 Now it's time for us to dive into the strange and unusual with the latest film from Yorgos Lanthimos, who lives in the bizarre with movies like 'Lobster,' 'The Favorite' and 'The Killing of a Sacred Deer' just to name a few. This title manages to take his vision for adapting the 1992 Alasdair Gray novel of the same name while simultaneously looking at someone like Tim Burton and saying, "Hold my beer and watch this!" If you're looking for something truly bizarre and outlandish while still having a lot to say, you need not look any further than this fever dream of a film.
Taking place in Victorian London, with set designs that lend themselves to a dream world version of it, a young, pregnant lady (Emma Stone) commits suicide by leaping to her fate. She is found by an eccentric surgeon named Godwin Baxter (Willem Dafoe), who transplants her now-dead adult brain with that of her own infant, thereby creating a sort of Frankenstein monster from her whom he names Bella. With her infantile brain kicking off this new life, we watch as she slowly develops the basics, like speech and motor skills, along with discovering things about herself as she grows, namely in the realm of sexuality. In the meantime, Godwin takes a medical student named Max McCandles (Ramy Youssef) under his wing to assist him with observing Bella and taking notes of her growing behaviour. Max becomes infatuated with Bella and is ultimately respectful enough to see her as more than an experiment. Eventually, he even asks for her hand in marriage, with Godwin's permission; Godwin portrays much more of a father figure to her than anything else. Instead of wanting to settle down with Max, however, Bella craves seeing the outside world, which is where the sleazy lawyer Duncan Wedderburn (Mark Ruffalo) comes in. Reluctantly, Godwin allows Bella to leave with Duncan to see how things work on the outside, and likewise, Max understands that she doesn't understand how the world works, right down to commitment to one person. Although they marry, Bella doesn't really grasp why people need to be held to one person and, therefore, sees no wrongdoing in her desire to go with Duncan, especially with the simple revelation that sex is fun. But don't worry, this comes back to bite Duncan in hilarious ways as she eventually matures and all the wrong reasons he's into her start fading away. Eventually, the pair get to a cruise ship to show Bella some changes of scenery, and she befriends fellow passengers Martha (Hanna Schygulla) and Harry (Jerrod Carmichael), who opens her mind to philosophy, which Bella uses (along with her sexuality) to develop herself into a strong, independent woman. In the meantime, she sends Godwin postcards about her adventure, along with all of the new stuff she's learning, be it good or bad, and it's pretty fascinating to see a developing brain take these things on for the first time. I think the biggest stand-out here, without question, is Stone's overall performance. I have to commend her on how brave she got with things here between acting like an infant, putting on a fake but good English accent and, of course, baring all for the world to see with the sex she has in this, of which there is plenty. It probably is the best performance she's ever given, considering everything. She owns it here and gives the other actresses of the year a run for their money. I say that with a bit of a bias; after all, Emma Stone is my favourite actress in Hollywood today. But one can't watch this without giving her tremendous respect for going for it and not holding anything back. Apart from that, though, here we have an original idea full of strange, almost fairytale-like whimsy (along with a fair share of fairy tale darkness) with set pieces and cinematography straight out of a true artist's imagination. While Stone heads this movie with her performance, everyone here is still very good with their roles. A lot of it is creepy, a lot of it is funny, and a decent chunk of it is dramatic. Speaking personally, I found it a truly unique project, and I respect Emma Stone far more than I already did... which was a lot! My only real word of warning: be ready to embrace the truly bizarre with this one. It really is a fever dream on the screen. 5/5
0 Comments
 I don't tend to consider myself that hardcore of a 'Godzilla' fan, but I've always appreciated the ideas and material that he has brought to the table. Without Godzilla, the giant nuclear monster who attacks a city for no good reason other than to be a jerk, may very well not have become a thing. It led to movies like 'Cloverfield,' which is still one of the best found-footage movies out there, in my opinion. Sure, it could be argued that Kong did it first, but remember that he was just a little giant monster before Godzilla fought him.
Anyway, 'Godzilla Minus One' covers almost everything you could want from a 'Godzilla' movie and more, including a heavy but well-done human element. I have to appreciate a movie that illustrates how certain things were left after World War II for people who weren't on the winning side. Japan's stories are among the most tragic and include things like 'Grave of the Fireflies,' almost guaranteed to bring on tears. This movie is similar in showing the devastation left behind in parts of Japan and how civilians dealt with these times. It's a little surprising how much drama came from this when I've only seen these as cheesy fun until now. Nearing the end of WWII, a Japanese airbase located on Odo Island is visited by kamikaze pilot Kōichi Shikishima (Ryunosuke Kamiki) coming in to repair some technical issues with his plane. Upon studying the plane, it's soon found out that Kōichi is a disgraced pilot, fleeing from his mission. This was all very interesting to me, and it's a solid way to pull you into the film. It's seeing things from the other side, and while most of the pilots and mechanics there claim him to be a coward and a disgrace for not committing suicide and taking people with him, a select few are humane enough to understand why he fled. Then, thank the Gods because out of nowhere, Godzilla shows up on this island and shows us right away that he is not the tamed Americanized version of Godzilla we've been seeing over the past few years. This guy is back to being a total monster and back to being what he always should have been (another part of the checklist), a monster meant to be a cautionary tale of the dangers of nuclear radiation. The scene is awesome and tells us what we're in for with this version. No outstretched hands to try to pet the misunderstood monster in this one! Upon returning home to a now devastated Tokyo (due to America's air raids), he finds everyone he loves and more missing. He befriends a woman named Noriko (Minami Hamabe), who lost her parents, and a girl she rescued named Akiko (Sae Nagatani). As a result of his guilt, he soon takes up a minesweeper job to support them. As they begin to rebuild, Godzilla gets mutated and powers up because of the Americans testing nukes nearby, and several American ships are destroyed as a result. Soon enough, the news gets back to Kōichi, who assembles his minesweeping team, which includes the brilliant Kenji Noda (Hidetaka Yoshioka) and the lead mechanic meant to fix his plane, Sosaku Tachibana (Munetaka Aoki) as well as several others. Eventually, they devise a plan that could work to destroy Godzilla (as these movies go), and I have to give them credit for how creative the idea was. With all this, Kōichi hopes to redeem himself for his guilt and embarrassment of fleeing his mission. If he can just beat this monster, he can continue rebuilding a happy life with Noriko and Akiko. I really didn't expect it to get there, but I have to say that this is a last-minute entry for my favourite movies of 2023. Aside from the fact that it's authentically Japanese and not Americanized, this movie has a great human element that we care about, especially in knowing that there's a reality behind it all. On top of that, it's just awesome to see Godzilla be a horror movie monster and not the Americanized misunderstood creature - something both the 98 and new versions have done (although I still enjoy the new stuff for what it is). If you're looking for a well-done Kaiju flick, look no further! 5/5  I'd be pretty hard-pressed to not enjoy a good Scorsese movie, and I'm super happy to see him tackle a subject matter that doesn't necessarily fit in with what we're used to seeing from him. Yes, it's "woke," but it's done so with Scorsese's wonderful writing and direction over some of Hollywood's best actors, who include Scorsese's biggest go-to actors together on screen - Leonardo DiCaprio and Robert De Niro. It also tackles a very disturbing subject matter that, until recently, we've all been ignorant of or just hadn't heard of due to others' ignorance.
As the film opens, we're given a little background into the success of the Osage tribe upon finding oil on their Oklahoma reservation. The tribe becomes extremely wealthy, but due to reservation laws, white "guardians" are to manage their money. Said benefactor is a guy named William "King" Hale (De Niro), who acts friendly toward the Osage, bestowing gifts, providing chauffeurs and other services, and speaking their native tongue. However, the audience understands from the get-go that there's something pretty "off" about this guy. Enter Ernest Burkart (DiCaprio), who comes to King, who's his uncle, for some honest work. King starts him off with a chauffeur job and asks for him to take special care of one, Mollie Kyle (Lily Gladstone), which ultimately translates to "get to know her and marry her so we can get some of that money" (just to skip ahead). While things look dirty and underhanded as what seems to be a real love is blossoming between the two, one by one, her family starts getting taken out, which gets the attention of Tom White (Jesse Plemons) of the FBI, who, naturally, come to investigate. I won't go into any more detail about the story here, but one should know that this was all something that really went down. Scorsese does a good job of not glamorizing it with Hollywood style so much as to break our hearts and open our eyes to a long-ignored situation. This is adapted from a book of the same name, but here's a good Wiki article that covers it if you happen to miss out on the movie. But it is definitely worth the three-and-a-half hours of captivating storytelling and acting. That brings me to my next point of the film: the acting from everyone is pretty phenomenal here. If I were to have one slight nitpick about things, it would be that DiCaprio overdoes his exaggerated frown a wee bit throughout the movie. But it's still a great performance alongside the legendary De Niro, who we get to see wear those old-timey driving goggles in this movie, and whether intentional or not, it looks pretty hilarious. But for as great as those two always are, the most impressed I was with her acting in this was Lily Gladstone. It's odd to say, but Gladstone's performance here damn near outshines everyone, including De Niro and DiCaprio. She has quite a range she has to play, from mysterious but intriguing with a sense of humour all the way to physically sick and mournful, and she basically steals the show. But that's not to say that everyone else was bad in comparison by any means; everyone's wonderful in this, and as far as I'm concerned, Scorsese has struck gold again and continues his legacy of being a legendary filmmaker. As mentioned above, in true Scorsese fashion, this is indeed a long one at three-and-a-half hours. It's bound to feel that long to some. But for most, it seems to be that people are coming back from this saying that it didn't, and that's no surprise. Scorsese has a way of bringing you into his movies, where we constantly want to see what happens, along with any pleasant surprises he has in store. This film, though a different kind of Scorsese masterpiece, is still pretty much a masterpiece, and it's great to see that the legendary director hasn't lost his touch in making his audience feel the mass spectrum of emotions. 5/5  While perhaps not entirely original, as it remains the classic cautionary tale of what happens once AI gets too big for its britches, it is nice to see a movie take a somewhat different spin. It does so by making the movie a conglomeration of a few different concepts and blending them together, complete with the aforementioned AI, a look at mankind being the potential real monster, loss and learning to trust/love again and, as one can easily pick up from the trailers, this one consists of another "escort mission" of sorts.
The film opens with an old-time-style (even though this is the future) ad about the advancements of Artificial Intelligence and, ultimately, how we've gotten them to the stage of being almost indecipherable from humans. We get the AI out of hand instantly when they detonate a nuclear warhead over Los Angeles, CA, in the year 2055. This ultimately leads Americans (referring to humans of the Western world) to struggle and fight for survival. Still, the AI also has friends with "New Asia" (Japan, Taiwan, Bhutan, Nepal, Southeast Asia and some of India) who continue to see them as something of an equal. Now that the environment is set, we turn our attention to undercover operative Joshua Taylor (John David Washington), who has unwittingly married his target, Maya Fey (Gemma Chan), whom the American government believes to be the daughter of their ultimate target known as "Nirmata," who is supposed to be the "Creator," responsible for the AI advancements that have seemingly taken things over. Long story short, Josh and Maya get themselves separated under devastating circumstances, but throughout the film, Josh continues his search for her under the belief that she is still alive. Five years later, Josh is approached by General Andrews and Colonel Howell to seek out and destroy a sort of ultimate weapon, supposedly capable of taking out their ultimate defence system - a giant ship known as NOMAD (North American Orbital Mobile Aerospace Defense). He reluctantly agrees when he realizes this mission could lead to reuniting with Maya, but then ends up over his head when he realizes that the "weapon" known as "Alpha-O" is just a kid he nicknames "Alphie" (Madeleine Yuna Voyles) who, despite her great abilities to manipulate machinery, just wants robots to be able to live in peace, thus giving Josh his internal struggle unable to complete his mission, but for all the right moral reasons. This one comes to us from writer/director Gareth Edwards, who feels about as upper-middle ground as possible in directing fantasy/sci-fi movies. He was also responsible for 2014's 'Godzilla' (a breath of fresh air after 1998's version) and 'Star Wars: Rogue One' (probably the ultimate stand-out movie of anything that came out after the prequel trilogy). But as much as I enjoyed those movies for myself, they certainly were not without their share of critics, and though they may never be solid gold, they're generally pretty damn good and never actually what I'd call "bad." This is no exception, and it is well worth the price of admission. Strangely, this movie didn't perform better for an audience who constantly gets sick and tired of the same old superhero blockbusters. This may not have stuck out as ultimately brilliant, in as much as it takes from other concepts. But it was nonetheless entertaining with likeable characters, a flare for the dramatic (even with robots), and visuals that remind us that the sci-fi genre isn't entirely tapped out yet. If I were to ultimately compare it to anything in the way it feels, I'd probably go with 'District 9' in that the film drops us into this world of the future that seems like it could be real one day, based on the ignorance of us asshole humans. Unlike 'District 9', however, I don't entirely see this one being up for a whole lot of Oscars (other than maybe some technical ones), even though I do enjoy the idea here. This isn't one of those big-time go-to sci-fi classics we'll be returning to, but I recommend checking it out to see what it's all about. If nothing else, it provides a relatively intense sci-fi adventure for those seeking something like that, though I may not label it as "fun" like I usually would. This is one to throw on when you've got two hours of nothing to do and just wanna relax with a decent story. There may not be much of a "Wow" factor here, but it's still pretty good. 3/5  I must admit that when I first saw the trailer for this movie, I pretty well rolled my eyes at it as yet another haunting movie that would be the same as most others. I tend to view them as a typical novelty haunted house in that you go into it, and you're along for a thrill ride using things like jump scares to fulfill your adrenaline needs. It's typically a fun time instead of a traumatizing one, though, with hints of mystery and intrigue accompanying the ride. I tend to enjoy them in their own ways and prefer them to torture porn.
However, as I watched the trailer, Detective Hercule Poirot popped up, and I was immediately sold. The idea of giving us a detective horror (and I use the term very loosely) film seemed right up my alley. Many don't realize it, but one old Sherlock film I watched and thoroughly enjoyed was 'The Hound of the Baskervilles'. That would be the 1939 version of the story featuring Basil Rathbone as Holmes. It made for one of those great atmospheric classics. And since I enjoyed the last two Poirot films as their own fun "thrill rides", I found something about bringing back this horror detective story idea super intriguing. This chapter opens up in post-war Venice, Italy, which they made look incredibly inviting, as though it had this rustic quality, like some sort of fancy, beautiful antique. The sort of thing that looks a little homely on the outside, even, dare I say, haunted? There dwells a retired Hercule Poirot (Kenneth Branagh) and his bodyguard, ex-police officer Vitale Portfoglio (Riccardo Scamarcio). On Halloween, Poirot is approached by novelist Ariadne Oliver (Tina Fey) and asked to attend a séance with her to expose a medium named Joyce Reynolds (Michelle Yeoh) as a fraud. Poirot reluctantly agrees to join her to make short work of this. Opera singer Rowena Drake (Kelly Reilly) meets with them at her Palazzo, and it's explained that she has hired Mrs. Reynolds as a means to communicate with her deceased daughter, Alicia (Rowan Robinson), who apparently committed suicide after a romance went south. Also in the séance's attendance are Rowena's housekeeper, Olga Seminoff (Camille Cottin), Drake's family physician, Leslie Ferrier (Jamie Dornan) and his son, Leopold (Jude Hill), and Reynolds' assistants, Desdemona Holland (Emma Laird) and an American guy named Maxime Gerard (Kyle Allen) who happens to be Alicia's Father, but not in the best of places with Rowena. Poirot is ready to leave after the séance, in which admittedly bizarre and spooky stuff happens. But when one of the group is brutally murdered, the séance turns into a crime scene, and Poirot finds himself on the case once again. However, Poirot has to deal with the ins and outs of reality itself this time and may even have to call his own skepticism into question regarding whether there is a ghostly realm beyond. And I'm just going to go ahead and say it: this is, perhaps obviously for those who know my tastes, probably my favourite of the bunch so far (I don't know how many of these Branagh plans to do). While 'Murder on the Orient Express' and 'Death on the Nile' were entertaining in their own rights, there was no sense of "perfection" from either of them. That may not be the right word, but I'm talking about when something seemingly lines up perfectly for the viewer, as long as we count "perfection" as relative. This provided yours truly with a pretty wonderful balance to what I like to call "toe-dip horror", which is usually the concept of horror translated into a PG-rated or PG-13-rated movie. There's actually a decent jump scare or two here, but it's still a mystery first. Add a sprinkle of good humour and some solid acting and it's a good time, especially for the Spooky Season. I think I can safely recommend this to anyone looking for a Halloween watch this year that's more or less family-friendly. It's a murder mystery, a ghost story, a haunted house movie, and the rustic setting of Venice makes for some really creepy but perfectly natural set pieces. Story-wise, it's also fun to wonder along the way from Poirot's point of view - that of a complete and total skeptic. I also have my skeptical side, but let's be honest here - where's the fun in that? It's just kind of fun seeing a skeptic's point of view get tarnished with something they can't explain. But one thing I can explain is that if you enjoyed the last couple of these, you're in for a real treat with this one! 4/5  I've said it before, and I'll say it again - I predict the Video Game genre to be the next big thing after the Superhero genre starts to fizzle out. And here, again, we have further evidence of such a concept. This time, the filmmakers decided to look at an intriguing story surrounding video games instead of just trying to adapt a game to the big screen. In this case, the story surrounds (arguably) the most popular racing simulator of all time - 'Gran Turismo'. All in all, a game I tried once, sucked at, and never really picked up again.
Having admitted to that, the game aside, this is an intriguing true story altogether, and I'm curious to know how it went over my head. But, as usual, it's still important to note that when a film says "Based on a True Story", that usually means the movie has some loose odds and ends for dramatic effect, and it's a term to be taken very lightly. 'Gran Turismo' is no exception to this rule, though, and I'd encourage people to look at the real true stories behind Jann Mardenborough and the GT Academy, which are perhaps less dramatic, but are still interesting! Anyway, that's what this movie is all about, starting right from the beginning with the game's development, created by Kazunori Yamauchi (Takehiro Hira), who wanted to make a racing game that could efficiently mimic real racing. We take this concept and fast-forward to (presumably) 2006, where marketing executive Darren Cox (or here, Danny Moore - Orlando Bloom) pitches a contest for the best 'Gran Turismo' racers in the world to compete for a chance to race on a real race track. Training them all in the ways of real racing is one Jack Salter (David Harbour) who, I believe, is pretty much the only fictional character here. Meanwhile, we are introduced to 'Gran Turismo' mega fan Jann Mardenborough (Archie Madekwe) and his family, father, Steve (Djimon Hounsou), mother, Leslie (Geri Horner, formerly known as Ginger Spice of the Spice Girls) and brother, Coby (Daniel Puig). Jann lives his life playing 'GT' while his parents, namely his father, wish for him to think about college or university and establish some sort of life path - which 'GT' will not help with. That is, of course, until he notices that he qualifies for the aforementioned contest with his excellent racing skills and high score. The rest of the movie follows the "Cinderella Story" formula of an underdog of sorts, proving himself on the track and climbing through the ranks to become one of the greats. Of course, it doesn't come without a detail or two that causes us to question the "true story" portion of it all. But I had a lot of fun with this movie! If you can go in with the understanding that some dramatic effect is added to the plot, it's really a good time, and I have to admit that I was impressed and happy to see that the video game genre is continuing to improve, slowly but surely. Opinions will certainly differ, but I'm sticking to my guns. One might wonder where the actual video game aspect comes into things, if at all. Well, I'm happy to say it's there and used just enough to remind us of the game - excuse me - racing simulator this is all about. And I'm further happy to say that the CG used in this movie is exactly where it needs to be - used for sponsorship tags, recreating famous tracks, and, coolest of all, often making things look like the game only by tagging the racer's rank in the race or showing us some kind of "achievement." The racing and the cars being used further bring the realism that 'Gran Turismo' was all about to the big screen. Although I must admit that the story comes with predictability and some dramatic effect added to the true story, I don't have a hard time forgiving that. This is something that managed to bridge the gap between being a video game movie and being a dramatic racing story that just so happens to involve 'Gran Turismo'. Director Neil Blomkamp does a great job with this (along with everyone involved, including the real Jann Mardenborough doing his own stunt driving) and I feel like this movie should be the beginning of a whole new concept involving things like the video game contest... perhaps 'Swordquest'? 5/5  I love when a movie like this comes along in more ways than one. First and foremost, it's a divide in overall criticism. While fans and average movie-goers enjoy it, critics seem to have another thought process. And, as one might expect, when it comes to my own humble opinion, the movie is... okay. But I must admit that I lean more toward the audience on this one because, if nothing else, it could provide us with another decent family-friendly title to watch for the Halloween season. Personally, I tend to have fun with such films.
One may remember the Eddie Murphy vehicle of the same name from 20 years ago. I suppose it's not remembered in the best light when you look at it, so Disney thought a re-do of what could be a really cool concept would be a good move. I would have to say that while there's improvement, things still aren't necessarily perfected. However, what's incredibly refreshing to me was that I thought several scenes in this would work very well for a kid's first toe-dips into the horror genre. My generation had a few Disney movies for "spooky" purposes, which were pretty effective. It's nice to see that come back! We meet Ben Matthias (LaKeith Stanfield), an astrophysicist developing a special camera to detect dark matter. One unfortunate day, he loses his wife, Alyssa (Charity Jordan), in a car accident and takes over her ghost tour of New Orleans. Since losing Alyssa, Ben becomes much more skeptical of the concept of a potential "other side", replacing the idea of her ghost tour with a walking tour of the various historical sights of the city. Meanwhile, single mother Gabbie (Rosario Dawson) and her son, Travis (Chase Dillon), move into Gracey Manor, looking for a fresh start by converting the mansion into a bed & breakfast. They learn how haunted the place is very quickly and run as fast as their legs can carry them. Ben is eventually visited by a priest, Father Kent (Owen Wilson), who hires him to photograph the ghosts using his special camera. Ben visits the mansion, and we notice Gabbie and Travis are back. We eventually learn that if someone visits the mansion and goes home, a supernatural entity will follow them. Kent has also fallen victim to this. It's almost as though the spirits act as sheep herders for anyone who enters Gracey Manor and tries to leave. Soon enough, the four try to get to the bottom of these hauntings by assembling what Kent calls a "Dream Team" for the supernatural - he is a supposed exorcist. This "Dream Team" consists of the four characters above, a well-renowned psychic (or, as she insists, medium) with legitimate abilities, Harriet (Tiffany Haddish), and Professor Bruce Davis (Danny DeVito), a historian for haunted locations who has blueprints to Gracey Manor in his possession. As the group does some digging, they uncover a dark history behind the mansion's previous owner involving a powerful psychic (sorry, medium) named Madame Leota (Jamie Lee Curtis), the mansion's previous owner, William Gracey (J.R. Adduci), and the dark entity he accidentally summoned who messed everything up, the "Hatbox Ghost" (Jared Leto). As mentioned before, it is super refreshing to see something aimed at kids/family with genuine creepiness. It doesn't get hardcore with anything, but the film sets the spooky atmosphere quite well. The film also has a good amount of humour and heart, which act as buffers against the darkness of it all, and it makes for a fun time. I'm particularly impressed with Tiffany Hadish here, as she doesn't play her typical over-the-top loud self. While definitely still meant to be comedy relief, she does things more subtly here, and I enjoyed her performance. This is the kind of movie a family could watch together as a Halloween treat. I'd say it has the fun, family side of 'Casper', but has the dark side of 'The Haunting'. It's creepy to some degree for the younger audience, especially with a kid to relate to. But the film's sense of humour and lightheartedness given to an otherwise terrifying situation makes up for it. The film's likeable cast also spans generations with its talented, familiar names. There's a character here for everyone. Some details, like writing and special effects, could use a makeover here and there, but again, there's nothing that bad about this. Put simply, it's fun. 3/5  I will start this review by stating that I am more or less clueless about the history involving J. Robert Oppenheimer and everything surrounding the Manhattan Project. I went into this with the mindset that I may learn a thing or two, but I have to admit that these things get hard when the film unfolding gets pretty confusing. Perhaps not so much to history buffs who know about this stuff, but for clueless, little old me, I came out of this movie knowing what I already knew, and it certainly wouldn't be among my favourite films from Christopher Nolan.
Having said that, I would probably take this review with a grain of salt, as it seems to be one of the higher-reviewed movies of the year from other sources. I won't rip the movie apart for being "bad". But the simple fact is that this went a little beyond my overall understanding, and the way the film time jumps back and forth with timelines can make it pretty confusing. In some ways, however, this is to be expected with a Nolan film. He does not dumb things down for his audience; if you don't get it, you just don't. But I'll see what I can pull off here, despite several brain farts throughout the film. Beginning things in 1926, J. Robert Oppenheimer (Cillian Murphy) studies at the Cavendish Laboratory in Cambridge, where he eventually met Niels Bohr (Kenneth Branagh), who recommended that he studied theoretical physics in Germany. After completing his PhD, (and meeting Werner Heisenberg [Matthias Schweighöfer]) Oppenheimer heads back to America to spread the knowledge of quantum physics there. He starts teaching with only one student, meets his future wife Kitty Puening, ex-Communist (Emily Blunt), and shows us his womanizing skills by also having an affair with one Jean Tatlock, Communist (Florence Pugh). Fast-forward to 1942, after much more set-up, Army General Leslie Groves (Matt Damon) recruits Oppenheimer to lead the Manhattan Project and develop an Atomic Bomb. With his Jewish background, Oppenheimer is especially fuelled to beat the Nazis in this race, knowing what destruction it would entail if the Nazis managed it first. Oppenheimer's dream team of scientists includes the likes of Edward Teller (Benny Safdie), Isidor Isaac Rabi (David Krumholtz), Enrico Fermi (Danny Deferrari) and David L. Hill (Rami Malek). From there, we know how things go, as history has informed even the simplest of us (mainly speaking for myself). The other end of this story is where I get completely lost because it has everything to do with politics and Communism, and I just plain suck at understanding these things entirely. As far as I can tell, it has to do with the eventual Cold War, where Oppenheimer's desire to cease research on nuclear bombs conflicts with the views of Atomic Energy Commission Chairman Lewis Strauss (Robert Downey Jr.). Many politics enter into it all, especially concerning Oppenheimer's past associations with Communism (hence mentioning it alongside his two love interests earlier). Politics tend to be, however, where movies lose me. I suppose it's easy to say that many others will watch this and get much more than I did out of it. But again, that's not to say this was bad. There was plenty for me to admire here regarding overall performances, the time-transporting set design, and the painting of Oppenheimer as a fallible human being. I'm sure it's easy for many to see him as "the guy who invented the nuke" and instantly put him in the villain category. So to the film's credit, this was a movie about the man and not so much what he accomplished along with the aftermath it caused. When all is said and done, this will end up being one of those titles everyone else will love, but I'll just say it was "okay". As mentioned earlier, it's far from my favourite Nolan film. I'm also not the kind of guy who believes Nolan can do no wrong, as I know some might. I find him to be sort of hit-or-miss, and the misses are primarily because I'm watching the film with a big question mark above my head. Sadly, this was one of those, although it WAS easier to follow than 'Tenet'. This undoubtedly has its audience, and I can't say anything truly negative against it because my only real dislike about it was me not absorbing it, which is very much a "me" problem. So again, take this review with a massive grain of salt. 3/5  So just to give a really quick recap, the 'Creed' films are the next phase of the 'Rocky' saga, and have done the passing of the torch concept almost perfectly. 'Creed' is the passing of the torch itself, with a similar underdog story to 'Rocky', featuring Adonis Creed (Michael B. Jordan) and Rocky Balboa (Sylvester Stallone) as his trainer. 'Creed II' sees our new, established champ fight in a grudge match against his father, Apollo Creed's (Carl Weathers) killer, 'Rocky IV's Ivan Drogo's (Dolph Lundgren) son, Viktor (Florian Munteanu).
'Creed III' manages to polish up Adonis' backstory a little bit more, as it opens in 2002, where a young Adonis (Thaddeus J. Mixson) sneaks out at night with his friend, Damian Anderson (Spence Moore II). Together, they head to an underground boxing event where Damian competes - boxing name "Diamond Dame". Here, we learn of Dame's aspirations to go professional and, seemingly out of nowhere, Adonis attacks a random guy named Leon, based on some kind of evident bad memory. This ends up being the background story that goes on throughout the film, and it pieces itself together bit by bit as the film unfolds. Fast-forward to 2020 where we see Adonis win a rematch against "Pretty" Ricky Conlan (from 'Creed'), and shortly thereafter, retires from the sport. His main focus now is his family; wife, Bianca (Tessa Thompson) and hearing-impaired daughter, Amara, who has led the hosuehold to learn ASL. Fast-forward again to present day, and Adonis runs a gym, along with Tony "Little Duke" Evers Jr. (or is it "Little Duke" Burton? IMDb and Wiki give me two different names. Anyway, he's played by Wood Harris). In his spare time, Adonis promotes world champion Felix "El Guerrero" Chavez (Jose Benavidez) in a match against Viktor Drago (spoiler alert, they're buddies now). Eventually, Damian (Jonathan "In Major Trouble" Majors) comes back into Donnie's (that's Adonis, not me) life after getting out of jail, and he taps Donnie to help him try to complete his ultimate dream of becoming a heavyweight champion. Donnie agrees to give him an underdog shot against Felix, but along the journey lays the fine line of friendship and selfishness, and, well, lets' just say the remainder of the movie is quite predictable. BUT, predictability aside, it IS kind of easy to say that perhaps most sports movies are. What's important about the movie is the execution of the story, and that's where the developing backstory comes into play quite nicely. One thing I have to admit to is that I did not go back to watch the previous two as a refresher before going into this. So there were a few moments and characters here and there that I had forgotten about, and had to come back to research just who they were to jog my memory. That said, I think if one knows the bare basics of the last two plots, one can still get plenty from this stand-alone story. I did appreciate how well it blended these films' passion for boxing with a more dramatic side of Donnie's past that didn't have to do with his father, Apollo. Although I will also say that much like the 'Rocky' films, they might work best in some kind of epic marathon. One big takeaway from this is the progress of Michael B. Jordan's career, as this is the man's directorial debut - and he did a fantastic job! It's great to see how far he's come since the first time I saw him in 2012's 'Chronicle', and it's safe to say that he definitely has an eye for direction. This is one of those all-emotion movies that'll make you laugh, cry, cheer, etc., and its themes of friendship and loyalty are pretty spot-on, if, as I mentioned, a touch predictable. But once again, the execution was great. In fact, as it stands, the 'Creed' trilogy is one of the most solid that I've ever seen, and I'm definitely going to be doing some kind of re-review of this, along with the other 'Creed' and probably 'Rocky' movies in the future. But now for some exposure... I almost shamefully admit that I didn't actually get into the 'Rocky' films, but have always had a soft spot for the original. Thus, the boxing series that became the one for me ended up being the 'Creed' series. However, a lot of this made me want to go back to actually watch and enjoy all of the 'Rocky' movies. I can definitely imagine that the story will be the same for a lot of noobs like yours truly, and in my own way, I hope it is. The 'Rocky' films may not have been something I quite got into, but I do view them as a classic series in their own right, and they do deserve the time of day. After all, the 'Creed' trilogy is already an instant classic as it is. 4/5  I have an interesting story behind my first viewing of 'Magic Mike.' I was comfortable enough to enjoy it despite the male entertainer subject matter, which is all good, but it isn't what I look for in a movie. What I do look for, however, is a good story, which the first film had, so I like that movie for what it is. The second one was more in your face about the male entertainer subject, as the entire plot revolved around a road trip to a male entertainment convention, and in its own way, even felt a bit hollow. But here we are with a third instalment.
With a full eight years between the last film and this one, it was definitely something that came along in which I wondered exactly who was asking for it. I even remember some of my female friends kinda turning their noses up at it, mainly because it felt like they had their fun with the last two, and things have moved on since then. But as the random guy in the audience looking for a decent story, the big question here is, is 'Last Dance' as respectable as the first film, resulting in a pleasant surprise, or is it just narrowed down to Tatum's (and others') abs and moves, like in 'XXL?' While Mike (Channing Tatum) bartends for a catering company in Miami, he gets a job working Maxandra "Max" Mendoza's (Salma Hayek) fundraising event, where he's recognized by someone who lets Max in on Mike's former career as a dancer. When the event ends, Max invites him to speak with her privately. There, she makes a deal with him to experience what he can do, and what follows is an intimate and honestly pretty hot dance between the two of them. This inspires Max to offer him to go with her to London, England, for a month. In a revenge tactic concerning her recent divorce, Max brings Mike to London to work in the Rattigan Theatre, which she happens to get in the divorce, for a generous paycheck. The idea is to bring a new, modernized and sensual feel to the play 'Isabel Ascende.' I can't figure out if it is an actual play, but I assume it's fictional since I get 'Magic Mike' links after Googling it. Max has Mike find some new performers for this and choreograph the whole play in her vision but with his help and guidance. Those are pretty much the basics of how things unfold throughout the film, and it can be seen as the classic "let's put on a play" plot-line, but with erotic dancing attached to it. And, of course, there's a bit of the "love interest" thing going on between the two leads, much like in the first film, but this time, the woman dances just as well as Tatum. Salma Hayek is one sexy lady who's still got it, and she shows it here without having to show anything. And that's one thing I can credit the film for - there's "eye candy" for everyone, not just those who are into dudes. I will also credit the film for focusing more on dance's artistry and less on stripping's entertainment value. This one bridges it together reasonably well, and much like the first one, the humour keeps it going. But the idea of Max's whole revenge on her ex feels petty. By the end, I was wondering if the play she wanted to do was something that worked OR if it was like Peter Griffin's production of 'Anna and the King' where he just butchered everything to the point that it's ridiculous nonsense. The film is passable if it's what you're looking for, but it doesn't hold a candle to the first one. The first 'Magic Mike' had this element of surprise for us, hesitant hetero males. Looking like a male strip show on the surface, it delivered a good story with likable characters, and it all ended up being an interesting reveal. This one takes the stripper element and blends it with a bit of a 'Step Up' feel. It's more about putting on this production and "saving the rec centre" than anything else, so I might suggest sticking with the first one. But at the very least, there's some sexiness from both sides here, and who knows, you may even get a good laugh or two. I know I did. 3/5  Some of you may very well remember a movie from a few years ago called 'Searching', starring John Cho as a man named David Kim, actively trying to find his missing daughter through all sorts of internet resources. The film was a bit of a new twist on the found footage genre but stuck to computer screens, webcams and phone cams, much like this one does. 'Missing' is the third part of an apparent anthology series about missing persons and using one's knowledge of social media and internet access to help solve the case.
We open things with a brief but well-done explanation of the passing of James Allen (Tim Griffin), father to our film's lead, June (Storm Reid) and husband to the loving but perhaps overbearing Grace (Nia Long). Several years later, Grace leaves for a vacation with her new boyfriend, Kevin (Ken Leung) and leaves Grace in the care of her friend, Heather (Amy Landecker) - this is where the "overbearing" part comes in, as June is actually 18 and frankly doesn't need a babysitter. Anyway, as it would go with most situations like this, while the happy couple is on their vacation, Grace manages to have a pretty epic party. The whole time, it should be noted that she is snubbing her mother's attempt at communication with her. The following week, June is supposed to pick them up from the airport upon their arrival, but neither of them shows up. As June's concerns begin to mount on the whereabouts of her Mother and Kevin, June makes contact with the FBI about the missing persons, and she delves into her computer and phone to investigate even further, trying to pick up on any hints that may lead to her mother's whereabouts. She even hires a Colombian investigator named Javier (Joaquim de Almeida) who works for a small fee. It doesn't take long before June is pulled down the rabbit hole, and the more she searches for answers, the more unexpected details are unveiled, and the more she gets to wondering who it is she can really trust. I haven't delved deep into any details about it, but there's a little-known factoid about the film 'Searching'. If you pay attention to a lot of the stuff besides the stuff you're supposed to pay attention to, you'll find evidence of an alien invasion. The signs aren't in-your-face obvious, but here's a nice little YouTube compilation I've found of the hints in question. I was looking for something like that with this film too but didn't manage to find any of it. Although, it seems that according to sources, the alien invasion subplot is going in here too. These kinds of things give both films a certain rewatchability, allowing the viewer to work on potentially solving two mysteries at a time instead of just the main one. The best thing to compare these movies to in that sense is probably the 'Cloverfield' anthology ('Cloverfield', '10 Cloverfield Lane' and 'The Cloverfield Paradox'). They are all different stories, but all essentially share a universe that allows the viewer to piece clues together and try to solve, or at least theorize what the Cloverfield aliens were all about. The big difference there is that I'd highly recommend 'Searching' or 'Missing' much sooner than I'd recommend any of the 'Cloverfield' movies (except the first one, which I still say is awesome). The idea of using screens to tell the whole story may not have started here, but I think these movies perfected the concept. While the whole background alien invasion thing is fun, the fact of the matter is, the main plots of both of these movies are very exciting. They are both great examples of how to tell a good story with limited resources. They're both surprisingly exciting, bringing you closer to the edge of your seat than you'd think from a simple computer screen. Both hold a good twist or two, and both are somewhat participatory. A big catch for these movies is that we know just as much as the lead knows going into it - nothing more, nothing less. It's fun in that regard to be following along, trying to make predictions and trying to get to the bottom of things yourself. These are pretty damn good for anyone seeking out a different kind of mystery. In the end, the stories of 'Missing' and 'Searching' end up being about the same things. To some degree, both are cautionary tales about how easy it can be to hack into something if you just have access to the right materials. The thing is, it's our heroes who are doing this, so it goes against the idea that that's only a bad thing and makes one think. Further to that, they are about the rocky relationships between parents and children but told from different perspectives. So, theme-wise, extremely similar. But to give both films the credit they really deserve, I will say that at least they both executed their stories very differently, and the thrills weren't lost on me this time around. Both are well worth it for a good mystery thriller! 4/5  Every once in a while, a movie comes along with a sort of "slice of life" aspect to it. The film is simple, tells a story about a person's "every day", and shows us a sort of otherwise mundane situation as the story unfolds. The idea is that the character focused on could be someone you know (at least as far as personality goes). And yes, some may define it differently, but it does feel like something of a loose category. In this case, we get the story of 63-year-old Otto Anderson (Tom Hanks); a grumpy widower, residing in suburban Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania.
Throughout the unfolding of the film, we learn that Otto is stubborn, particular, and has a "take-no-crap" attitude. This is the old guy who says things like "kids these days" and "whatever happened to the times when?" Between losing his wife, dealing with people he considers jerks and jackasses every day, and suffering from hypertrophic cardiomyopathy, he's ready to end his life. On his first attempt, however, he is interrupted by new neighbours, Marisol (Mariana Treviño), her husband, Tommy (Manuel Garcia-Rulfo), and their two daughters, Abbie (Alessandra Perez) and Luna (Christiana Montoya), who he reluctantly befriends; namely Marisol. As one may very well be able to predict from the get-go, Marisol, along with several other neighbours, help show Otto some reasons to keep living, and help him to understand how valued he is as a person in the neighbourhood. It seems that Otto has all the answers, plain and obvious to himself, but everyone around him needs his help with various things. A lot of that is where the comedy is, but there's a lot of dramatic emphasis on Otto's past with his one, true love, Sonya (Rachel Keller), as we see the story of their relationship unfold, which shows us why he is how he is; past Otto played by Truman Hanks, Tom's real-life son. Otto has something of a relationship with everyone in the neighbourhood, and for the most part, these involve not-so-friendly "hellos" to locals who know him by name. But there's also a story of a falling out Otto had with a best friend and neighbour named Reuben (Peter Lawson Jones), who suffered a stroke one day, and is taken care of by his wife, Anita (Juanita Jennings) and neighbour Jimmy (Cameron Britton). The reason for their falling out? I won't spoil it here, but it does provide a good laugh for the audience. But unfortunately Reuben's home is about to be repossessed, so Otto has a bit of mixed feelings on his friendship. What I liked about this story is basically what the film wanted me to like, and that's that amid the dark comedy situations throughout the film, it also has a big, big heart, and gives us examples of Otto not being such a bad guy after all. So much of the humor here comes from Otto's suicide attempts being interrupted because he actually gives a damn. Furthermore we have examples like his transgender teenage neighbour, Malcolm (Mack Bayda) who Otto accepts, as opposed to his Dad. With some situations like this, we could see it as something of a "woke" movie, but it does things subtly as they'd be in reality instead of making it the film's top priority. If I was to compare this film to anything, it would be some kind of blend of 'Gran Torino', 'Up' and basically whatever other movie features a recluse who needs their neighbours more than they think. It is a good look at life today as well and does a good job of showing both sides of the coin. You get why Otto is so upset and annoyed by everyday people he considers idiots, but you may also look at these so-called "idiots" and think "well... I've done that before". But the film's big final message IS a positive one, even if the ending isn't necessarily a happy one. I won't say what happens, but it is something that hit me in the feels. All in all, I really enjoyed this one despite it getting quite a few mixed reviews. It's very hard not to like Tom Hanks in general, but I really liked him in this role, as he finally shows a dark and grouchy side to himself. There's a part of you that has to learn to like him here as opposed to just liking him from the get-go as usual. My only real criticism is that this kind of thing has been done time and time again. Odds are, we've all seen the movie about the recluse that needs a life-lesson or two, but also helps in their own way. But while not entirely original, I'd say its worth looking at. If nothing else, there's a genuine human aspect to this, and after three damn years of Covid, it's not a bad thing to snap us back to reality with (although hopefully, most of us are there by now). 3/5 |
RSS Feed