Tag: film

Uncategorized

Memoirs of a Geisha (2005)

apenlady

Memoirs of a Geisha (2005)

Directed by: Rob Marshall   Rated: PG-13   Runtime: 2 hrs. 25 mins

Studio: Sony Pictures      Screenwriter: Robin Swicord

Based on: Novel of same name by Arthur Golden

Cast: Ziyi Zhang, Gong Li, Ken Watanabe, Michelle Yeoh, Suzuko Ohgo, Kaori Momoi, Youki Kuhoh, Kôji Yakusho

Memoirs of a Geisha is an American Hollywood film about the mysterious lives of a class of people within Japanese culture. It’s directed by a white man. The art and costume departments were also led by white people. The book upon which this film is based was written by a white man. The main cast is Chinese. So, yes. Let’s get the points of cultural impropriety out of the way first, shall we? 

This movie would most likely not be made today without Japanese cast members as the leads. It would undoubtedly involve someone behind the scenes as a consultant. This would remove the tarnish this film suffers from culturally, at a minimum. As it is, the cast looks and sounds Chinese. One of the original points in casting was that there were not enough Japanese actors who could speak English well enough to be considered for specific roles. As a white American, I’m not so stupid; I can’t tell the difference between Chinese and Japanese people. Apparently, I am an exception, as the thinking was many Westerners are too dumb and close-minded to notice. Is that true? Yes, but how many possess the intellect and patience to sit through a film like this anyway? So, if you can get over the casting issues, keep reading.

Memoirs of a Geisha is a dramatic period piece (1920-the 1940s) that follows the path of a young girl, Chiyo (Ohgo), who is sold to a Geisha house. Such a place is where certain girls/women train to dance, play music, pour tea, and master the art of conversation. To be a companion to men in public settings. Not physically or sexually at all. They are a status symbol, moving displays of art and grace. It is said to be a great honor. And yet, what is unspoken is that this lifestyle is a form of modernized indentured servitude. Which makes me wonder if that’s historically accurate. 

The film begins with Chiyo being sold and taken from her home, a small fishing village, to a place with more rooftops than she’s ever seen before in her short life. Where she’s expected to scrub, clean, sew and do anything else that’s demanded of her. To serve. Until one day when she meets a man who shows her an ounce of compassion and kindness. No one else has in a long time. From this, the film is a springboard for Chiyo’s resolve to become a Geisha so she can see the man again. 

Ken Watanabe, Suzuko Ohgo in ‘Memoirs of a Geisha’ Credit: Sony Pictures via Cinemaholic.com

That moment is one I have an issue with. Chiyo is still a child, and her life’s ambition to become a Geisha is entangled with her desire for this man, known as “Chairman” (Watanabe), to become her patron. Someone who will look after her for the rest of her life. The narrative frames this as a love story, but it’s not. It’s a girl’s infatuation with someone just because they were kind to her. It carries on like this for years as her motivation for everything she does afterward. It’s a dangerous, unhealthy obsession. She never even learns his actual name. This obsession is encouraged by Mameha (Yeoh), who reminds Chiyo that Geisha are not entitled to love or have a life of their own. It makes a person wonder what it is all for. 

As Chiyo gets ready to make her Geisha debut, she is given a Geisha name, Sayuri (Zhang). 

The beginning of the film’s vantage point of Chiyo/Sayuri as a child (ideally) lets the audience appreciate all that she’s endured and put up with as a young woman about to become a Geisha. How she deals with an established, jealous rival from her own house, Hatsumomo (Li). An angry, vicious viper who clearly can’t handle the competition. Her character is a constant point of conflict for Chiyo/Sayuri. She causes much treachery and deceit throughout the film. This back and forth is just one of the many areas that provided layers of detail and cultural nuances. Often adding to the pace of the film so it shifts from beat to beat with ease. 

Ziyi Zhang, Michelle Yeoh, Gong Li in ‘Memoirs of a Geisha’ Credit: Sony Pictures

If the cultural nuances of Geisha or Japanese culture haven’t been bastardized for the period as a whole. I do wonder how much is wrong and what is accurate. 

Many of the characters are given some back story to grant their place in the plot with more relevance than they deserve, but they all serve a purpose. No one seems like a throwaway character. That said, the cast all deliver a performance that is as good as could be expected. It’s not difficult to understand anyone in their attempts to speak English clearly. Gong Li and Suzuka Ohgo are probably the most energetic actresses, with the most ability to branch out emotionally. As such, their depictions of Hatsumomo and young Chiyo are the most engaging to watch. 

Memoirs of a Geisha has this pull. From the start of the film, there is a tone that is set. One of seriousness and mystery. Where the further in you go, the more layers are pulled back to reveal this atmospheric bubble where dance, cherry trees, kimonos, and tea are the only reality that matter. Where women are locked in battles of words and wit to acquire a patron. 

Gong Li ‘Memoirs of a Geisha’ Credit: Sony Pictures via IMDb.com

The ending to this film is like the book. So, the fault or questions that creep in at the conclusion are not solely those of the filmmakers. The movie’s last act takes place at the end of world war two. History explains how that went for Japan. My question is, how would Arthur Golden resolve his Sayuri and Chairman storyline without the crutch of adding in the war as a copout? He created this story that eludes and divulges the secrets of the lives of Geisha. With all the rules and taboos therein. I think this story could have been stronger if the main plot was resolved without U.S. soldiers coming to Japan. If the story had been set sooner in time. How would that have affected the trajectory of the character’s endings if he had kept Sayuri on her delusional path? I have no idea. It’s a question you can think about if you see the film for yourself. 

Is Memoirs of a Geisha terrible? That depends on how you feel about the casting, first and foremost. Overall is the acting unwatchable? Not at all. The set designs and costumes are all remarkable looking. Elegant. Detailed. The choreography… ask someone with knowledge.  

For an American-made film with an all-Asian cast, I can see its desire to expand beyond what gets typically made here. To provide a film that would expand Westerners’ mindsets on the notion of ‘foreign films.’ Because if this film was made with a Japanese cast, spoken in Japanese, with English subtitles, virtually no one in America would have gone to see it. That’s assuming it made it to smaller local theaters at all. American’s are idiotic, lazy, snobs when it comes to the idea of reading and watching at the same time during a film. Well, the entire film. 

Ziyi Zhang in ‘Memoirs of a Geisha’ Credit: Sony Pictures via Slant Magazine

The non-American Asian community will undoubtedly find faults with this film enough to not want to see it. That’s fair. However, there are plenty of factors about Memoirs of a Geisha that land it on the watchable list. Again if you don’t mind the casting flubs and a story around women and their issues, it’s a good watch. Just make sure you’re not distracted while viewing. 

—a pen lady

Film Critic, Movie Blog, Movie Reviews

The Tomorrow War (2021)

apenlady

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 Worlds. The 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)

apenlady

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

Avengers (2012)

apenlady

Avengers (2012)

Directed by: Joss Whedon   Runtime: 2 hrs. 25 mins.   Rated: PG-13

Studio: Marvel Studios   Screenwriter: Zak Penn, Joss Whedon

Cast: Robert Downey Jr., Chris Evans, Chris Hemsworth, Scarlett Johansson, Jermey Renner, Mark Ruffalo, Tom Hiddleston, Samuel L. Jackson, Cobie Smulders, Gwyneth Paltrow, Stellan Skarsgård, Clark Gregg

Avengers is the culmination of years of planning and strategic story-telling. Number seven in proper viewing order. It brings together Iron Man (Downey), Captain America (Evans), Thor (Hemsworth), Black Widow (Johansson), Hawkeye (Renner), and Hulk (Ruffalo). Together they work to stop Loki (Hiddleston) and his aspirations of ruling Midgard (Earth). 

Yep, that Loki. And he’s not alone. He’s got an army. Loki’s introduction beyond Asgard was visually impressive! The audience gets to see more character development with him and everyone. 

Trailer for ‘The Avengers’ Credit: Marvel Studios via YouTube.com

The Hulk was recast. The previous one played by Edward Norton came across exceptionally well as a geeky scientist. Other than that, Marvel swapping him out with Mark Ruffalo isn’t a big deal. Still, Marvel uses the Avengers to create a backstory and rationale for Hulk’s quick and seamless participation. 

Hawkeye gets more screen time here than he did in Thor, where the character appeared, briefly. His storyline within the movie mixes with Black Widows. They’ve worked together for years, and the audience gets to see this bond, which feels authentic. Their respective roles always matter more within the ensemble, what they add to the group and why they stick around. They’re the only two without something “extra,” so they are the closest to everyday people. That makes them more relatable. 

In the beginning, they’re a motley crew, but they rally. NYC gets trashed in the process, but it’s not their faults Loki came. 

The Avengers in ‘The Avengers’ Credit: Marvel Studios via Cinemablend.com

The story itself isn’t complicated, nor should it be with a movie like this. It’s designed to be engaging and fun. There’s no prerequisite to see this film if you don’t care about the standalone films before it. No need to have read comics, ever. With these stories, the Marvel Cinematic Universe’s (MCU) ambition is to build upon the one before it. It’s easier to watch an ensemble do something, like saving the world when the audience is invested in the characters. Marvel building up the characters beforehand was an excellent strategy to get the audience invested. 

Books have been made into films for decades. Stories as rich, diverse, complex, and satisfying as Lord of the Ring are masterfully adapted to the screen, but the material only goes so far. Avengers is dozens of stories and connections, their potential- limitless. Why? Because comic books engage multiple-age groups over a wide range of lifestyles and cultures. Comic adaptations, done right, don’t have to end. 

Chitauri in ‘Avengers’ Credit: Marvel Studios via Screenrant.com

The characters are engaging and watchable. The performances by all are convincing, for what the roles asked of them. No one from this franchise will win an Oscar for their acting; the script never allow for that level of depth and range. However, awards should be given for excellent editing, sound editing, CGI, and stunt work. The actors may be the “face” of the film, but the lion’s share of what makes it what it is comes from the handwork and efforts of all the behind-the-scenes magic. 

Avengers is a fun, loud, colorful, action-packed film that’s worth a place on your watchlist. 

—a pen lady

Film Critic, Movie Blog, Movie Reviews

Minority Report (2002)

apenlady

Minority Report (2002) 

Directed by: Steven Spielberg   Rated: PG-13   Runtime: 2 hrs. 26 mins

Studio: Dreamworks Pictures & 20th Century Fox   Screenwriter: 

Adapted: Short story “The Minority Report” by Philip K. Dick

Cast: Tom Cruise, Colin Farrell, Samantha Morton, Neal McDonough, Max von Sydow

In the year 2054, there’s no murder in Washington D.C., and it’s been that way for six years with the use of Pre-Crime in Minority Report. 

Pre-Crime is a division of the police that arrests people before they commit murders. How is that possible? With the use of ‘pre-cogs.’ The pre-cogs are three people that were given birth to by drug addicts and, as such, caused the babies to have a severe mental handicap. A doctor who sought to cure them of their afflictions caused an unintended anomaly to manifest in some—the ability to see future murders. 

Dreamworks Pictures & 20th Century Fox ‘Minority Report’ Trailer via YouTube

Minority Report is an overly complicated story of a murder, the vehicle for the plot, but, to me, is secondary to the film’s themes. These themes ask things of the audience that are overlooked by most of the characters. What are the ethical and moral obligations of using technology in many avenues of life? Doesn’t it take away free will? How can due process be ignored? In America, we are supposed to be innocent until proven guilty, but what if we haven’t committed said crime yet? There is a line between thinking of doing something and actually following through. The story follows the philosophical logic that events are bound by causality. That past events/actions/choices are always the cause of future events. 

Yes, the movie is a melding of action and ideas while solving a crime, but it has a huge plot hole that isn’t recognizable until the ending. I’m not talking about the gigantic question about how Pre-Crime can work long term when it’s based on three people. What happens when they die someday? That’s not even the plot hole; that’s just a huge, logical question. 

‘Minority Report’ Image: Dreamworks Pictures & 20th Century Pictures

For 2002, the film utilizes the technology available to create visually impressive “future” tech vibes that twenty years later have worked their way into our lives. There are no spider drones, but we have drones. We don’t have manually powered cycling sonic guns or fly around in jet packs. Our streets don’t look that nice anywhere in America, but the self-driving cars are sleek and sexy. Eat your heart out, Tesla. I also had Westworld vibes! 

Minority Report moves along well enough but drags at times. Specifically, when the main character, Chief of Pre-Crime, John Anderton (Cruise), sinks into his depressed, self-loathing, and self-destructive habits. Cruise is in charge in this role, and runs, jumps, climbs, and gets shot at repeatedly. That just described ninety percent of his career. It’s an a-typical performance and nothing spectacular from anything else he’s done. His ex-wife Lara’s addition, beyond old videos, is a crutch and isn’t needed if only to satisfy Spielberg’s sappy cliché ending. 

Samantha Morton in ‘Minority Report’ Image: Dreamworks Pictures & 20th Century Fox via Wired.com

While Colin Farrell (Danny Witwer) and Neal McDonough (Fletcher) don’t have as much screen time, they do bring great energy when on screen. Witwer is out to find the flaw in the system because he’s against over-reaching on people’s rights. Fletcher is second in command and is tasked to bring in John when determined he will commit a murder. 

Cruise may be the principal character, but it’s Agatha (Samantha Morton) who stole the show for me. Agatha is one of the three pre-cogs. All three live in a sterile room in a pool of specialized, nutrient liquid while constantly hooked up to provide a live, recordable feed from their minds of murders that haven’t happened yet. Sedated every moment of their lives, barely able to move or speak. A slave from the moment their minds opened up, unable to close again. At one point, she asks, “can you see?” and while Agatha is asking about something specific, it carries a double meaning for all of the themes presented throughout the movie. Her character is the most energetic and emotionally engaging in terms of performance. 

Tom Cruise in ‘Minority Report’ Image: Dreamworks Pictures & 20th Century Fox via Wired.com

Minority Report is this oddly lit movie that highlights the depth some will go to circumvent the system. No matter how advanced we get, humans are still materialistic, dirty, emotional creatures of habit at our core. The movie is part crime-solving, part action, and mystery. If you like crime, action, or sci-fi films, Minority Report is worth a place on your watchlist, even if you need to rent it. 

—a pen lady

Film Critic, Movie Blog, Movie Reviews

Max (2015)

apenlady

MAX ( 2015)

Directed by: Boaz Yakin   Runtime: 1 hr. 51 mins.   Rated: PG  

Studio: Warner Bros. Pictures & MGM  Screenwriter: Boaz Yakin, Sheldon Lettich 

Cast:  Carlos, Robbie Amell, Josh Wiggins, Mia Xitlali, Lauren Graham, Thomas Haden 

Church, Luke Kleintank

The people who put together the trailers for their respective movies and create something like Max’s trailer should have them fired or smacked upside the head. Bad trailers happen with alarming frequency. Max is another film that suffers from morons while editing. It should be a category for a Razzie award. I add the trailers to the movies I review as a convenience to you, the reader. However, if I add the trailer for Max, it’s like I’m giving the plot away. I usually don’t watch movies where I feel like I just saw the film after seeing the trailer. What would be the point of that? Yet the trailer for Max does just that. Back when this film came out, I still had a Belgian Malinois, like Max, so I saw it based on that. 

Max is a film based on a fictional American military working dog of the same name. Max (Carlos) is handled by Marine Kyle Wincott (Amell), who dies in Afghanistan. The events that lead to Kyle’s death leave Max unable to perform as trained, and he is sent back to the United States. Kyle’s family is given the option of what to do with Max, as he cannot be handled due to his PTSD. The one person he ‘accepts’ is Kyle’s younger brother, Justin (Wiggins). 

Robbie Amell & Carlos in ‘Max’ Image: Warner Bros. Pictures & MGM

Justin is several years younger than Kyle. Wiggins portrays the self-absorbed, sulky teenager with a chip on his shoulder better than most “teenagers” are depicted. Compared to the rest of the humanoid cast members, Justin’s character is the only one with depth. The film, more or less, is about Justin and his relationship with Max, so it’s bearable. 

While Max is semi-predictable and lacks any deep character development, it does highlight its themes well. How processing grief is healthy, courage, and character. For what it does well in those areas, it creates stereotypes in others. 

Carlos, Mia Xitlali, Dejon LaQuake, Josh Wiggins in ‘Max’ Image: Warner Bros. Pictures

The Wincott family hasn’t had Max long in their home when a friend and former service member Tyler (Kleintank) arrives back in town. He and Max clearly don’t like one another, yet no one seems to notice. Yakin does nothing to hide that Tyler is trouble; in the same way, Justin’s parents (Church and Graham) are obliviously stupid when necessary. Yakin also put no effort into anyone in this movie, sounding like they are from Texas. It’s not complicated. 

So, Justin learns how to own a dog, let alone one like Max, with the help of his friends (not his parents). The plot unfolds with Justin’s mistrust of Tyler’s reason for leaving the Marines. Deepening into more of an edgy, back-to-school special, modern-day Mystery Inc. storyline. If Scooby-Doo was a fearless bad-ass and not a cowardly eating machine and the gang all got around on bikes and not in a van. 

Lauren Graham, Luke Kleintank, Josh Wiggins, Thomas Hayden Church in ‘Max’ Image: Warner Bros. Pictures & MGM

This film is full of areas I can point out as logistically wrong. Still, its target audience is best appreciated by those 10-16 years old. Or those like me who enjoy seeing a Belgian Malinois on the big screen. Really, it makes me miss my dog. Sometimes we all need a dose of sappy. Max is a decent film that’s pace moves along well enough to keep a parent or kid engaged until the end. 

This movie is undoubtedly under the lens of Americans and their working dogs in Afghanistan. It can also be appreciated by anyone connected to or served with K-9 handlers from any country. Yakin tried to honor the working service dogs of the military, and does to a point, but could have done more with a better script.

Max is a feel-good movie that is meant to tug on your heart, to make you appreciate the efforts of K-9 military service animals. It does that, more or less in a tolerable way. While adults may like it, many younger viewers will love it. With that in mind, Max should find its way onto your watchlist. 

—a pen lady

Film Critic, Movie Blog, Movie Reviews

Zack Snyder’s Justice League (2021) Pt.1

apenlady

Zack Snyder’s Justice League (2021)

Directed by: Zack Snyder  Studio: Warner Bros. Pictures  Runtime: 4hrs. 2 mins.   

Screenplay by: Chris Terrio   Story by: Zack Snyder & Chris Terrio and Will Beall

Cast: Henry Cavill, Gal Gadot, Ben Affleck, Jason Momoa, Ezra Miller, Ray Fisher,  

          Amber Heard, Amy Adams, Jeremy Irons  Rated: R  

**This movie is LONG! Unpacking it is a chore, so I am breaking my review/commentary on it into two parts. Look for the second half on Monday. Thanks everyone!**

Zack Snyder’s cut of the Justice League movie was born from the efforts of a devoted fanbase. That is why this movie exists, pure and simple. They are all proud of this, and I might applaud their efforts if most of them weren’t so toxic. That is a conversational beast that doesn’t belong here. My review isn’t for them. They need no convincing to see this film one way or the other. 

Once a bell is rung, it cannot be un-rung. In the same way, I cannot un-see a movie already watched. The memory is there, that crucial first impression ingrained. My goal is to review just ‘the Snyder Cut’ without comparing it too much to the 2017 Justice League.  

‘Zack Snyder’s Justice League’ Official Trailer via ING, YouTube.

That said, the first scene in Zack Snyder’s Justice League shows the audience the end of the fight scene in Batman v Superman: Dawn of Justice. Except that it’s not. This scene is clearly meant to imply this sequence happened, but it didn’t. Basically, Snyder added it to this film in a show of ego of how he could improve something he didn’t have the foresight to do the first time around. This intro sequence certainly would have improved upon Lex Luthor’s (Jessie Eisenberg) lines said at the end of Dawn of Justice. Cementing the seriousness of what was to come in ‘Justice League.’ That aggravating clarification aside, Snyder does get points for including information in this introduction in a concise, straightforward way that explains how Lex knew certain things in the first place.

Kal-El’s (Cavill) cries are like a supersonic whistle that only three guarded boxes can hear. Pushing aside the 2017 Justice League movie, assuming you, the reader, haven’t seen that film, this introduction works:

  1. It connects this film better to the previous one.
  2. It sets the tone.
  3. It sets up the plot.

All in the first five minutes without one spoken line. Not bad. 

Ben Affleck and Gal Gadot in ‘Zack Snyder’s Justice League’ Image: Warner Bros. Pictures via cbr.com

This film’s premise is that Bruce Wayne/Batman (Affleck) has been warned of a force coming to destroy the Earth in the wake of Superman’s death. With a fresh resolve to make up for his previous notions of Superman before his death, Bruce seeks out metahumans, with Diana/Wonder Woman’s (Gadot) help to protect Earth. Snyder presents this task and journey in the film into seven parts.

Sectioning off the film into parts doesn’t come across as chapters in a narrative as smoothly as they could have been. If anything, they serve to avoid jagged scene transitions. Personally, I find that lazy. Let’s review the film by these parts, not because I’m lazy but because it will act as headers and make it easier to read. 

PART 1 

In the 2017 film, I didn’t know who to blame for giving Arthur Curry/Aquaman (Momoa) ice-blue eyes, Whedon or Snyder. They both knew a stand-alone Aquaman film was in the works, so why not consult about the character? In the 2017 film, his eyes were better looking than in ‘the Snyder cut’ because there is more color and brightness. Snyder has this depressing, overcast, muted tone thing going on in this movie. It loses the effectiveness of the choice to have his eyes this color the first place. Since then, the Aquaman movie came out and Zack Snyder’s choice to not change Arthur’s eye color to match is ridiculous. When establishing a movie franchise universe with different directors and visions, SOME consulting should be a given! A professional courtesy. 

Jason Momoa as Aquaman. Image: Warner Bros. Pictures via Looper.com

You’re probably thinking I’m just ranting and not reviewing, but I am. This lack of acknowledgment is repeated frequently in this film. When a director and studio allow this to happen, it can damage what is trying to be built. It also can confuse the audience. I’m giving my thoughts without giving anything away. Or trying to, at least. 

The introduction and general use of Lois Lane (Adams) are better here. It connects her relationship to Clark, and the loss, in a way that is relatable for anyone who’s lost someone important. She’s not just a last resort plot mechanism.

There is a sequence in a bank where Wonder Woman busts out some unbelievable moves. Diana has impressive reflexes, true, but she’s not faster than the Flash. She’s not faster than (modern-day) speeding bullets either. It’s an example of speeding up a character beyond their established capabilities. It also made me question if children in Europe actually go on field trips to banks? We don’t in America, so it seems like a comic cliche add-on. 

Steppenwolf in 2017 ‘Justice League’ on LEFT & ‘Zack Snyder’s Justice League’ on RIGHT. Image: Warner Bros. Pictures via ScreenCrush

A favorite DC setting is brought back, the island of Themyscira. Here we get a look at another aspect of Amazonian responsibility. This is where Steppenwolf, the antagonist of the movie, is introduced. Previously, in the 2017 version, he looked more organic. In Zack Snyder’s Justice League, he resembles the shiniest, chrome-plated Decepticon ever seen. An expansion of what happens on the island in this version shows what goes down is more than just a short keep-away game. In that, and this is in the trailer, so it’s not a spoiler, think what it would take to destroy part of an island created by a god. 

PART 2 

Steppenwolf’s goals and place in the universe are made more evident in this film. The audience gets a sense of it when DeSaad materializes to converse with Steppenwolf about his progress towards redeeming himself to Darkseid. The being Steppenwolf answers to. However, Snyder struggles to effectively elude to his ultimate plot within a plot.

Snyder does give a more intimate, personal introduction to Victor Stone/Cyborg’s (Fisher) storyline than he previously received. Ray Fisher does a wonderful job of portraying Cyborg, which I discuss in my review of the 2017 film.

Ray Fisher as Cyborg in ‘Zack Snyder’s Justice League’ Image: Warner Bros. Pictures via The Hollywood Reporter

The scenario where a woman jumps, climbs, or runs in high heels is a personal gripe I have every time it happens on TV or cinema. It’s a great example of men writing women characters poorly. Diana, who’s always in heels, jumps in hers and lands with them intact. Doesn’t break her shoes or ankles. She really is a Wonder Woman.

There are two moments where I question the musical choice for scenes. Like, what kind of mood are you trying to create from the one I was just in. The tone change doesn’t transition well. One is with Aquaman, the other is later with the Flash. Music is a fantastic tool in cinema, and this film’s musical scores did nothing for me. Both ‘Everybody Knows’ by Sigrid and ‘Come Together’ by Gary Clark Jr. & Junkie XL from the 2017 film are removed in the Snyder Cut. The removal of ‘Come Together’ is understandable; its tempo is too energetic for Snyder. Sigrid’s song is great, but there is no place for it in this movie, even one four hours long.

After almost an hour, Vulko (William Dafoe) finally refers to the three boxes as ‘Mother Boxes.’ I still don’t like how the boxes were adapted from how they are utilized in the comics. This scene could have benefited from Aquaman director James Wan and Snyder swapping notes since it messes with what ends up being part of Arthurs origin story. 

Darkseid in ‘Zack Snyder’s Justice League’ Image: Warner Bros. Pictures via Looper.com

In part two, Diana explains to Bruce who/what Darkseid is. She recounts the story of when he came to Earth before, and the wording is ambiguous. It’s frustrating because the script is so vague here. The writers hope the audience isn’t paying too close attention to details because they are not concise in their storytelling. They simply lack the imagination to connect this part of the storyline to a future plot point. I could sum it up, but that would involve spoilers. It creates questions for me about Aquaman and Wonder Woman’s original stories. Snyder blows some of that away without a care to the directors who gave fans notable films and storytelling. It’s so professionally fucking rude! 

Who needs continuity in a franchise or any story? Right?

PART 3

The Flash’s intro. In the 2017 version, Barry Allen/The Flash (Miller) was the best part of the movie for me. He was a mix of vulnerable, funny, and honest, appreciating and in awe for what he was joining. His reactions were tremendously different from everyone else. He’s what a young Flash should be, too bright for his own good, quick with quips and occasionally putting his foot in his mouth, but in an enduring way. Zack Snyder got rid of that. Pity. In his version, Barry/Flash starts off as an excuse-ridden idiot with attention issues. 

His intro sequence involves the introduction to Kiersey Clemons as Iris West. She’ll be in the stand-alone Flash movie for relevance. That said, she’s only in one scene, and frankly, it could have been shortened or cut altogether. The entire sequence does nothing for Barry’s character overall. There is an Easter egg here. This is the other scene when the musical choice makes me feel like I’ve been transported momentarily into a different film.

Ezra Miller as The Flash in ‘Zack Snyder’s Justice League’ Image: Warner Bros. Pictures via Screen Rant

Victor Stone’s story is fleshed out more and elaborates better on how he became Cyborg. Every time his character’s backstory comes up, the audience sees a well-rounded character in development that you want to follow along with. 

Barry meets Bruce, and that’s the same. There wasn’t anything wrong with that whole setup. What is tweaked is how Diana and Victor meet for the first time, but she is still patient and empathetic towards him, and that matters. 

Steppenwolf goes to Atlantis, and I think Mera (Heard) is fleshed out a bit more, but not much. As is King Orm, who is only mentioned but gives the audience an idea of who he is before the Aquaman movie. I do wish Mera’s magic was utilized more; it’s an underused attribute of her character. A significant example in this section of the movie contradicts Mera’s character in this film against the Aquaman stand-alone. It’s like Zack Snyder has never bothered to see James Wan’s Aquaman! If you see this movie, can you pick up on it? 

**Come back for the second half of this review!**

–a pen lady

Film Critic, Movie Blog, Movie Reviews

Chef (2014)

apenlady

Chef (2014)

Directed by: Jon Favreau  Rated: R Runtime: 1 hr. 54 min Screenwriter: Jon Favreau 

Studio: Aldamisa Entertainment, Fairview Entertainment

Cast:  Jon Favreau, Sofia Vergara, John Leguizamo, Scarlett Johansson, Dustin Hoffman, Emjay Anthony, Oliver Platt, Bobby Cannavale, Robert Downey Jr. 

Warning, if you love food, this movie might cause you to drool like my Great Pyrenees begging for food. 

Many adults are merely content with their jobs or careers. In Chef, however, Carl Casper (Favreau) loves what he does. To cook. To create. In real life, it’s inspiring to see such a person who enjoys what they do. Favreau creates and depicts such a person, character with chef Carl Casper. 

‘Chef’ Officail Trailer via YouTube–Movieclips Trailers

Carl is head chef at a popular LA restaurant owned and operated by Riva (Hoffman). When a review one night by famous food critic Ramsey Michel (Platt) ruffles feathers, a Twitter war ensues. Shit happens, and Carl is left looking for a place that will appreciate his creative, delicious endeavors. 

Outside the single-minded vortex of food and cooking is Carls family. His ex-wife Inez (Vergara) and their son Percy (Anthony). While there isn’t a backstory per se of their marriage, the audience understands Carl’s priorities and how parental responsibility isn’t high on his list. He isn’t so self-centered that he won’t spend time with Percy or go on a trip last minute with him and his ex-wife, essentially to be a babysitter for a weekend for his own kid. I’ve never met ex’s that get along so well, so in terms of believably take what you will from this part of the script/character development. 

Going along with the believability…is when Carl meets Marvin (RDJ). Awkward…and Marvin gives Carl a food truck because Inez talked them into it. You know what, it’s okay. It’s a fun movie, really, so go with it. 

Jon Favreau, Emjay Anthony, Sofia Vergara in ‘Chef’ from Aldamisa Entertainment via Entertainment Weekly

The actual girth of the film is Carl’s journey of discovery and self-reflection. The best ingredients for this plot and character arcs involve Percy and Carl’s former line-cook, Martin (Leguizamo). There is such great chemistry between them; you see the love, inspiration, respect, and bonds.

Anthony’s Percy comes off just right. Not too bright for his character’s age and not so whiny or dejected that you wish he wasn’t there. It’s hard to get kid roles right. Leguizamo is a welcome addition to everything I’ve ever seen him in. He adds humor, authenticity, and energy to contrast Carl’s more serious side. 

A film needs good pacing, just like a kitchen and this movie has it. While it is about Carl’s journey, it’s also about the food. Unlike a regular person Instagramming every meal they make at home, the food in a film based on a chef should be a focal point. The creations chef Carl makes are well presented and colorful. If you choose to see this movie, don’t do it on an empty stomach. That would be worse than going grocery shopping while hungry. 

Jon Favreau and John Leguizamo in ‘Chef’ by Aldamisa Entertainment Image via IMDb

This movie is stacked with a wonderfully talented cast selection; they all do justice to their respective roles. An easy film to have missed when it came out; Chef is an under-appreciated, relatable story with a comedic backbone. 

Chef is undoubtedly worthy of your time and a place on your watchlist, provided you view it on a full stomach. 

—a pen lady