Nerve Movie Review

Nerve is the 80s throwback dark romance fairy tale (meta) comedy I never knew I wanted... But absolutely needed.

I loved this movie!

I was intrigued by the posters, premise and possibly the initial trailer, but never really bothered to check it out. Not exactly sure what it was, but Nerve finally called to me recently (after scrolling screw my most of my Netflix queue then going through Amazon Prime's) and it was indeed the perfect time for it.

Set-up as a dystopian youth-friendly challenge-rising story with social commentary, Nerve unexpectedly proved to be incredibly smartly written and directed, with perfect casting for the roles, and an impeccable degree of capturing the voice of modern "teen" cinema while also skewering it (and the culture)(or at least an interpretation/impersonation of it).

And (partial comedy tone SPOILER), just as you think the film is heading towards tone def territory - the film already knows it.

That's the whole point.

The film already knows what your expectations are, and puts enough little twists and spins to make it an incredibly fun and engaging time that's well worth checking out. Even the soundtrack, while occasionally odd/off (or just not my style), really works for the film.

Hell, the cinematography in the film is enough to salivate over. It's gorgeously shot, with an intelligence to the movements the managed to even enhance the humor of the scenes. Just some excellent storytelling.

Also, don't let the trailers fool you (although I don't really remember them and not sure if I watched them, so...), as the film is still very much character and relationship-driven, as much as it is plot and escalation.

I regret it taking me so long to finally watch, but perhaps it was worth the wait.

Takeaway: Top-notch scores from me: HIGHLY RECOMMENDED. Though, as always, your mileage may vary, as I could see the humor and tone of the film not working for everyone, but I had an absolute blast while watching.

And, honestly, I'd go so far as to say it's a cultural milestone and a piece of cinema I hope is studied for years to come, thanks to its many great layers, particularly in our current nostalgia era of filmmaking.

The Conjuring 2 Movie Review

The Conjuring 2 is a fantastic blend of an inventive theme park ride mixed with a multi-genre horror movie. In other words - it's a ton of fun!

The film starts with some great tension right in the opening scene and doesn't let up for a good chunk of the movie (maybe an hour? I lost track of time). The quality does dip a bit once the first supporting monster shows up and again with some other ridiculous / overly sentimental scenes that detract from the horror and tension, but damn, what a ride; my theory is if they had cut the score during the sentimental scenes, it would have improved things. It can also be argued that those more sentimental, "relaxed" scenes are their for pacing purposes and to help the scares be stronger later, but not sure that's either necessary or true.

Regardless of any dips in quality, there's a lot to love in The Conjuring 2, not the least of which were the decent number of scenes that were either one-take or faux one-take scenes and a fantastic main villain that had a great design and thematic resonance for the lead characters. Regarding the one-takes, there was a sequence towards the end featuring one of the supporting monsters that's just bad-ass.

The story was simultaneously simple and excellent. The film starts with a tease of the Amityville Horror that presents a throughline for the rest of the film, which was carried beautifully by Vera Farmiga. Speaking of which, the rapport and chemistry between Farmiga and Patrick Wilson was a joy to watch - they're a couple I'd happily see in a series of these movies. Beyond the throughline was a fairly standard possession story, but beautifully directed by James Wan, and well performed by the kids (those previously mentioned sequences go a long way).

All in all, it's a solid film that's pulpy, as well as both modern and a throwback. I absolutely enjoyed it more than the first movie and may now be my favorite horror movie of 2016, easily besting The Witch (though that had arguably better acting), and probably edging out both Green Room and Don't Breathe (which probably had better tension).

Takeaway: Highly Recommended

Batman Forever Movie Rewatch Review

Yes, Batman Forever is still dumb, nonsensical, ostentatious, and a bit boring at times, but...

Hot damn! The movie is a visual treat in both cinematography (particularly the movements of the actors within frames) and production design. The music by Elliot Goldenthal, while nowhere near as good as Danny Elfman's scores, is enjoyable in its cartoony throwback styles, as well.

Plus - there's some really smart writing and bits (such as exploring Batman's psychology), inbetween all the various homages to 60s Batman and general weak points of the movie.

Not to mention the performances! Sure, Val Kilmer's a weak Bruce Wayne (his take is a rather flat traumatized one), but a pretty good Batman. The supporting cast is, for better or worse, 1- or 2-dimensional, and though both villains channel the Joker (via Robin Williams?), they're a pleasure to watch (I really love Tommy Lee Jones in this, even if its a flawed characterization). Also, hot damn! Dr. Chase Meridian.

And I'll say this - while fairly clearly teased, it's arguably a missed opportunity to explore Nigma's obsessive homoerotic tendencies towards Batman. They probably handled things as well as they could for 1995, but Forever presents some interesting themes and ideas that are only lightly touched upon. At the very least, it made for some great bits having Nigma chase Bruce (Nigma's party is a great example of this).

As a kid, I loved the film, so there's a good nostalgia factor for reciting the lines and enjoying the various scenes; and while as an adult I'm not as entertained, I can definitely appreciate a number of the strengths it has going for it.

Takeaway: Dumb but fun, and very enjoyable in some parts while more trashy in others.

Bright Movie Review

Bright is a great example of a film with an interesting world (magic in the modern day, prophecies), but the execution left much to be desired.

For my two cents, the film needed less David Ayer and Max Landis and more... quality. Flat direction and questionable writing (Landis was not a good choice for an LA-based cop drama about racism) made for an underwhelming experience. A number of scenes were trying to heighten the drama, but just fell completely flat due to bad direction (and cinematography) by Ayer. Had this been Ghostbusters' great blend of horror and comedy meets John Carpenter's auteur style meets fantasy, I'd have been all over it.

Acting was OK, with Joel Edgerton being the highlight, but the rest of the cast was racial stereotypes to an awkward degree. Noomi Rapace was wasted. It'd also be great to know WHY Edgerton's character wanted to be a cop, rather than wanting to be a cop since a kid.

This movie had a budget of $90 million - where did it go? The movie's look alternated between good fantasy (20%), shakey-cam street cop drama (15%) and a TV show (65%). There were some cool shots, but they also looked low-budget, to an extent.

I was hoping it'd be run-of-the-mill with some interesting elements, and it was, but it was also largely a waste of time.

Takeaway: Didn't care for it, but, as always, your mileage may vary.

Meddling Kids Book Review

Had Stranger Things been an anthology, this would have been an excellent second season.

Meddling Kids, by author Edgar Cantero, is a very fun homage to Scooby Doo and HP Lovecraft, clearly having a great time playing with some of the tropes from each source. Combine that with a decent amount of nostalgia, hefty dose of metaphors, plus the occasional meta, and Meddling Kids makes for an engaging pulp read.

I did have a hurdle in the first portion, getting familiar with the style (there were lots of references and the word choices felt like someone was having too much fun with the thesaurus), but once the story started going, it fell into a groove that didn't let up until the very end. That said, some action towards the end muddled things a bit, but the great characters and writing were enough to overcome any minor disruptions.

For a healthy mix of horror and comedy, Meddling Kids gets a solid RECOMMENDED.

I do mean it when I say I'd love to see this as either a movie or TV series, though 6-episode TV series would be ideal.

Justice League Movie Review

*MILD SPOILERS*

The first thing to acknowledge about Justice League is maybe the easiest thing to say about it:

It's a mess.

But what does that mean exactly? Well, your mileage may vary with both how much you enjoy the movie and how good you think it is.

As for me, I certainly didn't hate the movie as much as Man of Steel (which I consider to be the worst movie I've seen in theaters in the past decade, if not ever), nor was I as bored as I was during Suicide Squad, but it didn't have nearly enough of the good will of Wonder Woman or surprisingly entertaining tonal consistency of Batman vs Superman's extended edition (despite disagreements with the overall creative direction; I'm not bothering with the theatrical version).

My main gripes with the movie are:

• I stopped caring - Shortly into the movie, I realized I didn't care about anyone or anything that was on screen. Neither the plots nor performances were particularly exciting. Ben Affleck's Batman alternated between disaffected and disinterested, with a good chunk of dry smarm and wit to feign engagement. Cyborg's exaggerated movements were also awkward. 
• The film really needed breathing room - The editing, pacing and timing were rushed in a way that gave the movie a really awkward tone. Part of this may have been due to the split-directing duties between Zach Snyder and Joss Whedon, but there's a good chance the movie was a mess during the script. Speaking of which...
• The script - Clunky dialogue, cheesy lines, random (retroactive) introductions of plots/character motivations via dialogue, lack of subtlety - the film needed another pass on both the dialogue and the script.
• The music - Why did Danny Elfman replace Junkie XL? Despite my general dislike of both Man of Steel and Batman vs Superman, the music for both was of high quality. The lack of Superman's theme and other recent themes really hurt Justice League. Not to mention the very random inclusion of the Burton Batman theme detracted from the experience. Very, very disappointing. 
• The CG - This was really, really not good. From the blandness of Steppenwolf's face to the blandness of the terraforming. Sure, it led to some pretty flowers, but everything looked like visual crap, despite the big budget...

I could list more, but I'll try to summarize: the film was a very mediocre and underwhelming debut for DC's first-class team. I can't say that I was disappointed, because that meant I would have expected better from the current DC Extended Universe, although in seeing the movie that meant I unfortunately financially supported it. 

Had this been an entry in the DC Animated Movie universe, I'd have been perfectly contented. Hell, if all the rest of the Snyder-verse DC movies could be relegated to much cheaper DCAM versions, that may be the best win-win scenario - give people these stories with these characters and not continue with the exorbitant costs and missed live-action opportunities. 

That said, the film did do a few things well:

• Superman - Other than a debatable return, once Superman remembered who he was, we're finally able to see the "beacon of hope" Superman as played by Henry Cavill. Had this been the Superman from the get go, perhaps the DCEU course would be in a more positive direction. Note, though, that this movie is a giant refresh for Superman, with previous ones almost taking place in parallel dimensions, considering how different this Superman is.
• The Flash and Cyborg's banter - Other than one or two cringe-worthy jokes, they had a nice rapport.
• The overall team dynamic - Excusing script and performance issues, the team actually seemed motivated to work together to get the job done. They recognized each others strengths and tried to encourage each other to be the best versions of themselves. 

When it's all said and done, I would suggest either waiting to see the movie on cable, where commercial breaks may help disrupt the flow of the movie in a good way, or an extended edition of the film is released which hopefully reinserts some much-needed breathing room. Until then, Justice League is NOT RECOMMENDED. If you want some great Justice League content, watch the complete run of Justice League Unlimited. 

Dark City Director's Cut Review

I recently rewatched the Director's Cut of Dark City and hot damn is it a good, fun movie. I love the art direction, production design (seriously, the visuals are so cool) and especially the music by Trevor Jones. The general noir style is pretty great, though some of the trappings (misogyny) leave much to be desired (women aren't given great material, nor non-white characters).

This is the kind of movie I would love to make, as I think Dark City does a couple really cool things rather well:

1) Editing and pacing (and script) - The film only shows you enough, typically via quick glimpses, and yet its very effective at conveying the message, story and mood. Similarly...
2) Dialogue - Characters are able to say so much by saying so little. I particularly love a few of the dialogue choices with the main character, John Murdoch (Rufus Sewell), in that he knows something another character doesn't and either asks them a question or phrases his sentence in a specific way to not reveal anything; nicely done. It helps that the film is beautifully crafted, with a wonderful villainous turn by Richard O'Brien as Mr. Hand.

Not to mention, how many movies end with a really, really kick-ass telekinesis fight? Dark City features easily one of the best "psychic" fights ever filmed. Plus, the themes and ideas regarding memory and how that determines who we are? Very cool.

It's unfortunate that Dark City has become somewhat "lost in time." Had The Matrix not come out the following year (1999), I wonder if Dark City would have been more influential. Granted, something like The Matrix would have surpassed it at some point, because there's a bit more commentary and depth with The Matrix (more to the world and story that's relatable), but it could have been nice for Dark City to have had more of an impact.

To reiterate on one of the early points, it's a damn shame Trevor Jones isn't a more famous composer. His score for the film is perfectly atmospheric, suspenseful, exciting and action-packed - there are some great themes I just want to wrap myself in as if they were a blanket. I'd argue he's created at least three top-tier scores:

Dark Crystal
Dark City
Merlin

Excalibur may also be included, among others (Labyrinth).

While the Director's Cut is arguably the superior version to the theatrical, Dark City is easily HIGHLY RECOMMENDED. Hopefully it's legacy will only grow with time. It's such a beautifully 90s movie that must be scene at least once.

Thor Ragnarok Review

Thor: Ragnarok is a fine, if not very fine, movie, which I mean in a good way (and not just for the talent involved).

Ragnarok seemed very much like director Taita Waititi's Batman Returns, in that he very much gets to tell a story he would normally tell, but with so many toys and characters and things to play with in the Marvel Universe.

As Marvel's third movie in 2017, Ragnarok struck me as the better versions of GOTG2 (space-fairing adventure) and Spider-man: Homecoming (comedic action), despite not being able to learn any of the lessons from either release due to production schedules. In fact, I'd go so far as to say that Ragnarok shares many of the same plots and beats as GOTG2, but is what I'd argue to be the clearer superior movie.

However, I'm a bit mixed on the beginning, which was a little wonky and out-of-character for Thor, but "enough" humor (as not every bit hit) and certainly the action helped.

I LOVED so many little details (the dragon's eye roll) in Ragnarok. Taika's very good with details and building worlds. There's lots of intelligence with his movies, both in details and the script.

Acting-wise, I loved so many newcomers: Valyrie (Tessa Thompson) and  Hela (Cate Blanchet) were both awesome, kick-ass and sexy (while not being objectified); Jeff Goldblum (Jeff Goldblum) was lots of fun; and Taika Waititi was a scene-stealer in his role. For returning members, Loki (Tom Hiddleston) was pretty good, though a more mature (particularly emotionally) version, to an extent (though his plot was semi-moronic, unless everything was part of Loki's journey because it's a path he was already on...). Thor (Chris Hemsworth), Hulk (Mark Ruffalo) and Odin (Anthony Hopkins) seemed rather different from their normal selves, which isn't necessarily bad, just different (e.g. Batman Returns). Hopkins gets some big bonus points, as I loved his bit as Loki-Odin - I won't say anything more.

Regarding story, though, there was something ultimately kinda flat about the movie for me, with the stakes never really feeling that high or low. Thankfully, however, Ragnarok lacked scenes that undercut the emotion and drama like in Spider-man: Homecoming (so maybe it did learn something). It also lacked the general amateur storytelling skills in GOTG2. Disappointingly for me, and your mileage may vary, it never got quite as high as I think it could have (it did have a ton of the right beats, though).

Having now watched three of Waititi's movies (Ragnarok, Hunt for the Wilderpeople and What We Do in the Shadows), Taika may be a better version of a modern Terry Gilliam, in that he's able to be so unique with his voice and have knowledge of and intelligence for utilizing different mediums and methods. His films are art.

That said, I'd love to see him develop and direct more TV pilots, as those three movies of his I've seen (Thor, Wilderpeople and Shadows) and indicative - Taika leaves me wanting more at the end, in both good ways and bad.

All said and done, Thor Ragnarok gets a strong RECOMMENDATION from me as a solid movie. It's a world I'd like to return to, as the comedy, visuals and music (and shoutout to the score by Mark Mothersbaugh) gel together in a fun way, which is exactly what Taika set out to do.

Movies on plane August 2018 part 2

Watched some more movies on a plane in August, so here are some thoughts...

Sleepless in Seattle
I'm not sure how common or uncommon this is, but I actually saw this film after seeing You've Got Mail. Highly lauded as an early 90's romantic comedy, it certainly has its charm in the ways that writer-director Nora Ephron is so highly capable. As expected, there's lots of great scenework and fun dialogue, particularly the scene with Meg Ryan and Rosie O'Donnell watching a movie. As well, the acting is top-notch, considering the relatively ridiculous central conceit of the show (falling in love over listening to the radio), which is hard to overlook.

However, the film is so effective at being a cute throwback to older Hollywood romance movies it sucked me in enough to suspend my disbelief about basically everything plot-wise after the first 30-minutes of the movie (that kid has god-like powers).

Between the two films, I prefer You've Got Mail, but Sleepless in Seattle is still RECOMMENDED.

The Devil Wears Prada
As another movie I'd heard so much about over the years, I was looking forward to finally watching The Devil Wears Prada. As expected, Meryl Streep created an almost instantly iconic, nuanced, understated and yet larger-than-life character in Miranda Priestly, though based on a real-life counterpart. Anne Hathaway does a largely fine job of holding her own against both Streep and Priestly, but...

Can we talk about how awkwardly this movie is structured / paced, particularly for Hathaway's character Andy Sachs? Don't worry, it's a rhetorical question.

Prada starts simple enough with the disinterested Sachs getting the highly sought-after position, with a natural arc of heading towards the "dark side" as a potential ally / partner to Priestly, but it does so in such an odd path. Basically, Sachs keeps trajecting upwardly, even when screwing up or when things go wrong. For her, it's just up and up and up; though maybe her arc is more like a staircase.

While yes, it makes sense from a story perspective for her to see Priestly's perspective and tease being on the dark side, the film avoids almost any opportunity to really explore the depths and pathos of the consequences of these actions. It misses out two-fold:

1) Exploring Andy's perspective as she goes on this journey. It's just constantly moving onto the next thing, onward and upward. No living in the past, just moving forward. Which makes for an interesting character choice, but also very odd and rather cold; which may be the point, but makes for an odd anchor for the audience, or at least me.
2) Exploring Miranda's perspective, particularly in her one key scene, which serves as the preview of the end of Andy's path if she continues on it.

Neither character really pauses to question what's going on - the plot keeps running forward. And while yes, that's not what this movie is, it would have made for a great opportunity. Instead, the comedy of the film removes any great dramatic beats. Unfortunately, I didn't find the comedy strong enough as a comedy movie.

As such, Prada is only MILDLY RECOMMENDED. The acting, particularly from both Streep and Stanley Tucci, are great, but the plot and general character of Andy Sachs left much to be desired. Note: I haven't read the book, and that the story is apparently based on real life does have some impact on things, I'm sure. I suppose if I viewed this more as a character study than standard story, I'd appreciate it more.

Movies on plane August 2018 part 1

John Wick Chapter 2 
John Wick 1 and 2 are not for me, as much as I'd love to like them.

I have three issues with this one:
1) The assassins (particularly Reeves and Common), and others, are trying too hard to be cool like the opening scene of The Matrix: Reloaded; which is bad.
2) Much as I respect physical actual action, this is just a bunch of Reeves awkwardly bobbing around with a gun near his head. Then when he's close, it's just spin everyone around before popping everyone in the head. Speaking of which...
3) If I wanted to watch Headshots: The Movie, I'd rather watch a "Let's Play" of Goldeneye 64 in Big Head mode on easy difficulty.

There are again teases of an interesting world, but the film follows characters I don't really care about and the most basic, basic, basic, basic story around: mess with John Wick = you die. It was boring and flat. Maybe I'd enjoy it more with a better director?

Unless you enjoyed the first movie, John Wick Chapter 2 is sadly NOT RECOMMENDED, but please go see it anyway and judge for yourself.


Ghost in the Shell
There are actually some decent things good in the film, such as production design, generally costumes and some elements of the story (the metaphysical, the villain mostly).

But there are indeed some problems in the movie, too, particularly with how much they messed with Major's origin and made it such a central point (save it for the second or simplify what was done), adding an origin to Bato's eyes and casting him with a New York accent (or whatever that crappy accent was), not to mention criminally under-utilizing the rest of the Section 9 team. Had the story focused more on them being a solid team, having good banter, but still having political machinations, it would have been better. I'm positive a minor recut of the movie will go a long way.

As for the controversy of the casting and whitewashing, it wasn't an issue to me as she's in a shell - a supposedly generic shell, per the show and mange (another movie fuck-up). Hell, once she got a better idea of her origin, she could have modified her shell for a not-going-to-happen-now sequel. Would giving the role to an Asian actress have been preferred? Absolutely. But her being whitewashed/her identity taken away was part of the story and not a bad idea for a story.

Despite its number of issues, Ghost in the Shell is RECOMMENDED, but maybe just barely. I wish either this version were better or there's a sequel that could show off just how good the property is, but maybe that's what the Stand Alone Complex anime series is for (particularly the second season).


Kong: Skull Island
It's a total B-movie, but hot damn is this fun. Easily my now second favorite movie of the year, considering how underwhelming this year has been (first is Get Out). Kong has some cliches with the 70s setting re: music and the military, but things just work and click due to some excellent direction and editing.

Sure, the characters don't really exist outside maybe Sam Jackson's character, but it's not really the point - Kong is the central figure of the story and he completely owns this movie. We just happen to be seeing Kong through these rando's eyes. Then again, John C Reilly was so much fun!

Also, give the team that brought this Kong to life all of Andy Serkis' future work. This Kong was so much more compelling than Peter Jackson's version, which I've admittedly forgotten. Then again, it may have just been the movie, on the whole.

Either way, I'm completely onboard with the sequel and can't wait. The post-credits sequence is arguably the second best ending of the year (first goes to Split; third may be the post-credits from Spider-man: Homecoming).

Your enjoyment of B-movie cheese may vary, but Kong: Skull Island is HIGHLY RECOMMENDED by me. I'm sad I missed out on this in theaters, as I'm sure it'd have been quite the experience.