Candy Cane Lane (12.22.23)

 Was there a bigger comedic superstar in the late 20th century than Eddie Murphy? Saturday Night Live, Beverly Hills Cop, Trading Places—even the earliest days of the 21st gave us his iconic turn as a magical talking CGI ass. And then he just kind of… disappeared. Then in 2021 Amazon evidently thought it was high time that he had a career resurgence with Coming 2 America, a sequel that no one was really asking for and, if the various review aggregate websites are to believed, most people didn’t particularly care for. Now the Amazon Eddie Murphy meh-naissance continues with Candy Cane Lane, a truly forgetful holiday film that is uneven, mostly unfunny, and a bunch of other not-great “un” words.

It takes what feels like a half hour for Candy Cane Lane to settle into its plot—that of a wish gone awry, a vengeful elf, and the Twelve Days of Christmas brought to life. By the time they actually got to things I was already bored, wishing that the movie had instead focused on one of the many other aspects of the plot that turned out to be backstory rather than the actual meat of the film. And then it keeps on going for another hour and a half. At the very least I was hoping for Eddie Murphy to say or do something funny, a hope that goes mostly unfulfilled as the two hours dragged on and on (although I must say that it was nice to see him give a more understated performance and that he pulls off the dad roll quite well). Jillian Bell, who plays the aforementioned vengeful elf, is the only person that is consistently amusing, as is Timothy Simons in his bit part of a jaded newscaster. Sure, others try to make you laugh, but it just doesn’t work most of the time, as the writers and actors often seemed to confuse being loud with being funny. The group of sentient miniature porcelain figures is particularly insufferable, their only actually amusing quality being the novelty of hearing Nick Offerman speak with a British accent.

Sometimes Candy Cane Lane is a corny family drama as Murphy’s character grapples with his kids growing up and having thoroughly cliché and uninteresting kid problems. Sometimes it’s a wacky find-the-MacGuffin treasure hunt. It’s about not envying others, it’s about family, it’s about spreading Christmas joy, it’s about everything, which kind of dilutes the messages and meaning. Hallmark Christmas films may be a dime-a-dozen and they may be as equally as forgettable, but at least they have an endearing kind of cheese that makes some people feel the holiday spirit. Candy Cane Lane is as corporate and algorithmic as you can get; just like the porcelain figurines in this film seem to mistake volume with humor, the makers of Candy Cane Lane seemed to believe that stuffing their movie full of pretty lights and classic Christmas songs is the same as filling it with genuine heart.

If you’re looking for some holiday fun this season I recommend looking elsewhere.

Candy Cane Lane is now available on Amazon Prime.

 

This review was first published in the Keizertimes on December 22^nd, 2023. Visit at www.keizertimes.com. 

Doctor Who 60th Anniversary Specials- The Star Beast and Wild Blue Yonder (12.08.23)

 

The British have an interesting habit of keeping the runs of their television shows short and sweet, a practice that seems antithetical to the American way of doing things. In this, Doctor Who is undoubtably an outlier—a British television staple that has been an almost constant presence since it premiered in the early 1960s. Yet despite its impressive streak, Doctor Who endures because it is constantly refreshing itself, offering new beginnings and opportunities for the curious to hop on and become fans. In this spirit it was announced last year that everyone’s favorite Time Lord would find new life in the States at Disney+, starting with the three-part 60th anniversary celebration. As of this review two of them have been released, The Star Beast and Wild Blue Yonder, and while these episodes are probably a little more difficult for newcomers to completely comprehend than they should have been there is no doubt that they will win over some new hearts.

Well, Wild Blue Yonder will, anyway. The Star Beast is a bit rougher, if still endearing in that cheesy way that only Doctor Who can pull off. While it is still thoroughly a BBC production, it is obvious that The Star Beast had some of that Disney money behind it that it wanted to flex, leading to a more action-packed adventure than usual for the Doctor, which in and of itself isn’t a bad thing. But the main plot revolving around the titular star beast is bland and uninspired, and perhaps even more questionable is the fact that the episode chooses to resolve a big ongoing plot point that was introduced all the way back in 2008. As a relatively longtime Whovian I found this resolution incredibly unsatisfying, and I’m sure that newcomers will be completely baffled no matter how many let’s-catch-you-up conversations and recaps there are.

Wild Blue Yonder, on the other hand, is classic Who. I’ve always felt that the show was at its best when it was smaller, more thoughtful, and even a little creepy. The sci-fi elements and the core mystery are satisfactorily compelling, and even though a past episode or two are alluded to it doesn’t feel like you need to go back and do some homework to understand things moving forward. Perhaps the best part of this episode is the fact that it takes the time to slow down a bit and focus on David Tennant’s Doctor and Catherine Tate’s Donna Noble, two fan favorites whose return was one of the main selling points of the anniversary specials. They are as fun to watch as ever, neither missing a beat as they step back into roles that they haven’t inhabited in years.

Six decades and fifteen actors later the future of Doctor Who looks as bright as it ever did. Jump on in, if you’re curious. The fandom's warm.

The first two Doctor Who 60th anniversary specials are now available on Disney+. A third one will release on December 9th followed by a fourth on Christmas Day.

 

This review was first published in the Keizertimes on December 8^th, 2023. Visit at www.keizertimes.com.

 

Note: when this was published the third special had not come out yet, but as of the repost on my blog it is now available.

Scott Pilgrim Takes Off (11.24.23)

 

Scott Pilgrim vs. the World, with its poor box office performance and passionate fanbase, is the definition of a cult classic. Based on the graphic novels by Bryan Lee O'Malley, the 2010 film boasted novel visuals, a cute little plot, and the sharp wit and humor of writer/director Edgar Wright, but as many of the fans of the source material can tell you, as a straight adaptation it is only passable. Scott Pilgrim Takes Off, a Netflix reimagining thirteen years later, initially looked like it would tackle this complaint. It did not. Yet despite Takes Off being more of an unexpected “what if" reinterpretation of the comic and film, having lower energy, and less novelty, it still ultimately has the same spirit and quality as its counterparts.

The entire core cast of the 2010 film returns to voice their animated counterparts, an impressive feat when you consider how many of them have become superstars since then (Chris Evans, Brie Larson, Anna Kendrick, and Aubrey Plaza, to name a few). The energy and enthusiasm they bring to their roles is somewhat cancelled out by the questionable editing, however—there is often too long of a gap between when one character stops speaking and another begins, a relatively minor issue that amounts to a perceptively slower pace when it happens back to back to back. The energy of Takes Off feels odd because of this, especially when you compare it to the frantic nature of the 2010 film, and I sometimes watched the cartoon at 1.25 speed just to speed things up a bit. And while the animation in Takes Off looks exactly like a moving version of the original comic art there is no denying that the medium makes the new adaptation less novel than the 2010 film, which derived a lot of its charm from the marriage of live-action realism with cartoony violence and tropes. When it’s all a cartoon to begin with it’s just not as unique.

But I suppose these criticisms are only criticisms because I am comparing the new to the old. When taken on its own Scott Pilgrim Takes Off is a whole lot of fun, and it does have a lot of uniqueness and charm to it. The reworked plot and longer length allow for more focus on the characters themselves, although at 8 episodes at 25 minutes each it is still a pretty short watch, and the fight scenes are truly a blast to watch. It could have used some more of that Edgar Wright wit, admittedly (he also returned but only to produce this time around), but the humor still lands when it appears in its less concentrated form. I have not read the graphic novels but it feels very much like their souls are still intact in the new show, even if the plots are not. Fans of the film and fans of the comic could do much worse than that.

Scott Pilgrims Takes Off is now available in its entirety on Netflix. 

 

This review was first published in the Keizertimes on November 24^th, 2023. Visit at www.keizertimes.com.

The Marvels (11.17.23)

 

You know that nightmare where you have a homework assignment due in a few hours that you completely forgot about and that your entire grade depends upon? When I experience this dream it's always a relief to wake up in bed, remembering that I haven’t had a homework assignment in years. Maybe these experiences were just that influential. Or maybe I still have homework, just in a different way. Being a fan of the Marvel Cinematic Universe has turned into a never-ending cavalcade of homework assignments in a lot of ways, a fact that is very apparent in the latest MCU entry The Marvels. This is a film that is particularly indecipherable if one has not been keeping up with a slew of other Marvel Studio projects, and even if you have watched everything the experience is a disappointing one thanks to The Marvels' thin and unclear plot, weak script, and complete lack of weight.

When the MCU's most boring and one-dimensional bad guy starts to do bad things, it is up to Carol Danvers, AKA Captain Marvel, to save the day. This time she is joined by two other characters whose lives become entangled because… they are all associated with each other in the comics, I suppose. Oh yes, there is something about magical bracelets and vaguely similar powers and portals, but it’s all very mushy and unclear. They go from point A to point B, stopping briefly at a planet with a bewilderingly insufferable gimmick, and just when you think things are ramping up the film ends, making one think that they must have missed a climax somewhere, because surely that last bit wasn’t meant to be it.

As a sequel to 2019’s Captain Marvel, The Marvels should ostensibly have a lot of focus on the titular character of the former film, yet Brie Larson's character feels very diminished here as she shares the spotlight with Teyonah Parris (who plays Monica Rambeau and was last seen in Disney+’s WandaVision) and Iman Vellani (who plays Kamala Khan, the main character of Disney+’s Ms. Marvel.) The shared narrative and poor script that props it up does a disservice to both Larson and Parris' characters, robbing the film of a believable emotional heart as well as character arcs that are all the more important given the flimsiness of the rest of the movie. Only Vellani, the clear standout, is fun to watch, giving The Marvels an enjoyable energy that the film frankly doesn’t deserve.

The action is actually pretty well choreographed, speaking of good things, and the body swapping plot leads to some fun set pieces and situations. And there are kittens who only sometimes look like completely fake CGI constructs! But overall The Marvels is nigh impossible to follow for newcomers and leaves the MCU faithful dumbfounded. It’s hard to imagine a less consequential plot set in this universe moving forward, and even the most diehard of fans might find it better to just wait for the film’s inevitable release on Disney+.

The Marvels is now playing in theaters. 

 

This review was first published in the Keizertimes on November 17^th, 2023. Visit at www.keizertimes.com.

Lessons in Chemistry (11.10.23)

 

Some shows you just know you shouldn't go into hungry, but other ones can catch you off guard. Lessons in Chemistry, a novel that a banner in the Tigard Barnes & Noble ensured me was the book of the year, does not sound like the kind of story hungry people should avoid, but after watching the first half of the Apple TV+ miniseries adaptation I would be lying if I said I haven’t been craving lasagna ever since. An empowering story of love, science, and food, Lessons in Chemistry is a satisfying dramatical treat that hits the spot despite its somewhat formulaic nature.

I am a big fan of the identification and discussion of popular tropes in our media, and if one were to make a list of all the ones that apply to Lessons in Chemistry they might never finish. Brie Larson plays a brilliant yet socially awkward chemist in an era where misogyny was much more visible than it is today and falls in love with an equally geeky scientist played by Lewis Pullman. Along the way she encounters sexism, racism, trauma, loss, and empowerment, all while using her scientific knowledge to not only stick it to the patriarchy but also create some wonderful looking dishes. If there was a recipe for creating engaging drama Lessons in Chemistry follows it pretty closely, but there is a saying in the troper world that not all tropes are bad, because tropes are, ultimately, just storytelling tools.

Because say what you will about its originality, but Lessons in Chemistry utilizes these tools perfectly. Larson is perfect in her roll (wait, no… I mean “role.” I told you I was hungry) and her chemistry (no pun intended) with Pullman elicits all the warmth and awws that you would expect in a story that is partially about two dorks finding love with each other. And while the sexism and fights against it can be a bit on the nose sometimes it still feels empowering thanks to the writing, performances, and timeless messages that the miniseries enjoys. The drama is intensely felt, the good times make you smile, and there is a very cute dog. Recipes are followed for a reason, you know?

I still don’t know if the book (which I have not read) warrants an entire miniseries and not just a feature-length film adaptation—I imagine that cutting down some of the portions of the miniseries might have made the whole thing seem a little truncated and rushed, yet eight episodes still seems a bit excessive—and there is one side plot with the neighbor of Pullman’s character that only occasionally feels relevant to the overall narrative, but these complaints are all pretty minor when viewed next to the miniseries’ successes. Lessons in Chemistry is heartwarming, heartbreaking, and makes me want to eat something that isn’t Taco Bell or hastily boiled hot dogs for dinner tonight. I guess there are still some surprises left for me in my life after all.

The first five episodes of Lessons in Chemistry are now available on Apple TV+. The remaining three episodes will release over the next three Fridays.

 

This review was first published in the Keizertimes on November 10^th, 2023. Visit at www.keizertimes.com/

Dahl and Anderson Short Film Collection (10.27.23)

 

It might damage my film nerd cred a bit to admit this, but before this year I had never seen a film by director/writer Wes Anderson. Thanks to cultural osmosis I was nonetheless already familiar with a lot of Anderson’s favorite tropes and quirks going into the theater, however—ensemble casts, pretty color schemes, and inventive visuals, to name a few. And while Anderson seems to prefer directing stories that he has at least co-written, he also appears to be a big fan of Roald Dahl; In 2009 he adapted the British author’s Fantastic Mr. Fox to great critical acclaim, and now, fourteen years later, he has returned once more to the Dahl collection to produce four short films based on four of Dahl’s short stories, The Wonderful Story of Henry Sugar, The Swan, The Rat Catcher, and Poison. Of these four, I recommend Henry Sugar for its simplistic inventiveness alone. The other three are significantly less interesting, mostly because the stories they are based on don’t offer much in the way of plot or creative opportunities.  

At forty minutes in length, The Wonderful Story of Henry Sugar is the longest of the Anderson-Dahl short film collection, and every minute of it is a delight. The film is written in such a way that it feels like a live-action picture book reading—characters in the scenes narrate events as they happen as asides to the audience, sets change in real-time much like they would in a stage play, and there is no music to speak of. The story and moral are simple, and by the time the screen fades to black and the credits roll, things are tied up in a little bow, a nice little tale for a nice little time.  

The other three stories I am much more conflicted about. While Henry Sugar feels like a complete story, The Swan, The Rat Catcher, and Poison feel more like superfluous anecdotes that don’t really go anywhere or mean anything. “Don’t really go anywhere” is pulling double duty in the meaning department here, as the characters don't really go anywhere physically, unlike in Henry Sugar were the sets and scene transitions were some of the best parts. And while all four short films feature wonderful ensemble casts made up of accomplished actors such as Benedict Cumberbatch, Ralph Fiennes, and Ben Kingsley, the direction seems to have been for them to speak their lines as monotonously as possible, giving the impression that they were middle school theater students doing their very first run through of the fall play. Maybe this is one of the quirky things Anderson always likes to do? I wouldn’t know. But I did find that this choice occasionally made my mind wander as people droned on and on.  

But hey, they’re all short and harmless. You have very little to lose by firing one of these up on Netflix if you’re bored.   

The Wonderful Story of Henry Sugar, The Swan, The Rat Catcher, and Poison are now available on Netflix.  

 

This review was first published in the Keizertimes on October 27th, 2023. Visit at www.keizertimes.com/

 

The Burial (10.20.23)

 

              I am a simple man. Often times I look into a movie or TV show a bit before deciding to review it (avoiding the reviews of others as to not influence my own opinion beforehand, of course), but other times I simply see Jamie Foxx and Tommy Lee Jones on a cover together while scrolling through my streaming service options and I click it. It doesn’t hurt when the title of the film is something vaguely intriguing in and of itself, like, say, The Burial. This is what happened last night when I opened my Amazon Prime streaming app in search of something to watch, and it is nice to have my simpleness rewarded: The Burial, a courtroom drama with a healthy dose of social and racial commentary mixed in, is quite good thanks in no small part to the electrifying performance of its cast, even if it is a bit unsubtle at times.

              Normally I would avoid a film described as a “courtroom drama” like a swarm of flying, plague-infected sharks, but The Burial successfully entertained me simply because the cast is so incredibly watchable. Jamie Foxx gives an Oscar-worthy performance as the charismatic Willie E. Gary, a star attorney who knows he’s awesome, relishes this fact, yet doesn’t let it make him unlikeable or out-of-touch. At first I couldn’t tell if Tommy Lee Jones, who plays Gary’s client and funeral home director Jeremiah O’Keefe, was giving a more subdued performance in contrast to Foxx’s broader one or was simply phoning things in, but it eventually became clear that it was the former. The two compliment each other so well that it’s hard to believe the choice wasn’t intentional, and the friendship that blossoms between their characters is hard not to smile at.

              It was a bit odd how often the subject of race came up in a court case that essentially boiled down to one white guy suing another white guy for breach of contract, but the social commentary this offered drew some interesting parallels between the history of racial discrimination in the United States and the dangers of unchecked greed in a capitalistic society. Sometimes the message was offered a bit heavy handed, but more often than not it was done quite well, making not only for an interesting courtroom battle but also a nice story of brotherhood and friendship between Gary and O’Keefe. I don’t believe that the world should be colorblind; we should celebrate our differences just as we celebrate the things we have in common, but when it comes to the law the lady with the scales should really keep that blindfold on. This is not the case in The Burial, but this is presenting things as they are, not as they should be. So while the subject of race might seem like an odd pairing with this clash of businessmen over a contract it really does make sense and it really does work well, much like the combination of Foxx and Jones.

              The Burial is now available on Amazon Prime.

 

This review was first published in the Keizertimes on October 20^th, 2023. Visit at www.keizertimes.com/

No One Will Save You (10.06.23)

 

Although I’ve been freaked out by fictional aliens before—the alien from Alien, the thing from The Thing, the potato-headed creep from E.T.: The Extra-Terrestrial—I have never considered myself afraid of aliens like I am of serial killers and ghosts and the like. Maybe it’s because while the more earthbound spooks can theoretically get at you anywhere, I have no plans on ever going to space or Antarctica or into a Stephen Spielberg film. I do frequently go home, though. That happens to be where I live. So when a movie drops about freaky aliens invading someone’s house I take notice. This time that film was No One Will Save You, a quite effective horror piece that stands apart thanks to its fantastic central performance, admirable CGI, and interesting framing.

There are less than ten spoken words in No One Will Save You, a bold choice that could have gone wrong in multiple ways if it weren’t for Kaitlyn Dever, who plays our main character Brynn, as well as some good old fashioned “show, don’t tell" storytelling on behalf of the screenwriters and director. Dever’s presence and command of the screen is astounding, making us care about and sympathize with Brynn despite the fact that we go into the film with only vague hints of her backstory and almost never hear her talk. All we know at first is that she is the town pariah and that, if the title is to believed, she won’t have anyone to turn to when things start to go down.

The film rarely lets up when this happens, ratcheting up the tension and keeping it there. The aliens are appropriately scary, always showing some new disturbing trait just when you thought you had them all figured out. As Jaws taught us, the less we see of a movie monster the scarier it is, and while this holds true of the aliens in No One Will Save You the CGI used to render them is done well enough that they are still scary when you do get an eyeful. The sound design and directing adds to the visuals, keeping things dark and creepy even when the action moves to the daytime.

And that ending? Well, let’s just say that it is one that I was thinking about long after the film ended. The lack of narrative handholding that makes Brynn's backstory so interesting is felt up until the credits roll, leaving the end up for debate and interpretation. Or I’m just a rube who thinks a lack of clarity is the same as being artsy. It’s one of the two.

Even at ninety minutes No One Will Save You does occasionally feel long, but I think this speaks more to the tension present in the film than any perceived pacing issues. It’s a tight, effective thriller that is a good choice for this upcoming spooky season, and if the creep factor doesn’t stick with you the ending will.

No One Will Save You is now available on Hulu. 

 

This review was first published in the Keizertimes on October 6^th, 2023. Visit at www.keizertimes.com.

A Million Miles Away (09.29.23)

 

Too often do we focus on “firsts” to judge whether or not something is inspiring. The first person to get the top of Mt. Everest, the first woman to fly solo over the Atlantic, the first man on the moon. As I sat down to watch A Million Miles Away I assumed it would be about the first Mexican-American to go to space. This turned out not to be the case (it was actually Franklin Chang Diaz), but Jose “The First Migrant Worker in Space"  Hernandez's story is no less inspirational, even if the movie based on his life is not as ambitious as the man himself.

A Million Miles Away stars Michael Pena as Jose Hernandez and Rosa Salazar as his wife Adela, a pair that make for some very easy viewing. Their chemistry is genuine and their performances are heartfelt and well done, as are those of everyone else in their orbit. A Million Miles Away is strongest when it focuses on the family dynamics of the Hernandez clan, affectionately showing that when one person excels it is usually with the help of many unseen and sometimes underappreciated coaches and cheerleaders. The performances and focus give A Million Miles Away an irresistible emotional core to its quintessential American Dream narrative, a core that sustains it when another movie might have started running on fumes.

If the film sags it is because of its script, which is not as interesting as it could have been. The dialogue is fine but not particularly snappy, a fact that can be easy to overlook when you have people like Pena and Salazar delivering the lines. And while it may closely resemble reality, the fact that Hernandez’s journey is so prototypical of the pull-yourself-up-by-your-bootstraps tale that has enthralled hopeful immigrants for generations also means that the film sometimes feels like a cliché, or at least has moments that feel cliché. This might seem a bit unfair to real-life events, but even the narrative embellishments have an air of familiarity (How many times have we seen a butterfly metaphor in films like this? I feel like it’s a lot). Some additional time fleshing out the relationships between Jose and those close to him might have been nice as well, because while family is the driving force of this film it also feels oddly secondary, at least when compared to Hernandez’s ultimate goal of going to space.  All of this is to say that A Million Miles Away doesn’t take any chances from a movie-making standpoint, instead mostly letting its sentimentality speak for itself.

But speak for itself it does. A Million Miles Away is a good time that will remind you that when you shoot for the stars you sometimes just might make it there. It’s sometimes overly fluffy and sometimes doesn’t have much substance under the surface, but it has its heart in the right place, and that’s enough for me.

A Million Miles Away is now available on Amazon Prime. 

 

This review was first published in the Keizertimes on September 29^th, 2023. Visit at www.keizertimes.com.

A Haunting in Venice (09.22.23)

 

Summer is over, and with its passing we lay to rest another season of giant blockbusters. In autumn the releases tend to get a little smaller, occasionally a bit smarter, and often a tad spookier. When the big budget behemoths hibernate, films like A Haunting in Venice shyly make their way into the theaters, but audiences needn’t be shy about visiting them, at least not when they’re at the same quality level as Venice, the latest Kenneth Branagh-led Agatha Christie adaptation (based on her 1969 novel Hallowe'en Party) featuring the famously mustachioed Hercule Poirot.

A Haunting in Venice is smaller in scope when compared to the previous Poirot offerings: A Murder on the Orient Express and A Death on the Nile. This scaled-back approach works to the film’s benefit, as it gives us a more intimate and focused mystery to untangle. The fact that this film isn’t absolutely stuffed to the gills with household names like Orient Express and Nile were (besides Branagh, the only actors I recognized were Tina Fey and Michelle Yeoh) is actually a good thing. By featuring “smaller” names the movie gives the impression that we are watching actual people instead of a group of pretty people acting like other people.

Is the mystery these characters are subject to smart? Yes, if fairly undemanding and ultimately pretty simple. I was never overwhelmed with quickly rattled off deductions made by a heavily accented Branagh, which was not the case with the previous two films, but I was also never wowed with the mystery itself. The denouement is perfectly understandable, and I didn’t have any lingering questions after leaving the theater, which was downright refreshing for someone like myself who has to understand the finer points of every plot but still often misses things.

The thing that sets A Haunting in Venice apart is instead how this mystery is presented. As you can probably tell from the title, Venice is much spookier than your typical Agatha Christie adventure, making excellent use of tried-and-true horror tropes while never quite devolving into a straight horror film (I’m usually a wuss with scary movies, but I got through this no problem). A lot of this success is owed to beautiful visuals and Branagh’s direction, which can only be described as Alfred Hitchcockian-- At least when it comes to dynamic shots… he does have a slightly distracting tendency to be a bit too static when filming scenes that are exclusively dialogue, awkwardly focusing on one character at a time in close-up, which sometimes makes it feel like they aren’t actually in the same room as the person they’re talking to. This slick combination of whodunit and horror makes A Haunting in Venice a must-see for fans of the mystery genre, even those who are scardey cats like me. Because while the scariest thing is always the unknown, you can bet that a guy like Poirot won’t let things be unknown for too long.

A Haunting in Venice is now playing in theaters. 

 

This review was first published in the Keizertimes on September 22^nd, 2023. Visit at www.keizertimes.com/.

Stan Lee (09.15.23)

 

If you’ve seen a movie based on a Marvel comic, odds are you’ve seen the old guy with the mustache and, more often than not, sunglasses. He shows up and says something funny and then disappears, only to show up in the next film as a different character with a different funny thing to say. This is Stan Lee, comic superstar and co-creator of Spider-Man, the X-Men, Iron Man, and pretty much every other Marvel superhero that dates back to the 1960s and 70s. As a prominent pop culture icon, Stan was one of the most vocal advocates of the power of comic books up until his death in 2018, and now, five years later, we get a chance to know the man himself with Disney+’s Stan Lee, an entertaining if somewhat perfunctory documentary that is more honest than I was expecting, if still a bit sanitized and white washed.

              Stan himself narrates the documentary via a mixture of archived interview soundbites which naturally gives rise to questions about objectivity. Stan Lee isn’t an in-depth tell-all put together by impartial researchers, but instead feels like sitting down to listen to your grandpa as he talks about his life as he remembers it. One must also remember that, with all due respect to his legacy and legitimate creativity, business acumen, and general ingenuity, Stan was not afraid to take the spotlight in his day. Indeed, he often relished it. So while Stan Lee does touch on the main events and touchstones in the Marvelous Maestro’s life, one cannot help but feel like some things are being left out or misrepresented, whether intentionally or unintentionally.

              That being said, there were a couple of moments that surprised me with their honesty. Stan and his equally legendary collaborators Jack Kirby and Steve Ditko famously had fallings out over who deserved credit for what creations, and Stan Lee does not shy away from this conflict, nor does it choose sides and declare that one party was right and the other party was wrong. It is true that Kirby and Ditko are very much out of focus in this documentary, but one must remember that this is a documentary about Stan Lee, not Jack Kirby or Steve Ditko. It is also not a documentary about Marvel Comics itself; once Stan essentially retires the film jumps from the late 70s to 2010, leaving a lot of history unexplored (on the plus side, this means the documentary never turns into an advertisement for the Marvel or Disney, which I must admit I was concerned was a possibility). If there’s one thing I can fault Stan Lee for other than the predominant lack of objectivity it’s this: We never really get into any real depth, instead opting to jump from heading to heading on the Stan Lee Wikipedia page.

              Don’t get me wrong, Stan Lee is still an entertaining documentary that does have a lot of truth to it. One should just make sure to approach things with that ever-important grain of salt.

              Stan Lee is now available on Disney+. 

 

This review was first published in the Keizertimes on September 15^th, 2023. Visit at www.keizertimes.com/

The Cloned Tyrone (08.25.23)

 

“Why has it taken so long for someone to make this kind of movie” is a question that may not seem like a compliment initially, but I usually do mean it to be whenever I ask it of myself. Because what is smarter than seeing something obvious that no one else has seen? In the case of They Cloned Tyrone, why did it take so long for someone to make a movie that combines blaxploitation comedy tropes with science fiction thriller? Because the combination is great, as it turns out, even if the novelty does wear a bit thin by the end of the film.

Directed by newcomer Juel Taylor, They Cloned Tyrone premiered at the American Black Film Festival in June before getting a limited theatrical release. It was then plopped onto Netflix and was advertised as an exclusive for the platform, a fact that didn’t bode well with me, seeing as how that particular streaming service is very hit-and-miss these days with its original content. But They Cloned Tyrone is actually really good, in no small part because of the intelligent script written by Tony Rettenmaier and Taylor himself that combines sharp humor with genuinely insightful social commentary that is reminiscent of the race-based horror explored in director Jordan Peele’s films. This mixture is further refined by science fiction-y ideas that are interesting but a bit unfocused, as they include concepts such as cloning, mind control, eugenics, and many more without giving too much attention to any of them. But the science fiction itself isn’t too important, really, as it’s mostly the laughs, mystery, and commentary that drive Tyrone. The script and story are brought to life by a wonderful cast of characters, and the chemistry between the main trio—drug dealer Fontaine (John Boyega, who pulls double duty as the dramatic focus and straight man), pimp Slick Charles (Jamie Foxx, our main source of laughs), and sex worker/Nancy Drew fan Yo-Yo (Teyonah Parris, who gets to be both dramatic and hilarious depending on the situation)—is hard to top.

It’s also hard to deny the style that They Cloned Tyrone enjoys, from Juel Taylor’s impressive directing (there are some really cool shots in there) to the music (I watched it with subtitles and my favorite audio description was “scary funk music plays”) to the costuming (Slick Charles in particular was clearly a blast for the costume department to outfit). It is a good-looking film in addition to being an enjoyable one, at least until late in the last act, at which point things become your standard chrome-surfaced, sterile laboratory science-fictiony fare. By then the novelty of the premise had worn a bit thin for me and I started to get a bit bored, mostly because the film feels like it lost a lot of the creativity and uniqueness that made it stand out up until that point. But last act aside, They Cloned Tyrone is one of the better movies I’ve seen this year, and you should definitely check it out if you’re good for a chuckle or two.

They Cloned Tyrone is now available on Netflix. 

 

This review was first published in the Keizertimes on August 25^th, 2023. Visit at www.keizertimes.com/

Oppenheimer (08.18.23)

 

When I think of Christopher Nolan I think of four things: Giant scale, loud music, Michael Caine showing up for at least a little bit, and dense plots that sometimes border on the needlessly complicated. Until now the highly respected director has stuck to fiction, be it of the superhero, science, or cerebral thriller varieties, but it was only a matter of time before he applied at least a couple of these four calling cards to nonfiction. And while it is oddly lacking in Michael Caine, the other three are all there in Oppenheimer, a sprawling look at the Father of the Atomic Bomb that is dense and exhausting but also thoroughly impressive from a filmmaking standpoint, not to mention engaging and entertaining.

Clocking in at exactly three hours, Oppenheimer is sometimes a lot to take in. It is chock full of science talk and political maneuvering, a relentless and headache-inducing combination that often made me feel as if I was just barely understanding the bare basics of what was going on. Compounding this is a massive and somewhat bloated roster of characters played by what must have been half of the people currently working in Hollywood, as well as a non-linear style of storytelling that covered several different time periods simultaneously, because heaven forbid Christopher Nolan do anything simply. Sometimes I got bored. Once or twice I even got frustrated. But the fact of the matter remains: Oppenheimer is still a darn good movie, and it owes a lot of that success to its sheer ambition and scope.

Cillian Murphy is exceptional as J. Robert Oppenheimer, and I appreciate that neither he nor the scriptwriters pretend that the famous scientist was a shining hero that one must aspire to, instead presenting a flawed individual who may have done some good and certainly did a whole lot of bad. This nuance extends to all of the characters, all of which are portrayed equally as well as “Oppie” himself. Ludwig Göransson’s soundtrack is both bombastic and creative, underlining even the most mundane events with gravitas and meaning (I particularly enjoyed a track that utilized the clicking of a Geiger counter in its tune). Nolan’s habit of exclusively using IMAX cameras to film pays off handsomely in Oppenheimer as well, as the film looks breathtaking from start to finish.

It is a challenging film, but the challenge is integral to its success. The cast may be huge and it may be hard to keep everyone straight, but this just reinforces how monumental and important the creation of the first atomic bomb really was. It may be full of complicated science and intrigue, but this speaks to fact that history and the people who make it are messy. All of this would be meaningless if Oppenheimer wasn’t an engaging and entertaining film, but thankfully it is that as well thanks to its compelling character work, elegant script, and everything else that makes a film worth watching. And if I were to use any phrase to describe Oppenheimer it would be exactly that: Worth watching. 

Oppenheimer is now available in theaters. 

This article was first published in the Keizertimes on August 18th, 2023. Visit at www.keizertimes.com/ 

Haunted Mansion (08.04.23)

 

Pirates of the Caribbean-- a film franchise based on a theme park ride— seemed like such a novel idea in 2003 when the first entry knocked my socks off and immediately became one of my all-time favorite action-adventure movies. Disney, not a company to let good intellectual property go to waste, quickly followed up on this unexpected hit with the Eddie Murphy-led The Haunted Mansion, which by all accounts (I never saw it) not only failed to capture the spirit of the ride it was based on (pun intended), but just wasn’t good overall. Now, twenty years and one adaptation of Jungle Cruise later, the reboot rules tell us that the time is right to once again dig up the idea of bringing these 999 spooks to the big screen and try again for that old Pirates success; unfortunately, the result is much the same, as 2023’s Haunted Mansion is, simply put, not that great either.

As a big fan of the ride, most of the enjoyment I got out of the film was recognizing all of the little references to its source material that are sprinkled throughout, but that mild joy eventually fizzled out because the framework propping up these references turned out to be as rickety as the mansion itself. Haunted Mansion has a great cast full of funny people, but the script that they are beholden to is not particularly funny, nor are the frights that they are subject to particularly frightful. The characters themselves are weak, and only the lead, LaKeith Stanfield, has anything interesting to work with—the rest are boring stereotypes smashed together that claim to be a found family by the end of the film with absolutely no reason for us to believe that is true (and as much as I love Danny DeVito, did that character really need to be in this movie?) Overall Haunted Mansion is just plain boring, the lack of excitement and laughs that amount to anything more than a slight chuckle making the two-hour runtime feel like an interminable slog. By the time it was finally over I wasn’t even enjoying the easter eggs, instead wishing that I was at my own home watching something else without the loud family sitting next to me.

There are some good things about the film—as I said earlier, LaKeith Stanfield does a particularly good job as he does the vast majority of the heavy lifting as our sorrowful lead, and the themes of grief and acceptance in Haunted Mansion are actually done quite well. These give the film a nice emotional heart that it does not feel like it deserves given the state of the rest of the movie.

Maybe Disney will have something better to show in another twenty years. We may even finally have a great Haunted Mansion by the year 2063, if we’re not all permanent residents of the Mansion itself at that point. You should not lose any sleep if you skip this one, though.

Haunted Mansion is now available exclusively in theaters. 

 

This review was first published in the Keizertimes on August 4^th, 2023. Visit at www.keizertimes.com/.

Barbie (07.28.23)

Out of all of the summer blockbusters that I was looking forward to this year, Barbie was not even a blip on my radar. Sure, I had heard that a great director was behind it, and who wouldn’t love seeing Ryan Gosling as a life-sized Ken doll? No, I felt that other things deserved my attention more. But seeing as how the next showing of Oppenheimer wasn’t for another hour or so and I didn’t feel like sitting around outside the theater twiddling my thumbs for that long, I found myself, a lone man in his thirties, watching Barbie instead and feeling only slightly awkward about it amongst all of the kids and their families.  And I’m glad I did, because it turns out that Barbie is awesome.

First of all, Barbie is very, very cool looking. Surreal, beautiful, and very pink, it’s amazing how accurately and joyously director Greta Gerwig and company have managed to convey the Barbie doll experience on a life-sized scale. The sets are incredible and the cinematography is gorgeous, infectiously converting even the most jaded of non-believers into a fan of the world that has been created here. The cast, led by the shining Margot Robbie as the titular doll, brings a smart script to life with a sweet, naïve energy that is impossible not to appreciate, even when the veneer of Barbieworld begins to slip a bit and the ugly real world starts to seep through. When that happens there are genuinely nice emotional beats as Margot and Barbie prove once again that they are more than just pretty faces. And hey, the film is hilarious. Ryan Gosling as (a) Ken? Everything you could hope for. He even sings! Speaking of music, I would not be at all surprised if Barbie was made into a Broadway musical at some point. In fact, I’d be shocked if it wasn’t.

Barbie has some wonderful themes as well, but if there is one criticism I have towards the movie it’s that it simply has too many of them. This might sound a bit silly and pedestrian of me, but some real focus on one or two of the themes could have really hammered the messages home; as it stands, Barbie feels like it flies from topics of feminism to commercialism to existentialism to everything in between at a breakneck pace, diluting some of those messages just a bit in the whiplash. Speaking of diluting the message, I also found it an odd choice to constantly state how different Barbieland is from the real world but also portray the real world (mostly through Will Ferrell’s character and his corporate sidekicks) as almost equally goofy and surreal. But hey, it’s all in good fun and like the rest of the movie it is all done exceptionally well, so I’m not complaining.

Like the advertisements said: If you love Barbie this movie is for you. If you hate Barbie, this movie is for you too. Pure joy with a nice lesson or two, you might regret it if you pass this one up.

Barbie is now showing exclusively in theaters.    

 

This review was first published in the Keizertimes on July 28^th, 2023. Visit at www.keizertimes.com.

Mission: Impossible- Dead Reckoning Part 1 (07.21.23)

 

For my money, there are few ongoing film franchises that deliver as consistently high-quality and enjoyable movies as Mission: Impossible. Smart, full of bonkers action scenes and more than a few suicidally dangerous Tom Cruise stunts, the series rarely misses these days, and once that iconic theme music starts playing you know you’re in for a good time at the movies. After twenty-seven years and seven films (and a TV series, but it has little to do with the current big screen juggernaut), the adventures of Ethan Hunt do have a tendency to blur together, however, and this is no more evident than in Mission: Impossible- Dead Reckoning Part 1, another fantastic entry that lives up to the high standards of the series despite its dependency on the same old M:I tropes and cliches that audience members have come to expect at this point.  

Mission: Impossible- Dead Reckoning Part 1 doesn’t really do anything that we as an audience haven’t seen before, but this was more comforting to me than annoying. Tom Cruise has some solid banter with his lovable crew, has to bend the rules to do the right thing, goes to a fancy European party, and does a whole lot of running. Once you’ve seen one, you’ve seen them all. Except not really, since the action set pieces are always fresh and the characters are always engaging, as is the case with M:I’s latest (I particularly liked the addition of Hayley Atwell’s character, who I have a hunch is being set up for a spinoff movie or two once Cruise finally hangs up his running shoes). Dead Reckoning may just have the coolest car chase of the entire series, and there is a sequence on a train that may have raised my blood pressure levels to dangerous heights. And really, isn’t that what we see action movies for? Potential heart attacks?  

Being a bit smarter than your average action franchise, the Mission: Impossible films for me always lie on the border between being just simple enough to understand everything and being a little too complicated for me to keep track of all the moving pieces and motivations. Dead Reckoning falls solidly into the latter camp, as I will have to see it again or read a couple of plot summaries written by smarter people to figure out what exactly was going on a couple of times, but I can’t dock the movie for that. I’m sure it all made sense to the people who weren’t distracted by how attractive Hayley Atwell is.  

Mission: Impossible- Dead Reckoning Part 1 ends satisfactorily despite the fact that it is (surprise!) the first of a two-parter, and I can’t wait to see what comes next. It is an action blockbuster that all of the other action blockbusters wish that they could be. Sure it might play things safe (it might be the only thing that does... stop jumping off of things, Tom, you’re in your sixties!), but why mess with the formula when the formula is this good? 

Mission: Impossible- Dead Reckoning Part 1 is now available in theaters. 

 

This review was first published in the Keizertimes on July 21^st, 2023. Visit at www.keizertimes.com.

Still: A Michael J. Fox Movie (07.07.23)

 

Some heroes don’t wear capes; some wear puffy orange vests, accidently get hit on by a past version of their mother, and drive time traveling DeLoreans. Some heroes simply pretend to be these puffy orange vest-wearing, DeLorean-driving heroes for a few movies (among with other iconic characters in other productions that are equally as classic) before turning to more important matters like raising billions of dollars for Parkinson’s disease research. Michael J. Fox may not see himself as a hero, but to many his example of bravery and unrelenting optimism in the face of adversity certainly qualifies him for the label. Still: A Michael J. Fox Movie is Michael’s story as told by himself, a story that is heartbreaking, heartwarming, funny, life-affirming, and entertaining all at once.  

Still triumphs not only because of its inspiring subject matter, but also because of how it tells its story. As its subtitle indicates, Still: A Michael J. Fox Movie is not a documentary but a cohesive narrative that is cleverly told via footage of Michael J. Fox’s movie and television performances, news footage, home video, and the occasional talking head which is always given by Michael himself speaking as if the audience were a close friend. I’m sure there must have been a recreated scene or two in Still, but for the life of me I could not tell which footage was authentic and which scenes were reenactments because the two blended together so seamlessly. The parallels between the aforementioned movie and television clips and Michael’s own life are sometimes eerily apropos, and the editing work by Michael Harte (who also had the idea of using said footage to begin with) could not be sharper.  Director Davis Guggenheim does a fantastic job at keeping hints of his presence to a bare minimum, instead letting Michael’s humor, wit, and still undiluted charisma drive the show. Because despite the excellent directing and editing, Still: A Michael J. Fox Movie ultimately works as well as it does because Michael J. Fox is Michael J. Fox.  

Despite Michael’s infectious upbeat attitude, Still is still sometimes hard to watch because of how honest it is when discussing and portraying the difficult circumstances that Michael has been saddled with, and I’m not just talking about the Parkinson’s. Michael is not afraid to share his experiences with alcoholism, his blessedly temporary ego highs, and depression, but if there’s one thing I learned from watching this film it’s that Michael not only refuses be pitied, but that he also refuses to let his difficulties bring his spirit down. So why should we as an audience let his struggles get our own spirits down? His story is an uplifting one because he refused to have it any other way, and Still: A Michael J. Fox Movie is an uplifting film because of this stubbornness. If you’re a fan, check it out. If you’re not, check it out anyway. You’ll be glad that you did.  

Still: A Michael J. Fox Movie is now available on Apple TV+. 

 

This review was first published in the Keizertimes on July 7^th, 2023. Visit at www.keizertimes.com/

The Flash (06.30.23)

When it comes to famous superheroes, I’d say that the Flash is definitely up there, even if a lot of people don't know anything about him beyond the fact that he runs really fast. It is therefore kind of surprising that the Scarlet Speedster hasn’t had a movie of his own before now, and it is very unfortunate that when it finally did arrive it had to do so with as much baggage as it does. But despite the numbered days of its parent franchise (DC plans on rebooting their shared movie universe in 2025) and its star that should probably should have gone to prison once or twice, The Flash is still much better than I was expecting, dodgy CGI, sloppy cameos, and messy third act aside.

As a fan of the character, Ezra Miller’s casting as the Flash/Barry Allen has always been questionable to me, and that opinion has not changed. The Barry of the DCEU (DC Extended Universe) might as well be called something else for all the similarity he has with his comic counterpart, but I guess that’s a niche complaint coming from a comic enthusiast, because the reality is that Ezra Miller pulls off a super solid performance here, annoying laugh, goofy-looking run, and criminal history aside. The marketing may have leaned heavily into the return of Michael Keaton as Batman, but Barry is still very much the heart and focus of the story, a testament to Miller’s acting and comedic abilities as well as Christina Hodson's enjoyable script. And yes, it is just as fun to see Keaton's Batman back in action after all of these years as you’d expect, and the addition of Sasha Calle as Supergirl is also quite welcome, even if the character is undercooked and mostly goes unexplored.

The Flash's CGI, on the other hand, is very hard to look at. There were a couple of instances where I thought the horrid computer imagery had to be an odd intentional choice, but I think that was just me trying to justify the video game-looking nonsense I was beholden to for an entire third act that dragged on for far too long. The story kind of falls apart by that point, and the film’s overall lesson of learning to let things go is undermined completely by a certain questionable choice at the end as the filmmakers try to have their cake and eat it too, but the solid emotional core of the movie makes me much more forgiving of these missteps than I would have been otherwise. Equally as messy is the fanservice-y cameos, which range from genuinely exciting to cringingly cheesy to hilariously contrived. Why would that particular character show up? Because people want to see that person in that costume, that’s why. No other reason is given or needed.

In short, The Flash may not be the best superhero movie of the year, or even the season, but if you’re looking for a good time at the movies this summer you can do much, much worse.

The Flash is now playing in theaters. 

 

This review was first published in the Keizertimes on June 30^th, 2023. Visit at www.keizertimes.com/

Spider-Man: Across the Spider-Verse (06.09.23)

 When I saw Avengers: Infinity War in theaters I was bit annoyed, despite the fact that I absolutely loved it. Seeing some of my favorite characters together for the first time was an incredibly fulfilling and fun experience up until the very end, at which point things just kinda stopped. There was no real resolution to anything, making the tale of Thanos and his quest for magical rocks half of a bigger whole instead of a movie that could stand completely on its own. Films that boil down to elaborate advertisements for the next offering generally bother me, but with the new Spider-Man: Across the Spider-Verse, the first of a two-part follow-up to 2018’s amazing Spider-Man: Into the Spider-Verse (Into is the first one, Across is the new one, and Beyond will come out next year… keep that in mind, because it can get confusing), the feeling wasn’t too big of a factor, as was the case with Infinity War, just because the film itself is so darned good.

Like its predecessor, one of the coolest parts of Across the Spider-Verse is how perfectly it captures the feel of reading a comic book. The stylish animation, purposefully low framerate, and energetic busyness of it all takes a minute to get used to, but once one does it becomes a singular experience like no other on film. The sheer amount of creativity on screen at any given moment is incredible, from the fight scenes to the quiet moments to the scene transitions. The story itself is pretty straightforward, a miracle in and of itself for a film about multiverse shenanigans, but it works to the movie’s benefit as it instead has us mostly focusing on the characters and their relationships. For what its worth Across does have a slower pace than Into (and I do think that it could have been cut and streamlined just a bit), and I’m not sure how well this will go over with younger audiences, but I did not mind at all because these characters and relationships were just developed so well. The voice acting and script are what sell these, and if I have any criticism towards the former it’s that I occasionally had a hard time understanding a certain cockney-accented character, but I’ll let that slide. I’m sure I didn’t miss anything important.

Do I wish it was a more complete experience? Sure. Across the Spider-Verse doesn’t have any resolution whatsoever at the end and doesn’t have a typical story structure, namely rising action, climax, and all of that good stuff you learned back in high school English class, and that can be a bit unfulfilling if you aren’t expecting it (the scene that is probably  considered the climax felt more like another set-up scene to me). But the journey to that “to be continued” is so cool and heartfelt that it’s hard to not be anything other than wowed. If next year’s Spider-Man: Beyond the Spider-Verse sticks the landing (and at this point I have no reason to believe it won’t) then we might just have one of the best animated trilogies of all time on our hands.

Spider-Man: Across the Spider-Verse is now playing exclusively in theaters. 

 

This review was first published in the Keizertimes on June 9^th, 2023. Visit at www.keizertimes.com/

White Men Can't Jump (06.02.23)

 

Some movies just don’t need to be remade, no matter how much Hollywood wants us to believe the opposite. If the original is beloved then there is nowhere for the quality to go than down, because we humans love our nostalgia above all else. I never saw 1992's White Men Can’t Jump staring Wesley Snipes and Woody Harrelson, but I can still tell you with close to one hundred percent certainty that it wasn’t a movie that needed a facelift for 2023. I know this simply because I know the original has its fans, and I am sure no one is going to be a fan of this new version. Dull, led by boring and irritating characters, and offering nothing to say about race relations beyond a few surface observations, 2023’s White Men Can’t Jump offers a few chuckles but is ultimately unnecessary and forgettable.

It is clear from the outset that White Men Can’t Jump is going for broke on the whole unlikely bromance thing that other films have done so well in the past, but it is an attempt built on a flimsy foundation of two-dimensional characters and a complete lack of chemistry between the two leads. Kamal (played by Sinqua Walls) is a former high school basketball star that wants to get his former glory back, and that’s about it. Jeremy (played by Jack Harlow) has the same boring motivation with the added baggage of being the most stereotypical and unlikable douche (it’s the only word that really fits, sorry!) you can think of. They make for a thoroughly uninteresting pair, leaving the film to rely on its equally uninteresting story and a mere handful of laughs, most of which are provided by the tertiary friend characters Lorenzo and Speedy (Myles Bullock and Vince Staples, respectively) who are genuinely hilarious and thoroughly steal the show every scene they are in.

Perhaps the most frustrating part of White Men Can’t Jump is how safe the film plays it with its social and racial commentary. Instead of trying for something new, meaningful, and funny, Can’t Jump is content to merely reiterate already well-trodden material, making observations and jokes about as shallow as its title. Even though I have never seen the original film I still felt the distinct impression that I had seen White Men Can’t Jump already many times before as I watched the remake. And why not just revisit one of those films instead? Surely they at least have characters I want to root for instead of a self-obsessed hipster and a blank slate.

White Men Can’t Jump isn’t painful or anything, mind you. It just doesn’t do enough to justify its own existence and instead serves as a reminder that better entertainment of this ilk is out there. Ultimately this is just another unnecessary remake doomed to be forgotten in the shadowy edges of the Hulu catalogue, a place very few will ever tread and even fewer will ever watch.

White Men Can’t Jump is now available on Hulu. 

This review was first published in the Keizertimes on June 2nd, 2023. Visit at www.keizertimes.com/