A definitive kids movie with questionable appeal for adults.
Sonic The Hedgehog is one of those movies that doesn't really know who it is aimed at. The bulk of the plot and jokes are aimed at kids when the property itself is not very well known to the audience. Then there are adult jokes that are so thinly veiled that you could walk right through them. Ben Schwartz plays the titular Sonic and does a wonderful job imitating a child alien, as he played the man child Jean Ralphio on Parks and Rec. James Marsden plays the wholesome police officer who feels like a big fish in a small town. He gets roped into protecting Sonic from the almost too obviously evil Dr. Robotnic played by Jim Carrey who is at his absolute most Jim Carrey ever seen. He is so eccentric that it often times removes you from the film with his absurdity. While the film is often over the top with its child based comedy it is a respectable take on the need for family and the need to belong.
The controversy around Sonic's teeth was heavily overblown but the studio listened and changed the film for the better. The downside might be that the production budget ballooned and it may not make back as much of the return. The studio is depending on Sonic being a success as there are two obvious set ups for sequels that might not happen and in my view are not necessary. Sonic wraps up the story line in a nice little bow until those zingers and does not require a sequel. It can only go down from here and Sonic unfortunately doesn't start out extremely high.
A solid kids flick that will not sit perfectly with Sonic die hard fans, it earns a C+ from the Holmes Review.
A strange and puzzling take on the Fox News scandal of Roger Aisles. At times it doesn't know if it trying to make Megyn Kelly a hero or a villain in her taking down of Roger Aisles for Sexual Harassment. There are definitely women that the film takes aim at, in particular Judge Jeanine who still defends Aisles to this day. It attempts to bring Gretchen Carlson to the forefront of the movement where she rightfully belongs but then falls into the trap that followed actual events where bombshell Kelly became the big hero who took him down. Charlize Theron puts in a wonderful performance for her role as Megyn Kelly and at times makes us wonder if she really cared about the women. But most of the time it feels like she is more interested in self preservation and how she is perceived than whether she is doing the right thing. Her husband puts up more righteous indignation about what is happening to them than she does. As one thinks about it, it almost feels like mansplaining in a film designed to show the problems with the old boy mentality. Margot Robbie plays a character who is a conglomerate of 3 different women's accounts of their dealings with Aisles and Fox News. She is the audiences first hand account of the harassment that women experienced at the hands of Fox that turns her from a dopey eyed party line toting to a disenfranchised cynic. They also randomly place a closeted lesbian democrat in the Fox news room played by Kate McKinnon. If this was an attempt to make it look like there are problematic people on both sides of the isle, it lands flat because this character is obviously made up. Nicole Kidman also puts in an interesting performance as Gretchen Carlson where they cannot seem to decide if she is a conniving opportunist or a genuine whistle-blower. The one aspect that it does get across that is by no way subtle is what the news is selling to the viewers and what the viewers want. Sex. It is interesting to look at what the film is trying to say. It almost comes across as if it doesn't matter in the #metoo era what happens because the viewers will feign interest but want sex sold to them at any cost.
This film is a jumble of a messy plot and good performances. It is interesting to see what happened with the downfall of a media mogul but there are too many issues with the messaging. This makes it a C- disappointment.
Who would have thought that a movie about World War II Germany at the end of the war could be so darn funny. Taika Waititi is able to take the dark and disturbing topic of antisemitism into comedy with it's absurdity. Waititi even plays the main man Hitler himself as the imaginary friend of Jojo Rabbit (Roman Griffin Davis). Davis plays a sympathetic young boy indoctrinated by the Nazi propaganda. He eventually discovers that his mother (Scarlett Johansson) has been hiding a 18 year old Jewish girl Elsa (Thomasin McKenzie) in their home. Jojo must grapple with the idea of someone he hates living in his house and how he can deal with it. His best answer is to write a book and interview the girl. Through this process he learns and grows wrestling with the differences and similarities between Elsa and himself. There are sporadic comedic appearances from Yorki (Archie Yates), Jojo's best friend who is an absolute delight to watch. His comedic timing is fantastic and his normalizing responses to the craziness that surrounds Jojo is fascinating. Another stand out performance is Sam Rockwell who plays Captain Klenzendorf, a one-eyed war veteran who is slowly disconnecting from the Propaganda and seeing it for what it truly is. Rockwell is a true highlight of the film and his play of of Alfie Allen, fresh off of Game of Thrones. Their sparing and care for each other is a welcome relief for all the hateful antisemitism, even if it is in parody, in the film.
Scarlett Johnasson. Wow. If there ever was a perfect example of what is wrong with the Academy Awards, she is it. She has almost the least amount of screen time and yet she is the one who gets the nomination. Thomasin McKenzy puts on a masterful performance as a lost in a world of hate Jewish girl while Johanson plays a happy mother trying to keep the cruelties of the world from her son. Don't get me wrong, ScarJo is not bad in this film, she is just not great. And for the amount of time she is on screen, it is not even close to worth an Oscar nod. McKenzy on the other hand does a wonderful job showing a wide range of emotions and depth. Where is her nod? And that is just to say in the same movie. There are many other performances in other films this year that are far better than Johnasson is here. The Oscars really need to reexamine themselves if they want to be relevant in the future because Johansson already has black marks to her name and if they continue nominating performances like hers over other truly masterful ones, no one is going to care if you get an Oscar or not.
Easily a B+ film with only minor detraction's from regrettable performances like Rebel Wilson.
Don't ruin my childhood, what most people would be asking the director not to do when going to see a movie about Mr. Rogers. But as it turns out, a movie with big shoes to fill manages to catch the nostalgia of those watching and not harm the legacy. Mr. Rogers doesn't even turn out to be the main character in the film. It turns from the biographical film one would expect to a character study of a writer dealing with personal issues who is doing a piece on Rogers. Tom Hanks perfectly encapsulates the characteristics and mannerisms of Fred Rogers, making it sometimes hard to remember they are not the same person, While it is Hanks' first academy award nomination in 20 years, it is most deserved for his bringing Rogers back to life. A Beautiful Day In The Neighborhood plays out almost like an hour and a half episode of Mr. Rogers Neighborhood, even beginning with Rogers' traditional 'Hello Neighbor' and then talking about our writer Lloyd Vogel and how he is hurting, on the inside and out. The film then progresses through a snapshot of Vogel's life as he deals with his issues with this father and how he turns from a cynic to an idealist. He must come to terms with his father and the issues of being his own child's parent. All with the help of seeing the true optimism and genuineness of Fred Rogers and his show. If there was one complaint for the film it would be that Andrea Vogel, Lloyd's wife, is incredibly unsupportive of his grievances towards his father. I understand that it was necessary to push the character forward but the things that were done to him as a child seemed deeper than what his wife was showing.
That would be the one and only issue as Tom Hanks just steals the scene whenever he is on screen and mesmerizes with his ability to conduct the spirit of Mr. Rogers into the audience. It is easily an A film with only a little room to grow for that A+.
Lets hope the Monster verse that Warner Brothers is trying to create has gone the way of the Dark Universe and died. It was a cool idea with strong entries like Godzilla and Kong: Scull Island but it appears they have completely run out of ideas. To murder over half of the population on earth and then blow past it like nothing happened is a new level of Hollywood apathy. The heavy handedness of the environmental impact of the film is also a massive detriment. It is very difficult for the audience to empathize with the main billed cast of Millie Bobby Brown, fresh off of her Stranger Things high, when she is confusingly aligned with both the villains and heroes of the film.
We are in a world where dozens of Monsters have been found and are currently being studied by the hidden Monarch government agency until eco-terrorist Charles Dance steals a method of waking them all up at once. Which is what happens and millions if not billions die as these Monstrosities are wreak havoc on the world. We follow Kyle Chandler as he is trying to find the device that woke all the problems as well as his daughter (Brown) and his ex-wife (Vera Farmiga). Ken Watanabe does his absolute best to bring some gravitas to the film that desperately needs it but even he can't elevate this disappointment. The minor consolation prizes are that we get to see Mothra and King Ghidorah, although when you have a universe with Titans and monsters what else do you need? Aliens. Ridiculous and very hard to swallow. And when it is all said and done there all goes back to normal with drastically less people around. But we just won't talk about that.
Godzilla: King of Monsters earns a dismal D, only saved from an F by the Godzilla nostalgia and Watanabe acting his but off in a film that does not deserve it.
Slow burns are sometimes produce the best food for thought. Brad Pitt solidifies his position in acting as one of the best in the business. He should be nominated for an Academy Award for this film and not Once Upon A Time In Hollywood. Ad Astra takes aim at the common feeling of being left behind by both loved ones and life. Pitt plays Roy McBride, an astronaut who followed in his father's giant footsteps ind order to make sense of the of the world. He shuts himself down both emotionally and physically, he is divorced and his resting heart rate never goes above 80, even in life or death situations. McBride is tasked with finding his father (Tommy Lee Jones), who left on the Lima project to find intelligent life outside our known galaxy. On the trip McBride must come to grips with the fact that his father left him when he was 8 years old and he may not like what he finds on the Lima station. It is a journey of self discovery, reminiscent of 2001: Space Odyssey with challenges arising throughout that you would expect to have show up later but in a satisfying way, they don't. Donald Sutherland makes a satisfying cameo as a person from McBride Sr. past to aid Roy on his journey. More of this calm, reserved, sparse Sutherland please. Ad Astra looks at how barriers we put up in life to survive actually might be suffocating the very life out of us, begging the question, are you truly still living?Some will find this film boring and pretentious but that is what is often said of out past space epics. Think of Interstellar, Gravity and 2001: Space Odyssey. Ad Astra definitely needs to be considered in with these epics for truly analyzing the human experience by reaching for the stars.
An easy grade of an A for this fantastic film. The ending really can hit you hard.
Rian Johnson continues to show the world why his is a fantastic director and that the Last Jedi and Looper where not flukes. With the thought and ingenuity that when into this film, it is a real wonder that they were able to pull it off so masterfully. It is a true whodunnit that will have you guessing until the very end. I often try to figure out or guess the outcome of films before they happen as my namesake will suggest and even I, the great Sherlock Holmes was off the mark. And what this film does that even my own films have failed to do in the past is set up the ending with quite obvious hints to the perpetrator that if the audience is truly looking for they can see. It does not take a genius of high IQ to pick up on small minuscule details that are not even shown to the audience. And that is what truly makes a good mystery film. Is it believable and upon second viewing the audience can see how the crime was committed in real time vs the reveal in the end.
Daniel Craig puts in a truly phenomenal and hilarious performance as Beniot Blanc, a private investigator who is mysteriously hired to investigate the suicide of a famous mystery writer. It is wonderful to see him play off of Jamie Lee Curtis, Michael Shannon and Chris Evans as the spiteful children/grandchildren looking for their inheritance. It is a true wonder to see him interact with the coming out party for Ana De Armas who plays the dutiful nurse caught up in the family drama. De Armas has been relatively unknown until now and should not be forgotten again. She easily takes center stage in the film and uses her compatriots to elevate her status. Usually with such a stacked cast, the least known actor is relegated to looking foolish or out of their league. This is not the case in Knives out and De Armas even puts a few of her colleagues to shame. Knives out delivers on all fronts and could not have been a better response to all the Star Wars haters that were calling for Johnson's head.
This easily earns an A+ and I would consider it one of the best films of the year.
Joaquin Phoenix brings out a very dark, very powerful portrayal of Arthur Fleck aka Joker and the film itself holds up an ugly mirror to the world reflecting its inexplicable treatment of mental health and marginalized society. Fleck is trying to make it as a stand up comedian but can only get jobs as a call for hire clown. Even in the close quarters of his fellow misfit clowns, Arthur is an outsider. he talks to himself, has a condition where he laughs uncontrollably at random and goes home to his frail mother whom he is the sole provider. We get a deep look at the Gotham before Batman and see how things could have gotten so bad. This is only a possible case as our narrator for the film is Moody, who is a self described moody schizophrenic, which makes him unreliable at best and outright wrong at worst. Robert DeNiro enters the scene as Murray Franklin, a talk show host who Arthur Idolizes with this mother. We are continuously shown clips of the show and Arthur slowly has his perfect image of Franklin shattered. It is amazing what kind of sympathy that Todd Phillips is able to muster from the audience for a character that we already know will become deplorable with his actions. Phillips goes after many marginalized groups in the mentally ill, the poor, the taken advantage of, the children taking care of the parent. The audience can even feel sympathy for those treating Arthur poorly. In one scene in particular, Arthur is attempting to entertain a child on a city bus. His mother sees this and immediately overreacts telling him to leave her child alone. Based on everything surrounding the altercation one can feel sympathy for the mother with the utter filth depravity we see in Gotham, one would be suspect to a random older man making faces at their child. We only know it is an overreaction because we have seen what Arthur is truly like.
While I think that the argument that Joker glorifies violence and is a dangerous film for society is over blown, I do think it is a necessary conversation to have. Unlike the John Wick films which are also Ultra violent, Joker's main protagonist is not hero and never will be. To think that these two films are in the same wheel house is absurd. Joker builds off of all the pent up anger and rage that we feel today towards the ultra rich and gives it an outlet in Thomas Wayne. The film almost feels like what would have happened if Occupy Wall street had gone horrifically wrong. John Wick asks what would happen if a good guy hitman decided to burn down a hidden assassin order. Joker should be analyzed for its portrayal of society and the question it asks of does society create it's own monsters. John Wick should be enjoyed for fun and pure amusement.
Joker easily earns an B+ for its view of society and how we need to reexamine our current situation.
Christian Bale puts in another Oscar worthy performance in a year of the snub. While there are far more compelling snubs such as Eddie Murphy, Awkwafina and even Adam Sandler, Christian Bale is Certainly more deserving of an academy award this year than Leonardo Decaprio, Brad Pit, Al Pacino and the list goes on. Had he been passed over for the likes of Eddie Murphy in Dolomite is My Name, I would say that there was a tough group of contenders. But with who was nominated, it is very obvious that the Academy picked a few movies that they wanted to focus on and to heck with the rest. Matt Damon even gives phenomenal performance that in another year would net him at minimum a nomination. The small consolation for Bale, unlike for Murphy or Awkwafina, is that Ford V Ferrari was able to snag a nomination for Best Picture and the category they deserve to win, Sound Editing.
Ford V Ferrari manages to get the audience to care about a battle between 2 millionaires while keeping our main characters out of the scummy world of the supper rich. We follow Carroll Shelby (Matt Damon) as he is tasked with building a race car for Ford that will beat Ferrari at the famed Le Mans. Shelby Recruits a down on his luck, old racer in Ken Miles (Christian Bale) and has to fight the bureaucracy of the upper workings of Ford. Leo Beebe (Josh Lucas) plays the foil to Shelby and Miles as he constantly is trying to undermine their success and take it for his own. Miles is the character that the audience can most identify with by being the everyday man who is constantly held down by the man and is only trying to do what he loves, being the best racer in the world. Miles must decide on the journey if he is going to remain the lone wolf, doing it as he sees fit or join the team of the company that is trying to stab him in the back.
One interesting aspect of the film is that we are first introduced to Henry Ford II (Tracy Letts) were are made to believe that he is a typical uncaring CEO of a big company. Then there are a number of scenes that seem to humanize him, only for a scene five minutes later that undoes all of the humanization before it. It almost seams that the film only could move the story along by making him seem human and they then had to immediately remove those feelings from the audience. If only with a little better writing they could have kept him aloof and kept the story flowing.
Due to the performances of Bale and Damon, Ford V. Ferrari easily earns a A rating, even with the clunky empathy for Ford.
The sequel we never new we needed, but the one we deserve.
At first glance, Frozen 2 is just another unoriginal sequel that is trying to live off the glories of the original. Don't get me wrong, the first half of the film is very formulaic and you can see the twists coming a mile away. but once the second act hits, Frozen 2 fights back. It breaks through the frigid waters of showing kids the tough subjects that they need to see. All children will deal with sadness and loss. It is imperative for them to know that it is ok to go feel them and how they can get through it.
The beginning of the film is quite formulaic and you can see the plot coming a mile away but it is still important and a bold step forward to address these issues in such a wonderful way. Elsa (Idina Menzel) feels an undeniable call to the north woods and must leave Arendel to find it. Surprisingly, the lead track Into the Unknown is sung within the first 30 minutes but that pars the course with Frozen as Let It Go was sung in a similar time frame in the original. Anna (Kristen Bell) Refuses to let Elsa go without her so the entire gang along with Olaf (Josh Gad), Kristoff (Jonathan Groff), and Sven head north to the foggy forest. While Olaf was not the best in the original, he really brings his a game in Frozen II. He is easily the biggest stand out of the film, with his comedy for both adults and kids. He also has some truly wonderful philosophical ideas and one of them turns into a big plot point. While on the journey, Kristoff attempts to ask Anna an important question about their relation ship only to be denied the chance every time he tries. This leads to one of the most epic in movie music videos that has ever been put on screen and actually makes sense. While there might be a bit too many musical numbers for my liking compared to the first, Frozen II passes muster with a strong B+ rating on message alone.
The saga comes to an end as a
disappointing adventure and questions of what could have been. Disney
became so afraid after the meta-cognizant marvel that is The Last Jedi
that divided audiences but actually stood for something. They desperately
wanted to please the internet trolls, bigots and misogynists to gain back their
precious coin. By doing so they sold the soul of Star Wars in order to make a
quick buck. And to all the JJ defenders out there claiming that he was
blindsided by the final cut and it was a terrible working environment, spare
me. The Rise of Skywalker was a spitting image of where Abrams wanted to go in
The Force Awakens with only a few acknowledgments to the turns that Rian
Johnson tried to make in The Last Jedi. He chose this project, he wrote this
project and he was proud of this project. Just because it is now getting
blow-back, doesn't mean he can suddenly plant sources saying it is not what he
envisioned. Is it hard to work for Disney? Sure. But every drop of this movie
oozes of JJ Abrams. With that out of the way, let’s get into a final review of
the last film (hopefully?) in the Skywalker saga.
THE DEAD HAVE SPOKEN!! as we are
told in the opening scrawl of the film which looks nothing like any scrawl we
have seen before. Palpatine is resurrected as some sort of zombie puppet without
even a mention as to how. and that is only the beginning where we get a
half-moment to breath before we are off on one of the fastest paced, messiest
adventures ever to be created. From one scene after another we are given either
important plot points that don't make sense or JJ gives us a trip back 4 whole
years to correct criticism that he faced from the force awakens. When a film
maker reacts to the audience in universe to the point where you can obviously
see the criticism he is trying to correct, be it his own or from a previous
saga, you know there is a problem. Did we really need to be pulled out of the
movie to see Chewbacca get a medal that he didn't get in A New Hope?
Absolutely not. Did we need to see Chewbacca over react to the demise of a
character after he didn't give it a thought when his best friend Han Solo eat
it in The Force Awakens? No. And if we are not correcting mistakes then
we are getting nostalgia slammed down our throats at every chance they get.
From Palpatine to the Death Star, from Luke's A New Hope medal to the space
chess in the Millennium Falcon, it is all a terribly chose trip down memory
lane instead of any kind of in-depth step forward. A surprising highlight of
the film is the unabashed sass that C-3PO brings to the film. It is almost as
if her himself can't believe the incredibly absurd things that are
happening around him.
While i is not the worst Star Wars
film ever made, Attack of the Clones and Phantom Menace have those two spots
locked down, it is not the saga ending masterpiece that Disney wants you to believe.
The fact that you have to learn important details about the film from the
essential readers guide and not the work itself tells you the cluster of a film
and that bit off way more than it could chew. A number of the story-lines in
the film could have been cut to give us more time with the characters we
already know. The fact that Rose gets pushed to the side so we can be
introduced to a figure from Poe's past that has little bearing on the plot is a
travesty that should not be forgiven soon.
I will give the movie credit for a
couple of moments that were quite powerful, most of them involving the women,
but there are far too many missteps to call it a fun and satisfying end.
This earns a C- as it is a below average blockbuster
Disclaimer: I have not read the darkest minds trilogy. I have gotten a brief overview so I know what happens but did not get emotionally invested in the novels. Having said that, and knowing the move differs greatly from the novel, it still boggels my mind how people can hold certain YA movies to such different standards than others. This is a perfectly serviceable film, it is not great but neither is it awful as many have described it. It is a perfect shot at it's target audience, YOUNG ADULTS!! Of which I am not one, so when this film doesn't hit exactly where I want it too, I remember it is not specifically aimed at me. This is also a great case of a young woman of color taking the forefront of a movie series that everyone claims to want but then trashes when it' s not perfect. Why give the Twilight series or the divergent series such good will when they are not very good and The Darkest Minds could easily stand about e any of those films? Is it because it those films had a bigger following as books? Or they are backed by bigger studios? All I can say is we adult critiques seriously need to look in the mirror when we are smashing an attempted at something new before it even gets out of the gate. The one criticism of Darkest Minds is that they criminally under use Gwendoline Christie. She could have been so much more than a random bounty hunter. She's Captain Phasma for goodness sake!!! I digress. A fine movie for a fine afternoon. B-
P.S. A+ for the of Mice and Men Lenny rabbit schene that most of the you get generation won't understand but for us English enthusiasts was a horrifyingly aweso.e delight
Mission Impossible: Fallout, let's see how many cool stunts Tom cruise can do and call it a movie. Unpopular opinion alert, I did not like the new mission Impossible. How can everyone be taken by a series do extreme stunts that are tied together I a loose plot that tried to be clever but is constantly falling all over itself. While it is impressive the amount and type of stunts that Tom cruise performs, a good movie they do not make. Seeing cruise jump out of a plane and high pressure skydive is cool, but it would absolutely not happen when they are jumping into a thunderstorm, no matter how important the objective is. It actually shows how dumb the government is if they are not keeping track of the weather and are suddenly surprised by incliment weather. And another cool stunt is when he so climbing a rope to get to a flying helicopter. When he reaches the copter, just to ad tension, he falls all the way back down to the bottom of the rope so he can climb up again. This is all despite there being a timeline on how saving the world. There seems to be a running theme with this set of films where the directors simply ignore basic passage of time and how long it takes for people to do things. It is also impossible to maintain the suspension of disbelief when the overall theme of this movie is that Ethan Hawke is THE ONLY person who can ever save the world. If he is not around, bad things happen. But the true question is, how many times can the government disavow a man and then take him back after he goes against their orders. I am sorry but that is not how government works. Maybe they do it once or even twice but eventually he would be viewed as expendable and let go. You can't just be Tom Cruise and constantly be given the benefit of the doubt. While this would be a fine action film if you looked at it as a stand alone film with no past or future, one cannot discount all of the baggage the previous films bring into the film. Sadly can only give Mission Impossible a C and hopefully it will be the last of the series.
Adrift: Marketing at its best. Shailene Woodley again shows off why she is becoming one of Hollywood's most underrated actors of her generation. Just like her performance in The Spectacular Now, she undersells the magnitude of her emotions. While the viewer can look at her and see a simple young girl who doesn't truly understand her emotions, Woodley secretly demonstrates how powerful she feels and how it gets her through the emotion trauma of being Adrift on a damaged sailboat for 40 days. Based on the true story about Tami Oldham Ashcraft, who began sailing from Haiti to the San Diego with her boyfriend Richard Sharp (Sam Claflin) when they run into a hurricane. Tami then has to survive on her own with Richard incapacitated and find a way back to land with a broken boat and no electricity. This is one film that skillfully uses the flashback feature that had been beaten to death by Hollywood. The movie opens with Tami awakening with the hurricane over, her boat in shambles and Richard nowhere to be found. It then proceeds to flash back and forth between what lead to her crossing to Pacific and how she is surviving with so little. If Shailene continues with performances like this she will be a staple in Hollywood for years to come. A
Skyscraper: It's no Die Hard but is worth the climb. While many will get hung up on the physics and believitability of Dwayne Johnson jumping from a crane and him being able to climb 100 stories and not be out of breath, they are all forgetting one important thing; He's DWAYNE 'THE ROCK' JOHNSON!!! He can do anything and make it look easy. Any movie he touches automatically starts with a 2 star rating solely based on his innate magnetism. Everything he touches turns to gold. Try to name one movie that he has made that is truly awful. Go ahead I'll wait ... That's because you can't. Sure there are flaws in Skyscraper, mainly almost every scene without Johnson, but so does every blockbuster movie these days. If your looking for a fun exciting crowd pleaser, Skyscraper is for you. B
I'll be the first one to admit that Dunkirk is a
beautiful film and is masterfully shot but I can't say that I liked it.
Christopher Nolan has a knack for playing with people's minds and he and
Dunkirk is no exception. He begins the film with three different locations at
three different time periods ranging from 1 week two three hours from the
evacuation complete evacuation of Dunkirk. It is really interesting to watch
how he combines the three different timelines to end the film at the exact
point in each timeline. While interesting it is very confusing and took more
than 20 minutes to understand that there he was using different timelines to
tell the stories of the people who were on the beach, flying planes, and The
Little Ships coming to the rescue. The performances are astounding throughout
the film with the likes of Tom Hardy, Kenneth Branagh and Mark Rylance, even
getting an acceptable performance out of One Direction singer Harry Styles. If
you did not have the background of the film and even with it the film drags on
and on trying to instill the idea of hopelessness felt by the soldiers but it
is difficult to comprehend when the only German combatants that the audience
sees are airplanes. There are also a number of dramatic scenes that appear to
be instilled in the film to get an emotional response when they are completely
unnecessary. One would think that the from the great mind of Christopher Nolan
that he could come up with a better emotional gut punch then to easily debunked
character deaths that have not had the proper character development for the
audience to really care. Another disappointing aspect of the film is its
portrayal of the French throughout the evacuation of Dunkirk. There are only
two brief moments when it is acknowledged that the British did not care and
actively resented the French while those same soldiers defended the rear lines
and made it possible for the British to evacuate. And with a throwaway line at
the end of the film by the Admiral commanding the beaches it is acknowledged
that the British shoes original plan of abandoning the French is not right. It
is simply acknowledged as a fact of war and only the strong survive. The ending
of the film is also a disappointment as there is a masterful shot of Tom
Hardy's pilot character performing a heroic gesture which would be the perfect
ending only for Nolan to cut back to the soldier we have been following sitting
on a train four five seconds with no more dialogue and a fade to black. The
film was described to me as more of a documentary and I wholeheartedly agree
except for the portrayal of survival is most important and not the lives of
all. C+ rating
We all must leave home in order to discover ourselves
but sometimes I'll return home is just what the doctor ordered. This is exactly
what Spider-Man has done returning to the Marvel Cinematic Universe. Spider-Man
was one of the best parts of Captain America Civil War and his character is
built on in magnificent ways throughout homecoming. His witty charm, his
lovable ignorance, and his comic book nerd like innocence is a breath of fresh
air to the Marvel franchises. The one and only downside to the film is Tony
Stark's inclusion, which to be fair was much less than anticipated. This film
reiterates the problem with Tony Stark's Iron Man in all Marvel movies. In all
films before Civil War he has been the Maverick or The Lovable Rebel to The
Avengers but ever since Civil War Marvel have been trying to shoehorn him into
the Now Noble hero. Instead of making him completely Noble they try to flirt
with the line of keeping him Rogue like but also authoritarian. This comes off
terribly when he scolds Peter Parker for going off and doing things on his own
and blaming him for when things go wrong on plans he does not tell Peter about.
Luckily Spider-Man is able to carry most the film on his own with his comedic
dialogue and his new guy in the chair John something or other. Refreshingly his
love interest is neither Gwen Stacy or Mary Jane and can be given a fresh take
on prepubescent crushes. There an awesome Easter egg to his other love
interests near the end of the film leaving it open for Marvel to either take a
big leap from the comics or walk it back in the next film. This film critic
cannot wait for the next film with Spider-Man and that is coming from someone
who has become disillusioned with the idea of Marvel's Universe. A- rating
With last being in the title this should be the last
one but it obviously won't. These films really should have ended after the
train wreck of a third and they have only gone down from there. After age of
extinction one would think it couldn't get much worse but when it comes to
Michael Bay, he has to constantly one up himself, even in horrendousness. Unfortunately,
no audience has the guts to stand up to Mr. Bay and say we won't take your
nonsensical garbage anymore but that does not appear to be coming close. It may
be starting to happen in the US but the rest of the world appears to be willing
to continue to throw money at him. There is no comprehensible plot since
Cybertron was destroyed in the previous film but now has returned be again a
focal point. Bay continues to push the boundaries of objectifying pedophilia
with an even younger actress, Isabela Moner, entering the franchise for no discernable
reason other than to replace Mark Wahlberg's daughter who was either too
expensive or too old to bring back. Bay also tries to poke fun at the previous
criticisms of his transformer films with numerous jokes about racial
appropriation. He also tries to do a tone of call backs to the other films that
are utterly out of place and absurdly convenient. Now to attempt to explain
the film. Cade (Mark Wahlberg) is running between Chicago and North Dakota like
it is they are just down the street from each other. There is honestly a battle
sequence where case is our heroes are supposedly running through an abandoned
town in North Dakota and suddenly they are running up skyscrapers that look
suspiciously like Chicago and then are suddenly in the wasteland again. It is
shockingly reminiscent of Bay's teleportation powers from revenge of the fallen
jumping the heroes from Washington DC to the Nevada vehicle bone yard by
smashing down a door. This film basically shows the world how little he thinks
of his audience that we can't follow basic geography. Anyway, Cade is somehow
chosen as the last knight which has no effect on the film other than to
constantly put him in the right place at the right time with literally no
training or skill that is ever needed. Optimus Prime (Peter Cullen) is
corrupted by his maker, Quintessa (Gemma Chan). The world has completely turned
on all transformers, Autobot and Decepticon alike. This is a convenient way to
bring back Josh Duhamel’s character who is actively killing Autobots to try and
be the moral center of the government which has no morality. He is also there
to be the guy to tell the humans to automatically switch sides and join the Autobots
to save a world that is already being destroyed. Michael Bay continues to think
we are all stupid in thinking the audience will ignore when you crash another
planet into earth, billions, not millions, billions of people die. The world
can't go back to having logical government with such loss of life. Bay simply
glosses over this, like he has in all previous iterations and teases even more
horror with a 6th film. It is just utter and complete garbage and if I could
give it lower than an F I would but sadly there is no lower a grade
Wonder Woman is wonder-full. It has been said before
me but it must be said as much as possible. Wonder Woman truly is a magnificent
feminist film, from on screen to behind the camera. Patty Jenkins has been
fighting to make this movie for the last 12 years and she was the absolute best
choice for the job. She takes the character of Diana Prince back to her
feminist roots and pushes back the decades of Diana slowly being delegated to
eye candy. Throughout the film the traditional roles of women being ogled and
the men being strong are flipped on their head where it is the male bodies that
are emphasized and admired while Diana shows more strength than any of her male
counterparts. There is literally a scene where Diana stares and admired Chris
Pine's naked body in a hilarious reversal of Hollywood norms. She is also given
tremendous agency throughout the film by her constantly choosing her own
actions and forcing men to react to her, not the other way around. I will be
the first to admit my fault in judging Gal Gadot's performance before seeing
her in the film. While she still doesn't especially fit the Amazonian body
type, she acts her butt off to make up for any issues, bypassing any hate and
showing off her awesomeness and decisiveness. If this film is the model for
what DC will be doing in the future then the future is bright. If this is an
anomaly it is a bright one but will have to have all other films held up to it
with what could have been. The biggest plot issue with the film is the emphasis
on world war 1 because wonder woman claims to want to protect the world and
help mankind know the power of Love but then there is absolutely no mention of
anything after 1920. This was done to avoid comparisons to Captain America but
it still doesn’t make sense. World War II was much more barbaric than World War
I and we have to assume she did nothing. Ten there are the countless wars
between then and now, from Vietnam, Nigerian Civil War, the Chechen wars and many
others. At least Captain America had the excuse of being frozen in a glacier,
what's her excuse? Other than that glaring hole, the film is fantastic and we
absolutely need a sequel to be focused on more than any other planned DC movie.
If dead men tell no tales, then this movie is dead on
arrival. In an attempt to revitalize his career and the series, Johnny Depp
returns as Jack Sparrow except with none of the charm he has been steadily
losing since the original. Disney seems to have forgotten why Sparrow was a fun
and interesting character. Originally it was because he was a lovable rogue who
could get himself out of terrible situations in what looked like ridiculous but
lucky ways. Instead, Disney thinks it's because he is a drunk, looks funny, has
a blaze fair attitude and cares about no one but himself. It is an utter
cluster bomb of a movie that simply makes things up as it goes to explain what
is going on. In Dead Men Tell No Tales the audience is introduced to Captain
Salazar (Javier Bardem), a Spanish sea captain who is bent on revenge for the
curse he now suffers from who he blames on Sparrow. We are also introduced to a
new power that Jack's all-seeing compass apparently has that has not been
brought up in any of the four previous films and has changed hands countless
times between characters. Just more nonsensical exposition to explain away the
plot holes. We are also introduced to Will Turner and Elizabeth Swan's son Henry (Brenton Thwaites), who
is miraculously now 21 years old with no one other than him showing the passage
of that much time. Because this is a Disney movie and we need everyone
important to have a love interest we are also given Carina Smyth (Kaya
Scodelario) who is also looking for Poseidon’s trident to break all cursed at
sea. Henry desires the trident to free his father from his curse, Carina wants
it because it was her father's life's work, and Jack needs it to rid himself of
the undead Salazar. Which brings me to question, since when did Davey Jones's
duty, which became Will Turner's, become a curse. It is referenced numerous
times as a curse when he is actually performing a duty. It also granted him
life, as he was killed at the end of At World's End. So, if it is a curse and
has been lifted then he should die and not just be able to return to land. If
your sensing a theme here of BS non-explanations then you now know the essence
that is Pirates 5. Unfortunately, it will make a ton of money and that will
motivate Disney to keep making more as a sequel is set up in the end credits
scene. Which again is a scene that makes no sense. This is a series that
entangles too many good actors into terrible roles for it to keep going. Stop
thinking of it as a pay check and have some principles! None of you are
scraping the barrel for roles! Just a down right terrible movie that makes very
little sense a d makes you hate the jack Sparrow when he should be the easiest
character to like.
