Tag: Movie

Film Critic, Movie Blog, Movie Reviews

Thor (2011)

apenlady

Thor (2011)

Directed by: Kenneth Branagh   Rated: PG-13   Runtime: 1 hr. 55 mins. 

Studio: Marvel Studios’   Screenwriter: Ashley Miller, Zack Stentz, Don Payne

Cast: Chris Hemsworth, Tom Hiddleston, Natalie Portman, Jamie Alexander, Idris Elba, Anthony Hopkins, Rene Russo, Stellan Skarsgård, Clark Gregg, Kat Dennings, Ray Stevenson, Tadanobu Asano, Jeremy Renner

Thor is the sixth MCU film in thematic viewing order. The concept of Thor and company is based on an actual myth and once followed belief system. For the most part, Disney hasn’t mutilated Thor to suit its own needs yet. Given that it’s the first, this cleverly created script works to introduce that the myth is, well, real. 

Its fantasy come to life, aided by fantastic-looking costumes and sets working in tandem with the magic of CGI. The grandeur and scale of Asgard are beautiful. I wish it was explored more. 

‘Thor’ Official Trailer via Marvel Studios, YouTube

The stunt work is incredible. Whether Thor (Hemsworth) is beating up SHIELD agents, or Sif (Alexander) is taking on a magically powered sentry. To group fights with giant ice beings, nothing is questionable and disrupts the viewing experience. 

Thor is not perfect; none of the Norse mythological characters are. Okay, Disney/Marvel did change that in this first film, but that’s not a bad thing. For those who think Odin (Hopkins) can only act as Odin and Thor, a selfish, mindless meat sack should go brush up on Norse mythology. This adaptation is diet-Norse, a lower rating of their usual temperaments. Doing this fits in better with Marvel’s overall plans and makes for more compelling characters long run. 

After disobeying his king’s/fathers commands to not do something that would cause war, Thor is cast out from his home on Asgard. He is hurtled to Earth as punishment until he can grow up. Why is it that being sent to Earth by aliens is a punishment?

Tom Hiddleston and Chris Hemsworth in ‘Thor’ CREDIT: ZADE ROSENTHAL/MARVEL/PARAMOUNT/KOBAL/SHUTTERSTOCK via People.com

The message from father to son of ‘there are consequences for actions—even for ‘gods,’ is essential to represent. One, because power should not be left unchecked. Second, superhero’s seemingly walk about doing what they please, often forgetting or believing they are above ramifications. The point helps shape Thor into who he’ll become, even if it’s not what Odin had in mind. 

Even though Thor has his own standalone film to better serve Marvel’s goals of an ensemble team-up, it works. His characters’ world has depth and history, and his own movie was absolutely required. 

The overall pace of the film and scene beats flow with no sagging or hiccups. The cast is a massive part of that. Everyone is phenomenal and perfectly cast. Yes, some don’t get their full due in this film, but it’s a large cast. Certain characters will be fleshed out more later (Renner), and others are just there as supporting members (Dallas, Asano, Stevenson). 

Ray Stevenson, Jamie Alexander, Josh Dallas, Tadanobu Asano in ‘Thor’ Image: Marvel Studios via Mashable.com

Chris Hemsworth makes a visually appealing Thor, but more than that, he delivers his character with the right balance of emotion, force, and charm. He’s not too brutish, cheesy, or mildly simplistic like some animated versions of the character. 

Tom Hiddleston’s Loki is the opposite of Thor. He’s smaller in stature, lean, and lacks any physical prowess. Loki makes up for that with wit, smarts, charm, and a silver tongue. Unlike Thor, Loki was taught magic by his mother, Frigga (Russo), and uses it often. Tom was an unlikely choice for the god of mischief but made the role his own and embraced it. 

Sir Anthony Hopkins has done many roles in his distinguished career, but his casting as Odin is perfection. It’s not a large role, but once you see him as the all-father, it’s difficult to imagine anyone else. The same is true of Idris Elba as Heimdall, the gatekeeper of Asgard. His natural tenor and presence would make most think twice before wanting to deal with him, but in Thor, his golden armored costume only amplifies that. Honestly, it takes an exceptional person to pull off that much gold and fight in it, all while wielding a gigantic sword. 

Stellan Skarsgård, Kat Dennings, Natalie Portman in ‘Thor’ Credit: Marvel Studios via Cinemablend.com

The comradely and established bonds of the characters shine through in such a robust and believable manner with little to no character development. That’s difficult to create and perform, and Thor executes it well. 

Thor is the general publics’ first inclination that they are not alone in the universe. Decades after Captain Marvel came to Earth, briefly and went unnoticed by the public, this is Marvel’s foot in the door to execute its master plans. 

Is Thor a compelling story as other superhero troupes? No. And yet, it’s absolutely worth watching. A good, fun story with a solid cast. For those that don’t like this kind of film, fine. For everyone else, this is worth a place on your watchlist. 

—a pen lady

Film Critic, Movie Blog, Movie Reviews

Robin Hood: Prince of Thieves (1991)

apenlady

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

Film Critic, Movie Blog, Movie Reviews

Iron Man 2 (2010)

apenlady

Iron Man 2 (2010)

Directed by: Jon Favreau   Rated: PG-13   Runtime: 2 hrs. 4 mins. 

Studio: Paramount Pictures/Marvel Studios   Screenwriter: Justin Theroux

Based on: ‘Iron Man’ comic by Stan Lee, Jack Kirby, Don Heck, Larry Lieber

Cast: Robert Downey Jr., Micky Rourke, Sam Rockwell, Gwyneth Paltrow, Jon Favreau, Samuel L. Jackson, Don Cheadle, Paul Bettany, Scarlet Johansson, Greg Clark, 

Iron Man 2 picks up six months from where the first one left off. Here Tony (Downey) must deal with the downside to coming out as Iron Man. His company, health, and reputation are suffering, and through all that, some heavy choices and discoveries happen. 

Marvel Studios’ and Paramount Pictures ‘Iron Man 2’ Trailer 2 via YouTube.com

The main question that’s asked, ‘is the Iron Man suit a weapon?’ If so, should it just be handed over to the government? This question is one of the main conflicts. The idea/fear is that not just anyone should build such a device; just because they can. That’s logical from a legal perspective; people can’t make explosives at home and use them. Or a nuke, if one was resourceful and intelligent enough. For Tony, it’s more-it’s also keeping him alive, so he argues. And yet, it’s the device in his chest that does that, not the suit. Still, it’s proprietary. He created it. Tony’s grandstanding and ego aside. 

Mix the above with the lifetime grudge Ivan Vanko (Rourke) has for the Stark family, and the story begins to take shape. On his own, Ivan’s character and mission could never hold up as a plot. However, when Justin Hammer (Rockwell) joins the party, things fall into place. Yeah, Hammer is like that guy that shows up and tries to fit in but never quite does. Still, his desperate efforts and use of Ivan’s hatred tie in effortlessly with the government’s issues with Tony Stark as Iron Man. The merging of the subplots is clean, logical, and drives the story forward. 

Samuel L. Jackson and Robert Downey Jr. in ‘Iron Man 2′ Image Credit: Marvel Studios’ and Paramount Pictures via Screengeek.com

Iron Man and many of the components of the film also move forward seamlessly because of the CGI. The costumes, flying, explosions, race sequence, and fight scenes all add to the film but don’t overpower it. It’s balanced. 

Agent Coulson (Clark), Happy Hogan (Favreau), and the voice of JARVIS (Bettany) all return for their respective roles. Other new additions are Nick Fury (Jackson), Natasha Romanoff (Johansson), and Lt. Col. Rhodes was recast with Don Cheadle. Everyone has more of a role in this film, and they execute their characters very well. It’s always nice to see character growth (development) with established characters. 

Rourke’s performance is forgettable, but his character is meant to be. Ivan’s merely a plot device to further Tony’s journey and nothing more. 

Hammer has always been a cast-off, a joke in the comics. Hammer tech is the two-star rated company you settle for because the best-rated ones are out of stock/back-ordered, and you can’t wait. Sam Rockwell really does a suburb job of bringing his character from page to screen. 

Sam Rockwell and Mickey Rourke in ‘Iron Man 2′ Image Credit: Marvel Studios’ and Paramount Pictures via Gamerant.com

A real treat is watching Natasha Romanoff (Johansson) bust some ass-kicking moves on a group of security personnel. In this film, the audience gets a glimpse that theres’ more to her than she lets on. Her character is instantly one you want to see more of. 

RDJ continues to shape the character of Tony Stark/Iron Man in a performance that never disappoints. 

Iron Man 2 is a good sequel and is a staging ground for many stories and characters to come. The film is worth a place on your watchlist for a fun watch with a good story and engaging characters. Be sure to stick around for the end credit scenes. 

—a pen lady

Film Critic, Movie Blog, Movie Reviews

A Quiet Place 2 (2021)

apenlady

A Quiet Place 2 (2021)

Directed by: Jon Krasinski   Rated: PG-13   Runtime: 1 hr. 37 mins.

Studio: Paramount Pictures and Platinum Dunes

Screenwriter: Jon Krasinski, Scott Beck, Bryan Woods

Cast: Jon Krasinski, Emily Blunt, Cillian Murphy, Millicent Simmonds, Noah Jupe, Djimon Hounsou

I take care not to put out spoilers that ruin a movie in my reviews/posts. To dance around them when reviewing franchise films, where one builds upon another. Though, strictly speaking, they’re not sequels. A Quiet Place 2 is very much a traditional sequel. To talk about it will mean referencing its predecessor a little. There may be baby-sized spoilers, but nothing major. Therefore, don’t read this until you’ve seen the first one. 

Paramount Pictures final trailer for ‘A Quiet Place 2’ via YouTube.com

A Quiet Place 2 is not one of those sequels that’s a letdown. Sure, some of the mystery is gone now that audiences understand the alien’s trigger. That doesn’t equate to a lack of suspense and thrills. I couldn’t remember the last time I jumped in my seat seeing a movie, and for this one, it happened twice. 

The film picks up right where the first left off. In a flashback/memory, the audience gets to experience the day the aliens came. Yes, it shows multiple perspectives and not just the person having the flashback; it’s forgivable. Move on. It’s effortlessly shown and seamlessly goes right back to the movie’s present. By adding this, viewers see the connections with other townspeople the Abbott family knew. This is nice because there is no need to explain who someone is later on. Case in point, Emmett (Murphy). 

Emmett and Regan (Simmonds) are the genuine leads of the film. Evelyn (Blunt) and Marcus (Jupe) have sizable chunks, but someone has to keep an eye on baby Abbott. With the family farm in ruins, a safe and sound-proof space is crucial with a newborn in tow. 

Noah Jupe, Emily Blunt, Millicent Simmonds in ‘A Quiet Place 2’ Image Credit: Paramout Pictures via Screenrant.com

Everyone’s acting is on point, to a level that questions how. How did Krasinski get such real-life-like emotional reactions? When Noah Jupe’s Marcus screams and panics (which is all he seems to do), did he have a coach? Or Emily Blunt’s resolve as Evelyn to carry around that crate and baby on an injured foot is pure grit. Grit is not a term I would use to describe Emily Blunt typically. The natural-seeming reactions of Millicent Simmonds’s Regan are also amazing to see depicted, as she is deaf in real life too. All of it adds to the believability and suspense as you watch these characters struggle to survive. 

Let’s talk feet for a moment. Evelyn walks around barefoot as the Abbott’s have elected to do, with a wound and dirty bandage. Ow and yuck! On top of that, they must now walk beyond the soft sandy paths they established near home. I’m barefoot most of the time, so my feet are used to a certain degree of abuse. However, walking on and running through the places the characters do without issue isn’t believable. Maybe if they were as light-footed as the elf, Legolas, from Lord of the Ring. 

Krasinski doesn’t expand on the aliens in any way, which will bug some viewers who expect answers and details. In this, A Quiet Place 2’s alien foe is like the concept of the zombies in AMC’s The Walking Dead. There is no ‘why,’ only how to survive around them. A bleak notion, to be sure!

Cillian Murphy, Emily Blunt, Djimon Hounson, Millicent Simmonds in ‘A Quiet Place 2’ Imgae Credit: Paramount Pictures via Screenrant.com

A Quiet Place 2 isn’t short on action and suspense. The film may have more dialogue, but it still invokes the same need for audience participation with being silent. With excellent sound editing and solid performances by the cast, the story holds up well against its predecessor. Seeing the first film, and this one is like being enveloped into a great book. When it’s over, you still want more. That’s a sign of excellent storytelling. 

If you are a fan of action, suspense, and drama with a fantastic cast and great story, A Quiet Place 2 should make it on to a high place on your watch list. 

—a pen lady

6-25-21

*Currently, you can only see this film in theaters. If it’s safe for you to see and you can see it in theaters before its home release, see it on the big screen. Some films are always better viewed on a gigantic screen, in the dark, with a superior sound system. This is one of those films. Cheers! 

Film Critic, Movie Blog, Movie Reviews

The Incredible Hulk (2008)

apenlady

The Incredible Hulk (2008)

Directed by: Louis Leterrier   Rated: PG-13   Runtime: 1 hrs. 52 mins. 

Studio: Universal Pictures/Marvel Studios   Screenwriter: Zak Penn

Cast: Edward Norton, Liv Tyler, William Hurt, Tim Roth

Explosions. Car throwing. Jumping from choppers without a shoot. Destroying a part of New York. Mass destruction and collateral damage. People running and screaming in the streets. Yep, it must be a Marvel movie!

The Incredible Hulk is the fifth MCU film if you’re watching in logical viewing order. And the second film, in general, to be released. This film starts with snippets of images to convey information and actions to progress the story while the intro credits run. It spends zero time showing you how Bruce Banner (Norton) ends up as ‘The Hulk,’ and it’s better for it. There are plenty of other places in the film that show and tell what gamma radiation/poisoning is and what it does. These snippets are gritty, bloody, and convey a heavy scientific and militaristic tone. This film predates Disney’s acquisition of Marvel. 

Marvel Studios and Universal Pictures Officail Trailer for ‘The Incredible Hulk’ via YouTube

Even for a Marvel film, The Incredible Hulk has a darker, more sinister feel to it. While there is plenty of violence in any of the MCU films to date, this movie has the unfortunate use of humans and regular weapons. These two factors set it apart from the other MCU characters and their stories because there are no aliens or futuristic technology to act as a visual boundary. The Hulk and his foe aside. 

Bruce Banner is a scientist who has an accident in a laboratory experiment, which results in him morphing into a gigantic, green mutation known as the Hulk. When he’s calm, he turns back into Bruce. General Ross (Hurt) always wanted to use Banner’s work and weaponize it. When Banner changed, General Ross felt Bruce was government property to be experimented on and exploited. So, Bruce fled. One of Bruce’s scientific collaborators was Dr. Betty Ross (Tyler), Bruces’s love interest and General Ross’s daughter. 

Liv Tyler and William Hurt in Marvel Studios ‘The Incredible Hulk’ Imgae Credit: Marvel Studios/Universal Pictures via Geekfeed.com

General Ross seeks out where Bruce is hiding for years. Given the plot so far, it wouldn’t be much of a story if the general didn’t locate him at some point. At this junction, the general enlists the help of Emil Blonsky (Roth) to help track and capture Banner. After seeing the Hulk up close, Blonsky wants to be like the Hulk and works towards that goal. Because of this choice, Blonsky ends up the primary foe of the film over General Ross. 

The premise overall isn’t flawed; it’s acted well by everyone. Yet…the pace is what trips this film up. It transitions well from scene to scene so that the audience understands the flow of time and such. The problem is the movie relies too much on its action sequences and explosions. Some of which are genuinely unbelievable (that’s not a compliment). Without them, the story would flop around like a fish out of water. There is lots of destruction and violence with an origin story like the Hulks or most stories about him. It’s difficult to tell such an origin story without it. And that’s the root of the problem. The Hulk shouldn’t have his own standalone film. It’s simple enough to convey in other ways and should have been. 

Tim Roth in ‘The Incredible Hulk’ Image Credit: Marvel Studios/Universal Pictures via Screenrant.com

This film does show the Hulk doing his ground stomp, makes boxing gloves from cars, performing a thunderclap, and yelling his iconic catchphrase. All these things are utilized and absolutely belong. It’s not enough to make this film stand out. Its failure to captivate is in the limited complexity or nuances that Bruce/Hulk has as an origin story. It’s pretty cut and dry. 

While the events depicted in this film are referenced later in the MCU, General Ross (Hurt) is the only actor to ever be seen again. The others are never shown or are recast altogether. There are nods to S.H.I.E.L.D.’s existence in the movie. Still, they come across as confusing afterthoughts that are meaningless in this film. To that end, the only real thing that connects this film to the MCU is in the last minute of the film, where Tony Stark makes an appearance. If it were not for that, this film couldn’t even be considered a part of the MCU. 

Edward Norton in ‘The Incredible Hulk’ Image Credit: Marvel Studios/Universal Pictures via CBR.com

More than enough comments happen in future films, allowing the audience to understand the Hulk/Bruce Banner’s situation. It’s because of this fact that this movie is totally one you could skip seeing. Keep this off your watchlist and move on to whatever’s next on your list. 

*There is no end credit scenes for this film

—a pen lady

Film Critic, Movie Blog, Movie Reviews

The Mummy (1999)

apenlady

The Mummy (1999)

Directed by: Stephen Sommers  Rated: PG-13   Runtime: 2 hrs. 4 mins.

Studio: Universal Pictures   Screenwriter: Stephen Sommers

Cast:  Brendan Fraser, Rachel Weisz, Arnold Vosloo, Oded Fehr, John Hannah, Patricia Velásquez

Movies often hold up a pair of their characters, in the most trying of circumstances, and get them to the point of asking, ‘Is our love worth dying for?’ Well, that setup applies to stories in general, but let’s stick with cinema here. In Stephen Sommers The Mummy, that is the introductory sequence. The actions of High Priest Imhotep(Vosloo) and his love, Anck Su Namun (Velásquez), set a solid foundation for the plot. Less than five minutes in, and you’re hooked.

Universal Pictures trailer for ‘The Mummy’ via YouTube channel The Trailer Guy

The Mummy has a strong plot and story about, well, a mummy who won’t stay dead and aims to bring his lost loves soul back from the underworld. To that end, there is action, mystery, light comedic touches, and suspense. It’s not a horror film, though kids 10-12 may find certain scenes momentarily graphic (it’s a movie about a mummy and not the bandaged groaning kind).

American Rick O’Connell (Fraser) is a French Legionnaire who is wrangled into taking Evelyn Carnahan (Weisz) and her brother Johnathan (Hannah) to a lost Egyptian city. A city guarded by the Medjai, decedents of the pharaoh’s guards, led by Ardeth Bay (Fehr). The trio has a map to this fabled city, and they’re not the only ones searching for it. Evelyn wants to prove herself to her fellow scholars; everyone else is in it for treasure. 

This is the project that introduced me to Arnold Vosloo, Oded Fehr, and Rachel Weisz. Despite his small role in this film, Fehr displayed a believable presence and talent as Ardeth. 

Arnold Vosloo as Imhotep/Mummy in Universal Pictures ‘The Mummy’ via Screenrant

Vosloo’s portrayal as Imhotep/The Mummy is fantastic! He has very few lines and none in English (there are subtitles), so his role is mostly hitting his mark. That is, being where he needs to be at the right time. Special effects took a giant leap forward in 1999 after this film came out. So props to Vosloo for pretending to be all that’s required of an actor that will later become a gooey mummy who unhinges his jaw in post-production. 

The Mummy is the only film that I like with Brendan Fraser in it. His character isn’t a tomb raider or archeologist and yet comes off like a watered-down Indian Jones. Done poorly, it could have ruined the movie, yet it works. The same can be said for Weisz’s character, Evelyn. 

Erick Avari, Oded Fehr, Brendan Fraser, Rachel Weisz, John Hannah in Universal Pictures ‘The Mummy’ via Netflix

Evelyn is a bookworm. A librarian in a museum. She scurries off on an adventure with no experience and no team. Rachel Weisz is a wonderfully talented actress, and she takes this character and makes her likable. Weisz explains things to the novice characters, as an actual museum worker might. Therefore Evelyn’s lines in many places come off as natural instead of condescending. Weisz depicts her in a way that doesn’t have me groaning at the glaring, unbelievably of the whole situation. 

As moviegoers, we expect movies to be logical enough that we can see it happening or working out. Perhaps, even so, we could picture ourselves as specific characters. The Mummy doesn’t have all the logical bits to fill in the gaps, but it’s okay. It’s a lasting example of what movies were designed to do, entertain and distract.

Kevin O’Connor in Universal Pictures ‘The Mummy’ via Looper

In the decades since its release, this movie still holds up as a good story with watchability. I viewed this film digitally on a 4K TV with HDR. WOW! Some scenes don’t upconvert as nicely as others, but I was really pleased with the viewing quality. I expected the whole thing to be grainy (noisy) and the fact that it’s not made rewatching this so much better than pre-Blu Ray. 

The Mummy is a great film to see and worth a place on your watchlist. Don’t forget the popcorn! 

—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

Knives Out (2019)

apenlady

Knives Out (2019)

Directed by: Rian Johnson  Rated: PG-13  Runtime: 2 hrs 10 mins.

Studio: Lionsgate  Screenwriter: Rian Johnson

Cast:  Daniel Craig, Chris Evans, Ana de Armas, Jamie Lee Curtis, Michael Shannon,  

Don Johnson, Toni Collette, LaKeith Stanfield, Kathrine Langford, Christopher Plummer

When the patriarch of an eccentric, privileged family’s death triggers an investigation, no one is above suspicion in Knives Out. The film aims to be an ode to classic whodunit stories. 

Detective Benoit Blanc (Daniel Craig) works with local police to investigate the death of crime novelist Harlan Thrombey (Christopher Plummer). His estate is reminiscent of something from an Agatha Christie novel, with its distinctive and eclectic presence. Its grandeur can only be matched by the robust and self-centered family members. 

‘Knives Out’ trailer from Lionsgate via YouTube

Whether it’s the interviews with suspects to the story moving along in general, there is enough information to establish each character. To flesh out what makes them tick, and perhaps what would give them motive, is this effortless display of character development. The group is dysfunctional, what family isn’t, and yet they all have presence. Each respective role is depicted well, and that’s what a viewer wants from an actor; to do a good job. To be believable. The cast is layered, funny at times, and portrays a level of family tension that absolutely rings true. 

Ringing true is Rian Johnson’s ability to create such a script. Movies are not made like this typically; they just aren’t and that’s a travesty. I’d take a great story with a pinch of violence and a dash of language over the way the majority of films are made in America any day. Really, who needs wanton violence, skin, and language if the story is fantastic and well-acted? 

Kathrine Langford, Toni Collette, Jamie Lee Curtis, Don Johnson, Michael Shannon, Riki Lindhome & Jaden Martell in ‘Knives Out’ Image: Lionsgate

The details that went into ensuring the audience doesn’t figure out what really happened is pure genius. It was jarring to hear Daniel Craig with a Southern accent, and I personally hope to never hear again. Mr. Blanc needed an accent, or he would have come across as a hard investigating cop. Craig’s performance was reminiscent of Hercule Poirot at the end, with his break down of events and clues, with the accent, but Poirot is far superior. 

At the mid-way point of the film, I was like, okay, I have all this information, and there’s an hour left in the movie. It felt like the pace needed to quicken to keep my interest, and I was not disappointed. From there, the story shifts gears, the viewer is equipped with all the details they think they need, yet the plot dives deeper still. The plot twists and creates new perspectives and questions that all weave together to strengthen the suspense of determining how Harlan died. 

Ana de Armas in ‘Knives Out’ Image: Lionsgate

While this all-star cast gives good performances, Ana de Armas and Chris Evans really sell the later part of the story with Daniel Craig. It’s got laughs and begs you to try and solve it before the end. 

Knives Out is a fantastic homage to classic whodunit stories for the modern age. With suspense, family drama, laughs, a compelling story that will leave you engaged from beginning to end, and an ending… Knives Out should unequivocally be on your watchlist! You won’t be disappointed carving out time in your schedule to see it. 

—a pen lady

Film Critic, Movie Blog, Movie Reviews

Godzilla: King of the Monsters (2019)

apenlady

Godzilla: King of the Monsters (2019)

Directed by: Michael Dougherty   Rated: PG-13   Runtime: 2 hrs 12 mins

Studio: Legendary Pictures, Warner Bros. Pictures

Screenwriter: Michael Dougherty, Zach Shields

Cast: Kyle Chandler, Millie Bobby Brown, Charles Dance, Bradly Whitford, Vera Farmiga

Godzilla: King of the Monsters is the second film in the “monsterverse” trilogy. The first was Kong: Skull Island. Where Skull Island had a much better storyline, tone, and pace, it also, more or less, had a better logical explanation of the monsters. ‘King of the Monsters’ fails at this. 

Godzilla: King of the Monsters is basically monster porn with the weakest plot and cringy lines. If you’re a big fan of monsters, then this film probably won’t put you off. Though keep in mind the trailer’s tone compared to the actual movie is misleading.

Warner Bros. Pictures Final Trailer for ‘Godzilla: King of the Monsters’

The human characters have a purpose but have no depth. They exist merely to justify the limp excuse for a plot that moves along with the smoothness of a newbie learning stick shift. A story that revolves around culling the infectious human race with monsters—one of which is an alien. Seriously? This film is convoluted enough without that add-on. The whole justification for monsters existing in the entire trilogy is tenable until this screenplay, which is an exercise on how to fail film school. It’s meant to set up the third film, Godzilla v Kong. 

If I had watched these in order, I never would have watched the third film. Instead, I was under the impression I didn’t need to see this film, so I saw ‘Skull Island’ and then Godzilla v Kong. Viewing the third film, I was confused as hell, so if you can make it through this film, more power to you. 

While watching Godzilla: King of the Monsters, I stopped three times. My brain simply didn’t want to process the fecking train wreck in progress. Forcing myself to finish this is a crime against my brain cells. I just can’t. I don’t care about it enough to know how it ends. That’s a sad admission for any movie-goer. 

The first film is like the first act of a movie, the setup. The second film is the middle, where the plot thickens, and lots of other details are learned. Finally, the third movie is the climax, the action, or reveal, and conclusion. Keeping that in mind, that is what this “monsterverse” is set up to be. The filmmakers are playing a long game. Trying to reinvent and expand beyond every monster film before them. 

‘Godzilla: King of the Monsters’ Image: Legendary Pictures

Kong: Skull Island is a good start; this film is the equivalent of X-Men the Last Stand. The bastard, hot-mess of a franchise everyone wants to forget about. Godzilla v Kong is like a constant show of rock em’ sock em.’ However, if you understand the setup, it’s acceptable as such. You know what you’re getting going in. 

Some argue there should be fewer humans in these movies; I disagree. The monsters can’t communicate, so the audience will understand, they were not designed to be. Therefore you need the human component. 

If you like monsters, action, a believable story, and brain cells, there are far better movies to watch. Pacific Rim is an excellent, more recent example to see. Not this! Anything but this travesty of plot and logic. Godzilla: King of the Monsters should never make it onto your watchlist. Read a spoiler about it online and skip to the third film if you want, but forget it was ever produced. 

—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