Here we have a curious newcomer, providing us with his film debut as both writer and director. The man in question is one, Matthew Reilly. This guy has to be the epitome of someone who sounds altogether familiar, but when you look him up, he hasn't done... basically anything but this (at least for the screen). So with that being said, I'm going to go ahead and give him the benefit of the doubt on this one. For someone's debut, it's not actually that bad for a straight-to-Netflix action movie. This one kind of hits the ground running, as an interceptor launch site in Fort Greely, Alaska is attacked by what is presumed to be a terrorist faction. A second interceptor site is found in an undisclosed area in the middle of the Pacific Ocean, closer to Hawaii. These sites' purpose is to intercept any nuclear warhead launches targeted at American soil. Sent to defend the second site from attack is US Army Captain, JJ Collins (Elsa Pataky), her deployment here mostly due to reported sexual misconduct from one of her superiors, along with a terrible amount of hazing and bullying, and before I get too far with it all, yes, this is a "woke" movie that is generally about highlighting this woman's abilities in the face of adversity. Collins comes on-site as part of the last line of defence after Fort Greely's hostile takeover, working under Lt. Colonel Clark Marshall (Rhys Muldoon) command. She further works with Beaver Baker (Aaron Glenane), whose personality suits his name as the token toxic male character, and Corporal Raul Shah (Mayen Mehta), a not-so-confident pencil-pusher type who, for some reason, they chose to work at this facility. I have to say, Shah is not my favourite character type, and some of the lines this guy has to say are kind of ridiculous. Actually, a good chunk of this movie is kind of ridiculous. Anyway, eventually, Collins finds herself against all odds as the facility is, of course, eventually infiltrated by a terrorist team led by ex-military intelligence soldier, Alexander Kessel (Luke Bracey). As I was watching this guy though, in a weird way, I started to wonder if the great Hank Scorpio of 'Simpsons' fame (possibly the single-greatest one-off character that show ever had, Season 8, Episode 2) inspired this guy in some ways. He's not exactly the same guy or anything, not even with a similar personality. However, just a few decisions and lines the guy delivers is just enough to make you want to watch that episode all over again. I think my biggest takeaways from this were that 1, this was definitely written as a woke movie with a fair amount of almost forced "girl power" within. I DO NOT have a problem with this idea, but I still think there's a right way and a wrong way to write that kind of role. It seems the best way is to just write the hero role with no gender in mind - 'Alien' pulled this off incredibly well, and that's going back to 1979! But listen, don't let me take anything away from anyone, either. The truth of the matter is that Collins is still a pretty fun action hero to follow, and one can take some of her cheesiness with a grain of salt. If you can think of her as a Schwarzenegger type - in other words, she's there simply to be a strong hero with an odd (perhaps lame) one-liner. I think if you can go into this with the right mind-set, you can still be entertained by it. It's important to remember a bunch of stuff going into this, however, and the big one is the idea of this being one man's directorial AND screenwriting debut. The saving grace is actually probably his co-writer, Stuart Beattie, who one might recognize from writing for the 'Pirates of the Caribbean' movies, along with golden gems like 'GI Joe: The Rise of Cobra', 'I, Frankenstein' and '30 Days of Night' (okay, so maybe not so much sarcasm on that last title, which I admittedly enjoy). The other thing is not to take it too seriously - it can fit nicely into the "dumb, fun action" category if you allow it to. It's not something I'll rush to watch again, but I was entertained as long as I thought of it as a video game movie that wasn't based on a video game. 2/5
0 Comments
Here we have the latest from the great Richard Linklater, who makes it obvious that this is a passion project based on his credits for the film. Altogether, Linklater is the writer, director, and producer here, along with the story being loosely based on his life, growing up in Houston, Texas. This not only meant living nearby NASA Johnson Space Center but being there for the first moon landing in 1969. Now, of course, this isn't the first film he has all these credits for. But it's something you can tell he holds near and dear to his heart. This is him showing us his own nostalgia for growing up in the late 60s. He shows us what it was like to be a kid back then, and it's the perfect answer to the question of what kids did before the internet, video games, and other luxuries we completely take for granted nowadays. And quite honestly, the movie is mostly the unfolding of his childhood as opposed to anything to really do with NASA, space, and the rest of it. It's more of a nostalgia trip framed with a childhood fantasy about being part of a top-secret test mission to the moon before the actual '69 moon landing. It's sort of a weird section of the movie that plays out as though it's real, but it's all this boy, Stan's (Milo Coy and Jack Black when narrating) fantasy. Otherwise, the movie is simply about what it was like to grow up in that time. To make it more interesting, it's all done in the same animation style as one of my personal favourites of his, 'Waking Life' (animation sketched over live-action). Now, I will say this about Linklater's material - it may be considered an acquired taste to some. I find a lot of his overall style to be very artsy while trying to get it across to your average Joe. 'Dazed and Confused' is probably the most relatable of his work, overall, as it's more of a high school film than an art project. 'Waking Life' or 'Boyhood' would be the other side of that scale. This can be found right in between those two films. But don't worry, it's not as "out there" as 'Waking Life' was. This is, quite plain and simply, Linklater showing us childhood in the late 60s, and as long as you're open to hearing his stories, you can enjoy this just fine. Personally speaking, I was of two minds on this one. For starters, I appreciated how he brought us back in time and shared his nostalgia with us. I further appreciate the art style (I do love this type of animation), and the minute details he gets into with his descriptions. On the other hand, while I liked the storytelling, the whole NASA fantasy that he has felt sort of unnecessary. I do get it, and perhaps I'm nitpicking, but I might have liked it better if it was just the nostalgic story, and left relatively basic. He's exposed to NASA enough that the title would still make sense. Anyway, I'm gonna say right off the bat that if you're a Linklater fan, it's worth checking out. It's a pretty fascinating look back, especially when we see things we consider old that is brand new at the time. Think of there being arcades, but the only machines there are of the pinball variety. It's a cool slice of history, and I can't help but appreciate the fact that Linklater tells it through the child's eyes. He does so without talking down to his audience and even educates us on a few things here and there. I really liked this, and I think it will appeal to anyone who grew up in that era, along with anyone looking to find out "what was it like back then?" 4/5 Folks, it would appear that there is a director out there who has captured my interest with his titles lately, and that is Shawn Levy. Up until now, Levy has been a name with a familiar ring to it for me, but not someone whose film library I'd be able to list very easily. For those who might fall under the same category, his directorial credits include 'Free Guy', eight episodes of 'Stranger Things', 'Date Night', and a few other "lesser" titles. Like a fine wine, however, this guy seems to improve with age. Although I feel like this could have been good for a big-screen experience, it (along with several other Netflix originals lately) finds itself entertaining us perfectly fine in the comfort of our own homes. It's getting very cool to see streaming service originals sort of "upgraded" from what they once were, and this one is no exception. I mean, this thing opens up with an incredible parallel to 'Guardians of the Galaxy', as our lead, Adam Reed (Ryan Reynolds), steels a time jet and escapes his chasers through a wormhole, taking him back from 2050 to 2022. Here, he meets his 12-year-old self (Walker Scobell), whose father (Mark Ruffalo) has recently been killed in a car accident, and mother (Jennifer Garner) has been dealing with it since. Part of her dealing is Adam getting suspended from school, and being somewhat distant from her. As a result, a good chunk of this movie addresses the idea of going back to give your younger self some life advice - something I think we'd all love to be able to do. But the cool thing is that things work the other way around, too, suggesting that we were never once "just dumb kids". Anyway, back to the plot, older Adam has accidentally crash-landed in 2022 due to a struggle during his escape. His aim, however, was to get to 2018, where he has learned that his wife, Laura (Zoe Saldaña) may have travelled back to and gotten herself trapped. All the while, he's being chased by the leader of a 2050's dystopian future, Maya Sorian (Catherine Keener) and her badass lieutenant, Christos (Alex Mallari Jr.). Maya, basically being the self-proclaimed mother of time travel (unofficially). There's a twist here and a turn there, and soon it becomes less about the rescue mission and more about doing what's right. Now, can we just take a second to talk about Walker Scobell? This his his screen debut at 13 years old, and he Ryan Reynolds' the hell out of his role here. I swear, they found the perfect kid to play him, and that much is evident the second we're introduced. I've said this in the past (and on my past site) about young, rising stars (including Chloe Grace Moretz after 'Kick-Ass', Saoirse Ronan after 'The Lovely Bones') but this is a kid to keep an eye on. Let's face it, being a good match for a young Ryan Reynolds would probably be a good start if you're just starting your acting career. As for the rest of the film, it does appear that I'm a bit of an odd man out when it comes to how much I enjoyed this. But what can I say? It just struck a chord with me. And I'm not necessarily bias towards Ryan Reynolds, as you might see in my review for 'The Voices'. I also wasn't too fond of 2005's 'Amityville Horror'. As a person, he seems pretty awesome though, and I'd like to have a beer or two with the guy. I don't know if it's the idea of talking to your younger self, the wonderful casting or the fact that I experienced a good range of emotions with it, but I loved it! 4/5 Netflix has been doing a pretty solid job lately with their Christmas material. For my money, at least 'The Christmas Chronicles', and 'Klaus' are well worth it, instant Christmas classics. This one, however, didn't quite land as strongly for yours truly. For starters, it's another Netflix original about how Christmas got started, which they already did with 'Klaus'. For another, maybe it's just me, but I found this movie to be pretty harsh for a Christmas movie. We open in the style of 'Princess Bride', but instead of kids being sick, kids have recently lost their mother. On that Christmas Eve, young Andrea (Isabella O'Sullivan), Moppet (Ayomide Garrick) and Patrick (Eden Lawrence) are left alone with their Aunt Ruth (Maggie Smith) when their father has to leave for work-related purposes. From here, Ruth tells the children a Christmas story of a boy named Nikolas (Henry Lawfull), who lives in the forest with his father, Joel (Michiel Huisman), and who also lost his mother two years prior to the story. Nikolas' mother once told him the story of a land called Elfhelm; a land full of magic and elves that one day rescues a lost girl from the harshness of the winter weather. He takes comfort in the memory of this story every night, but soon the probability of Elfhelm being real is increased when Joel sets out to find it. Along with a group of hunters, their hope is to find Elfhelm and prove it exists, which will in turn get them a reward from the King (Jim Broadbent) who is in search of an object that will bring joy to the otherwise bummed-out kingdom. Upon Joel leaving, Nikolas is put under the care of his Aunt Carlotta (Kristen Wiig), where he manages to find a map that confirms Elfheim's existence. So, life with Carlotta sucks enough for Nik to make a daring escape with his pet mouse, Miika (Stephen Merchant), in an effort to head north to find his father and get the map to him. Little does he know, however, that finding his Dad along with Elfhelm will turn out to be the least of his big adventure, and his life was about to change forever. I mean, c'mon, it's obvious who Nikolas is supposed to grow into. Along the way, Nikolas gets some help from a few key characters. The coolest is probably Blitzen - the first of his reindeer, according to this movie. There's also a variety of elves who need help with a kidnapping, and of course, the Truth Pixie (Zoe Margaret Colletti). She's a sidekick type character who is just kind of there, and frankly quite irritating - a kid hopped up on way too much sugar who maybe tried weed for the first time ever. No offense to the young actress, of course, but I have to say, this character got under my skin. I know that I mentioned this film is kind of mean-spirited, but didn't get so far into it because a lot of that takes place on the side. I also think it's sure to give the big-time Christian community a bit of a problem, as "Christmas" is "just a word" here, and Nikolas' nickname from his mother. The concept of Christ (Christmas' real namesake) doesn't enter into it. Personally, I like the idea of avoiding religious connotations. 'Soul', for example, did it extremely well. But in this case, it's more about a specific word that already has a specific meaning ("Christ Mass" or just the celebration of Christ) so some might be bugged by this. I think it's safe to say that there are better Christmas movies about the same thing that teach the same positive lessons. I think this one just gets a little too dark at times, and the whimsy of Christmas is sort of lost on this one. I might suggest it's a Christmas movie that takes itself too seriously, despite the odd chuckle you might get from Miika. Stick to 'Christmas Chronicles' and/or 'Klaus' as far as Netflix goes. Unlike them, I won't feel a need to come back to this one next year. But who knows? Maybe it's just lost on me because it's honestly kind of depressing. 3/5 Here we have one of those titles you can play a fun game with. The game? How many times did this take from 'Aladdin'. No word of a lie, that's basically what this is - a redo of the '92 Disney flick with similarities plastered all over the place, and subtle differences here and there. Right around the third act, this does sort of come into its own though, and I have to admit to enjoying some of the characters here - namely a couple of henchmen who are actually very sweet. It's one of those movies I see as a carbon copy of something else, but I'm not going to accuse it of being a terrible film either. As the film opens, we soon meet Din (Jimmy Wong - even the lead's name is the last three letters of "Aladdin") and his new best friend, Li Na (Natasha Liu Bordizzo). We see them having an awesome time as kids together, but it's all interrupted when Li Na's father, Mr. Wang (Will Yun Lee) takes her away to start a life in the lap of luxury. Meanwhile, Din stays in his neighbourhood with his Mom (Constance Wu) and grows up to be a college student, but a bit of a slacker. He takes the time to visit a billboard with Li Na's grown up model face on it, and knowing she's coming to town, prepares a welcome-home gift for her. One day, Din is handed a teapot (magic lamp) that unleashes Long (John Cho); a wish dragon (genie) who tells Din all about how he'll grant him three wishes, as Din is his new master. If things go well for Long, he will be released from his servitude - in 'Aladdin' it's about making it the final wish, but here, it's about Long serving his tenth and final master. This will ultimately give him access to the spirit world. Din's wishes pretty much revolve around him being good enough for Li Na; a woman of higher class, but more to have his former friend back as opposed to anything romantic (although the notion really still feels like it's there). Long even establishes the rules that include not being able to make people fall in love, and not being able to kill anyone. Not being able to bring people back from the dead ('Aladdin'), however, is replaced here with not being able to time travel. Meanwhile, Wang has hired three henchmen to retrieve the magic teapot from this boy (who he doesn't recognize anymore) for his failing business. The henchmen probably are my favourite part of this, but are still fairly typical for cartoon characters. They are lead by a martial arts expert known as Pockets (Aaron Yoo) who constantly fights with his feet while his hands are in his pockets, and further consist of "Small Goon" (Jimmy O. Yang) and "Tall Goon" (Bobby Lee) who are there for the work, but would seemingly rather open up a pet store and sell cute little puppies. There's something about that polar opposite personality of what a goon should be that just gets me. While this does seem to take a hell of a lot from 'Aladdin', I do think that this is a passable flick that embraces a good bit of Chinese culture here, and who's to say that this isn't just the Chinese version of 'Aladdin'? That sounds like an excuse, I know, but it did feel like the way Chinese culture might tell the same story. There's enough difference here that it can still separate itself and be its own thing. Think 'Avatar' vs 'Dances with Wolves', 'Pocahontas', 'Fern Gully', etc. 'Avatar' told a story we had seen before, but still managed to be its own execution of said story while blowing us away with visual effects. This doesn't blow us away with effects or much that's very special, but its embrace of the culture, including the voice acting, is what makes this one stand apart from 'Aladdin'. While I can't say I loved it, and the whole 'Aladdin' thing does have me teetering on a fence, I think it's safe to say that there's still enough here to make this enjoyable. I can't deny that it made me laugh a few times - my favourite thing being a running gag involving the Small Goon making a funny sound every time he falls or wipes out. Sometimes it feels like it might be trying too hard with its humour, but it's easy enough to shrug off and remember that this is a Sony Animation family/kids movie, so there's bound to be a bit of cheesiness to it. At the end of the day, I might suggest that as a Netflix original, it's pretty much exactly where it belongs. 3/5 Those who know me well can probably tell you how much I am into the whole sleeping process and what it does to our minds. We're forced to face our fears with nightmares, try to make sense of our dreams, and a select few even have to endure the terrifying reality that is sleep paralysis. I find it all very fascinating though. It's neat to think about some of the more bizarre stuff that makes us tick. So movies about this stuff are something I'm drawn to, i.e. 'Nightmare on Elm Street', 'Inception', 'Waking Life', etc. You'd think this would be another movie to add to my list, but it's more of a cool concept with a badly written execution. It all starts when an EMP goes off because of... reasons, and everything electronic goes dead. A family of three, Jill (Gina Rodriguez) and her two kids, Noah (Lucius Hoyos) and Matilda (Ariana Greenblatt) are affected by this with a car accident that throws their car into a lake. As Jill and Noah manage to swim for it while Matilda drowns, but a local manages to revive her. As a result of this EMP, the world is forced awake, and no one can seem to sleep except for two people - a random, unseen woman, who is being kept at a special facility, and Matilda. From there, it basically becomes a 'Last of Us' situation, where Matilda's immunity to the situation could be the key. Being such a 'Last of Us' fan, of course, this kind of irked me. But I did appreciate that the "monster" (so to speak) was different. The idea of not being able to sleep forever does have me curious as to what could really happen to the body. This is a film that seems to take it to an extreme for dramatic purposes, but to be perfectly fair, it also suggests that the side effects of sleep deprivation are sped up. I don't fully know how much of what the film suggests happens is true, or if it is, how long it's supposed to take for things like organ failure. One thing I've always found fascinating is the record holder for staying awake. 17-year-old Randy Gardner pulled it off in the winter of '63/'64, doing it as an experiment. He was awake for 11 days, 25 minutes, and found that the deprivation had little effect aside from mood changes (aka "being cranky and needing a nap"). Apparently on the 10th day, he was still able to do things like beat his friend at pinball. On the other hand, he was seen as having not only crankiness, but trouble concentrating, paranoia short-term memory loss, and indeed, even hallucinations (as the film suggests). Ultimately though, after the 11 days, he was in pretty good health, other than odd changes in his natural sleep for a bit (which was probably to be expected). Anyway, getting back to the film, my humble opinion is that it's Netlfix trying to make another 'Birdbox' while bringing in the general human concepts of 'The Last of Us'. In the end, I don't really get how I feel about it. As mentioned before, it's a cool concept with a poor execution. Parts of it felt extreme, parts of it annoyed me (nothing against the actor, but I did not like Noah at all) and parts of it just didn't make any sense by the end. Honestly, when the big reveal happens you have to wonder about the other people across the globe experiencing the same thing and just how "rare" Matilda actually is. Personally speaking, I'll stick to 'The Last of Us' for what is pretty much the same story - but it actually makes you care in the first 5 minutes. 2/5 Another Netflix title that has been floating in front of my face for quite some time without me clicking on it has been 'Love and Monsters'. I don't really know what took me so long, considering this is a concept so far up my alley it kinda hurts when I think about it. I love a good survival movie, I love a lot of creativity when it comes to creatures, and I love when a character takes time to develop as we learn more and more about them; the "zero to hero" situation, but not too rapidly. The story opens with a little backstory in which an asteroid has crash-landed into Earth (and even the film makes a jab at it being unoriginal). The chemical fallout from the destruction has caused cold-blooded creatures to mutate into giant monsters, decimating most of the human race. When his hometown of Fairfield is evacuated, Joel Dawson (Dylan O'Brien) gets separated from his parents (Andrew Buchanan and Tandi Wright) and girlfriend, Aimee (Jessica Henwick). He is picked up by a group of survivors, and has since been living underground with the knowledge that his parents are now dead, and Aimee is far away at another underground colony. As the next seven years pass, Colonies are able to keep in touch via radio, and everyone within Joel's colony has paired off. One day, Joel gets in touch with Aimee through the radio. Remembering a promise he made to find her again, he's nudged into action and decides to roam through the dangers of the surface in order to see his promise through - even if it has been seven years since he last saw her. His colony isn't entirely supportive, however, as Joel has a pretty serious problem when it comes to these mutant monsters; he freezes. To them, he might as well be a worm dangling on a hook. Joel won't let them keep him down though, and he heads out, as he feels he doesn't have much else to lose. Along the way, Joel befriends several characters. It starts with a dog named Boy (Hero/Dodge) who happens to be a faithful and protective companion. This is one of those animal roles where you fall in love with him almost instantly. On top of that, we also get survivalists Clyde (Michael Rooker) and Minnow (Ariana Greenblatt) who teach Joel a thing or two about what it means to survive on the surface. Perhaps the most important lesson is that, though dangerous, some of these creatures aren't just out for blood. There is definitely an underlying message here about environment and human treatment of animals, but thankfully, it's not in your face. This is an adventure story first, and a message second. The film's CG might look a touch low-budget here and there, but for a Netflix original, it's entirely passable. The truth is, I found a lot of the creature designs really cool, creative, and even gruesome in all the right ways. What makes this one really special for me is the idea that Joel has set out on his own for this adventure. It could be compared to something like 'Into the Wild' in that sense, and personally, I have a real thing for the solo adventurer. I feel like there's a bit more room for development, and in this, we laugh, cry, and even get a little anxious while we take this adventure with Joel. While there are certainly movies similar to it, and a lot of things here might remind you of 'Zombieland', I found it interesting that one of the biggest nods I found here was towards 'Stand by Me'. This wasn't a constant, but it does combine a long journey, the song itself, and even a scene involving leaches - which are much worse than the ones found in 'Stand by Me'. In my opinion, this is one that's really worth checking out for just about anyone. It may have a few creepy-crawly frightening scenes for younger viewers, but the story is solid, and I found myself routing for Joel quite often. You want him to get over his fears and succeed, especially when certain scenes stop the movie to warm your heart up. Despite a few little odds and ends, this is one I can easily recommend. 4/5 This is a movie that hits the ground running, and then takes us back to find out how we got to such chaos. We're introduced to the Mitchell family, consisting of Dad, Rick (Danny McBride); Mom, Linda (Maya Rudolph); little brother, Aaron (Michael Rianda); and big sister, Katie (Abbi Jacobson), who is our narrator and lead for this feature. The introduction involves them whipping through town in an orange station wagon, as they're on the run from a robot uprising. Right away, you're gonna see the stylistic animation style that kind of reminds me of a combination of 'Scott Pilgrim' and 'Into the Spider-Verse'. Katie sees her family as very weird and unusual, and sees herself as not fitting in at all. This was one thing that bugged me a little bit about the movie though - this is by no means a very weird family. I kept looking for it, but could only find a dash of it in Aaron and their dog, Monchi (Doug the Pug). Anyway, Katie doesn't fit in, but finds solace in movies; both watching them and making them. Think of her as someone who you might hook up with Adam Goldberg of 'The Goldbergs'. She gets accepted to college, and becomes very excited about getting away from this "disaster" of a family. However, seeing her start to slip away, Rick is realizing that he's missing his chance on really getting to know and understand his daughter. This results in a family road trip, as Rick cancels Katie's flight, and decides the family if going to drive there and spend time together before she's gone. In the meantime, entrepreneur Mark Bowman (this movie's answer to Steve Jobs, played by Eric André) introduces us to an upgrade of a virtual assistant named PAL (this movie's answer to SIRI) in the form of robots who pretty much act as maids or butlers. So think of a SIRI that can cook and deliver food. Right off the bat he points out the "kill code" that will prevent a robot uprising, but it's overridden, and the uprising ensues pretty much instantly. So now, in the midst of a family road trip, the very average Mitchell family find themselves face to face with a collective of machines who are enslaving all of mankind. This was directed by Mike Rianda and Jeff Rowe, who both worked on various episodes of 'Gravity Falls', of which I am actually a huge fan. I must say that the overall personality of the characters, and feel of the film are very parallel. In fact, the hit-the-ground-running opening of this is almost exactly the same as the opening to 'Gravity Falls'. That said, the style is a little in-your-face, and that might not be for everyone. I find it important to take the style as something that's just on the surface though, and take the storytelling and characters to heart the most. Once again, using 'Gravity Falls' as the comparison, it starts out as goofy fun, but it has all these pockets of heart-felt moments we can relate to. On the whole, I enjoyed it. I've always admired something that brings a lot of in-your-face style with it, especially if I can get a decent laugh or two out of it. Here, I laughed plenty, but I did have a real problem trying to take this family as being as weird as suggested. Despite that, however, it's still a lot of fun, and you can still enjoy these characters while overlooking what could be a nit-pick. After all, we all think our families are pretty weird, right? I personally enjoyed the relationship Katie has with Aaron; that "best friend" deal where they get each other, but no one else seems to get them... and again, I find that hard to believe when her thing is movies and his thing is dinosaurs. But I digress. This is a film that's pretty high-ranking as far as reviews go, and most of that is with good reason. For as fun and crazy as this movie is, it seems to have the same heart as 'WALL-E' did; once again being a bit of a message about how we allow technology to consume us just for the sake of being lazy, and I am definitely guilty of this. Although nowadays, I always take the time to get some fresh air... while on my phone, taking pictures. It doesn't feel quite as eye-opening as something like 'WALL-E', but the right message is still there. This is one that can certainly be fun for the whole family. 4/5 Here we have a title that keeps popping up on my Netflix suggestions, and I have to admit that there was always a part of me sort of curious about checking it out. Right from the get-go, you can pretty much understand that it doesn't seem to be a movie taking itself seriously, and both McCarthy and Spencer seemed like a pair that would be enjoyable to watch from a contrast perspective. I knew this wasn't going to be like watching an 'Avengers' flick, so I wasn't entirely surprised to learn that in the end, it wasn't all that enjoyable. The film takes place in an alternate reality where some electro-magnetic pulse (or something along those lines) has mutated people giving them superpowers. The select few, however, were all violent sociopaths, and therefore the world has been taken over by supervillains with no superheroes to balance things out. As children, we meet the brilliant Emily Stanton (Bria Danielle Singleton/Tai Leshaun/Octavia Spencer) who befriends tough girl, Lydia Berman (Vivian Falcone/Mia Kaplan/Melissa McCarthy), and together they dream of one day being able to put a stop to the destruction these "Miscreants" cause. Eventually, in their teenage years, the pair drift apart, as Emily is constantly distracted by her schoolwork and Lydia wants to have a bit more fun. Years pass, and their high school reunion approaches, so Lydia contacts Emily about going. When Emily doesn't show up, Lydia heads to her lab to pick her up and stumbles on an important experiment - the potential to give superhuman powers to average people, accidentally injecting herself with a "super strength" serum. From there, plans go forward for the ladies to live out their dreams, and bring down a crime lord running for Mayor, calling himself The King (Bobby Cannavale), along with his most dangerous henchwoman, Laser (Pom Klementieff), and true neutral henchman, The Crab (Jason Bateman); a character who makes for the most bizarre turn in the film, being a dude with crab claws who Lydia seemingly falls for. This is a film that isn't entirely without its moments, and parts of it were humorous along the same lines as something like 'The Tick'. It does the superhero thing, but leans on a sort of weird reality. Once again, The Crab is probably the best example of this, as he's also pretty mild-mannered. But the film does take some odd cuts and make you wonder what the hell you just watched, or why it's necessary. One way they attempt humour here is definitely in the "gross-out" way. This is done a few times, but none of which is more nasty than the idea of Lydia developing an insatiable appetite for raw chicken - this is a side-effect of the serum. They really throw it in your face here, and you're just not laughing at it. I have to mention that there are a lot of pretty stupid decisions made throughout the film, not the least of which is the climactic sequence. I won't spoil it, but let's just say it tries to tug on the heart strings while you're sitting there going "wait, why didn't you just do this?" - yeah, it's one of those movies. There's not much depth to it, and it can be fun if you're in the right mood. But I personally didn't get much out of it, often wondering if it was just trying too hard. That said, however, it is a Netflix original, so it's not like you're paying full-price for it if you decide to check it out. Who knows? Maybe you can get more out of it that I did. 2/5 This was one that intrigued me a little from the get-go. I was never very excited for it, but my curiosity was bound to eventually get the better of me. As a kid, I wasn't super heavy into young detective stories like 'The Hardy Boys', but a lot of what I read still had some mystery to it. When this popped up, I thought it might be a fun trip back to the days of reading some of those young teen-level stories - especially since it didn't look all cheesed up with effects or trying to be too modern. This was something that looked pretty legit, and upon finally seeing it, I'm pretty happy to say that I got pretty much what I wanted out of it. Enola Holmes (Millie Bobby Brown) is an independent thinking young woman who goes against the social norms of the time, and has a parallel intelligence to her uncle, the famous Sherlock Holmes (Henry Cavill). Her name, "Alone" spelled backwards, is thanks to her insistent mother, Eudoria's (Helena Bonham Carter) passion for word games. Furthering the idea of the name, her independence is derived from her mothers teachings, as she has gone through her youth learning things like Ju-Jitsu for self defense, Chess for strategic intellect, and archery, which is sadly not used as often as I'd like to have seen. As mother and daughter, they have always been very close. On Enola's 16th birthday, however, Eudoria goes missing, leaving behind a few birthday gifts. A week after her mother goes missing, matters get more complicated for Enola. She suddenly finds herself under the care of her strict and stern uncle Mycroft (Sam Claflin), who arrives by train with Sherlock, and intends on sending her to a finishing school to make her into a "proper" woman. Enola has other plans, however, and manages to follow clues left behind by her mother in order to escape to London and search for her. Enter a young runaway Lord named Tewkesbury (Louis Partridge), and Enola ends up on a sidetracked path trying to help the young man, using her own detective skills. I see this as being along the lines of a youth-friendly detective story, much like 'Harriet the Spy' or a 'Nancy Drew' mystery. We follow a young, female detective on her journey, there's mystery and intrigue along the way, and its target audience is young women in their early to mid teens. For such an audience, I'll put my cards on the table and admit that I see potential in this being an inspiring story in all the right ways. Being a 38-year-old guy, it's not necessarily aimed at me, but I can say that if I had an impressionable daughter, this is one of those movies I'd love to be one of her favorites. They cover a lot of what it meant to be a young woman in the late 1800s, and it does so with a certain sense of humor. Add to that her independence and the idea that she's as capable as her famous uncle, and it all comes out positive. I admit that there does seem to be something of a love-interest situation going on between Enola and Tewkesbury, but I'm happy to say that it's mostly hints and not at all in your face. Think about how it worked in 'Wonder Woman' or 'Captain America', and it's quite similar. Whatever is there is more of an afterthought than the story we're following. All in all, I got what the movie was doing and who it was generally for, but I'm happy to say that I still managed to have a bit of fun with it. Despite the idea that I'm not its target audience, it is cool to see Millie Bobby Brown really act here. Child actors develop their skills over time, so with 'Stranger Things' and 'Godzilla', she was still an up-and-comer. I feel like she broke out with this one, however, and I predict very positive things for her down the line. So, I think that if you're someone who has a daughter at a fairly impressionable age, I might highly recommend sitting down and checking this out with her. There are plenty of positive messages throughout, and the film does what it sets out to do. I simply can't deny that this is a positive film in many ways, even if it does get a little heavy on the boy-bashing (which is something I'm personally super nit-picky about anyway, so it's likely exaggerated in my mind). Just know that you're absolutely not watching this to see Sherlock Holmes in action - he's really more of a cameo, and a cool way to connect Enola in the sense that the story is about how she can do what he can do, maybe even better, if only give the chance. It's a Netflix original, so if you're a subscriber, head on over and check it out for yourself. 3/5 |