His conversations with Thor are not a subject with a leader; you can tell there’s a kinship there. A real friendship. 

While her role in the Thor films is the smallest, she makes an impressive impact with her screen time—Thor’s mom. Frigga (Russo), Queen of Asgard. Russo is adept at handling herself in action films, and Thor: The Dark World is no exception. Frigga’s use with a blade makes me wonder if she taught Loki more than just magic…

Stellan Skarsgård, Johnathan Howard, Kat Dennings in ‘Thor: The Dark World’ Credit: Marvel Studios via NerdReactor.com

Some well-placed lines and scenes with Darcy (Dennings) are like low-hanging fruit in the way she always says what she’s thinking. Or what everyone else is but won’t actually utter out loud. I like the character as a natural break between tension and humor. Mixing Darcy with Dr. Erik Selvig (Skarsgård) is vital to the plot, their tone vs. the rest of the movie is like peanut butter and jelly. 

The pace of the overall movie and the scene transitions are all fine. There is character development here, but the purpose of this film really wasn’t about Thor and company. Marvel needed to use certain aspects to further propel the gigantic story arc that is the first few phases of the MCU.

Costume design for the characters, again, perfectly accentuates each one distinctly and fittingly. To Frigga and Jane’s (Portman) Asgardian attire, to Loki’s classic black and green leather ensemble, Darcy’s hats, or Dr. Selvig’s lack of pants. Um…

Rene Russo, Jamie Alexander, Natalie Portman in ‘Thor: The Dark World’
Credit: Marvel Studios via ScreenCrush.com

The story itself isn’t terrible. It’s like any sequel that needs to slow down to build up more material to work with later. Once you understand it’s not meant to be a fast-paced, sci-fi action film, you’re less likely to be disappointed. It certainly pumps the breaks after Avengers, but it is watchable. 

Thor: The Dark World gets knocked around because of how its tone stacks up against the other ‘Thor’ and MCU films. Take it with a grain of salt. This film is eighth in viewing order and is absolutely worth a place on your watchlist if you’re just in it for Thor’s story or the MCU as a whole. 


Be advised there are two end scene credits for this movie. Enjoy!

—a pen lady

7-9-21

Film Critic, Movie Blog, Movie Reviews

Jumanji (1995)

Jumanji (1995)

Directed by: Joe Johnston   Rated: PG   Runtime: 1 hr. 44 mins.

Studio: TriStar Pictures   Based on: Book by Chris Van Allsburg

Screenwriter: Jonathan Hensleigh, Greg Taylor, Jim Strain

Cast: Robin Williams, Bonnie Hunt, Kirsten Dunst, Bradley Pierce, David Alan Grier, Bebe Neuwirth, Jonathan Hyde

Jumanji. “For those who seek to find a way to leave their world behind.” This ominous inscription on a magical wooden board game is the introduction to a wonderfully twisted story concept. This isn’t like accidentally finding ones way into a magical wardrobe with another land on the other side while playing hide-and-seek. No, no. Jumanji calls to you, a potential player. With a sound that is as intense as it is ominous. The beating of drums beckons its would-be player into opening it. A sound only the young can hear. 

Sony Pictures Trailer for ‘Jumanji’ Credit: Sony via YouTube

The movie starts in 1869 with two boys frantically trying to bury “it,” some item in a bag with inexplicable drum beats. Move forward a century to 1969, to a dig site outside a shoe factory, the drumming is heard again by young Alan Parrish, son of the shoe factory owner. He takes his find home with him. After a schoolmate comes over, he convinces her to play with him.

While they play, the dark and twisted magical tones of the game emerge as they play on. The special effects of 1995 make this part of the film look freaky, still, after all these years. While the results didn’t age well for this film with time, it almost helps it, despite that fact. It instills this disturbing quality that is quintessential to “Jumanji’s” lore. Nevertheless, it causes Alan’s friend, Sarah, to turn tail and run, screaming from the house. 

Fast-forward 26-years later. 

Bradley Pierce, Bonnie Hunt, Robin Williams, Kirsten Dunst in ‘Jumanji’
Credit: TriStar Pictures via Common Sense Media

Peter (Pierce) and Judy (Dunst) move into Alan’s old house after their aunt (Neuwirth) buys it, intending to turn it into a bed and breakfast. The drums call to them intensely. After they locate the game, they decide to play. Only it’s not their game. It’s the one that was started decades ago. To be plagued by the things from this game for years, or a lifetime, just because you couldn’t find the other player anymore… that’s messed up! 

Some of the jungle creatures that emerge while they play are creepy. It’s hard to figure if the filmmakers were using what they had available at the time for such film components or if they wanted it all to look evil-like. There’s a lion that looks like a poorly CGI’ed taxidermy head in a few shots. The vines with man-eating flower pods use and appearance makeup for it. It’s pretty cool. 

Then comes a plot twist that introduces ‘the jungle man’ (Williams). With his help, Judy and Peter can stay alive and outwit the hurdles the game is literally throwing out at them. Ideally, to finish the game and be free of it. 

‘Jumanji’ still of Yellow flower attack. Credit: TriStar Pictures via EW.com

The performances by the actors are well done for a family film that involves lots of running and screaming. Because of the excellent material, the story’s pace moves flawlessly from one part to the next. The tone of imminent danger and being hunted is counterbalanced wonderfully by the jokes, quips, and Home Alone-like sequences that fit right in. Kids and adults will enjoy it. 

Jumanji is an exciting, well-told adventure story crafted (originally) by someone with a dark sense of humor. It’s an excellent film to add to your watchlist for movie night or on a lazy weekend.

Would you play Jumanji?

—a pen lady

Film Critic, Movie Blog, Movie Reviews

Robin Hood: Prince of Thieves (1991)

Robin Hood: Prince of Thieves (1991)

Directed by: Kevin Reynolds   Rated: PG-13   Runtime: 2 hrs. 35 mins

Studio: Warner Bros.   Screenwriter: Pen Densham, John Watson

Cast: Kevin Costner, Morgan Freeman, Alan Rickman, Christian Slater, Mary Elizabeth 

Mastrantonio, Nick Brimble, Michael McShane

Does every generation deserve a version of Robin Hood? Considering how many have turned out, no. So what’s the allure? Robin Hood is from an English folk story. It’s been retold or made more than the legend of King Arthur or Beowulf. This allure is probably rooted in the fact that Robin Hood sticks up for the little guy, the downtrodden, against an oppressive ruling body. That theme exists in every society today. 

For those unfamiliar with the character, he’s against the local sheriff of Nottingham overtaxing, imprisoning, and killing the people and destroying their homes. Robin steals back the money and returns it to the people. He tries to also protect the kingdom until King Richard can return home. Why? He feels honor-bound to do so, not because someone tasked him with the job. Some people don’t like bullies… I can appreciate that. 

‘Robin Hood: Prince of Thieves’ Official Trailer via Movieclips Classic Trailers via YouTube

While Robin Hood: Prince of Thieves Robin of Locksley (Costner) does end up leading a group of outlaws, he’s little like the original material. Costner’s Robin is not light-hearted, and that departure is at the expense of having him been a crusader. Battling for years can change anyone, but it removes a critical component of the legends persona in this version. To say nothing of Costner’s “English” accent or the rest of the cast. 

The film begins with a dark, violent dungeon scene where body parts are chopped off. Historically this is what happened in certain places of the world as punishment. So it has little to do with an American director being overly violent. 

This introduction sequence is where Robin meets Azeem (Freeman). His character is not from the original tale but is a welcome addition that is utilized well. Morgan Freeman’s natural presence and tenor made him a perfect casting choice for this character. Azeem also balances out Costner’s lackluster performance to Alan Rickman’s sheriff’s outlandish demeanor and quips. No one on this project cared much for historical tone or accuracy to help drive the story. 

Kevin Costner in ‘Robin Hood: Prince of Thieves’ Image: Warner Bros. via The Guardian

While historically, loves was not a factor in match-making, the tale of Robin Hood is centered around his deep love for the Maid Marion (Mastrantonio). In this film, love has nothing to do with it. Costner and Mastrantonio come across more like squabbling siblings who were ordered to get in the mood. There is no buildup of chemistry; they just sort of jump to that at some point to move the film along. This makes the immensely popular Brian Adams song “Everything I Do (I Do It For You)” seem wrong. As for the rest of the music in this film, it’s strong and has a memorable intro score. 

Robin’s band of merry men are mainly nameless, except for a guy named Bull, who references his penis size. Little John (Brimble), whose role is diminished due to Azeem’s addition, Will Scarlet (Slater), and a drunk Friar Tuck (McShane). 

Christian Slater, Morgan Freeman, Nick Brimble in ‘Robin Hood: Prince of Thieves’ Imgae Credit: Warner Bros.

Thinking back thirty years from when I first saw this as a nine-year-old kid, specific memories come to mind. The witch of Nottingham was a creepy-crone (that’s still true), wanting to rewatch this movie just to see Will Scarlet and my moms’ comment about Kevin Costner’s “nice butt.” We all have bizarre things that stick in our minds…

In terms of viewability, there are far worse Robin Hood tales to watch. As a child of the 80s, my first introduction to the character was via Disney’s 1973 animated film, Robin Hood. A fun retelling of Robin and company in animal form. The next was the 1938 film The Adventures of Robin Hood, starring Errol Flynn. It’s the version everything else has failed to emulate for over eight decades. 

This was the early 90s, so the best action sequences still came from explosions and stunt work. The utilization of nature and the trees of the forest help to move the story forward is creative, compelling, and believable. The bow shooting, swordplay, and other action scenes are a nice change of pace from what’s usually showing in theaters. Or streaming nowadays. 

Alan Rickman and Mary Elizabeth Mastrantonio in ‘Robin Hood: Prince of Thieves’ Credit: Warner Bros. via Deenofgeek.com

Robin Hood: Prince of Thieves misses the mark of Robin Hood, the legend. While Alan Rickman was a phenomenal actor, someone should have given him some scope of his character; rather than free rein. Mary Elizabeth Mastrantonio had nothing to truly work with, except to avoid being raped…while a creepy witch watches. That entire scene is weird, uncomfortable, and anti-climatic. Kevin Costner was too stoic for the role. 

Robin Hood: Prince of Thieves is watchable. It’s not bad enough to avoid it altogether. A touch of nostalgia made me again. But, any film I can go longer than a few years, or decades, without watching shouldn’t be on anyone’s watchlist. 

—a pen lady