Tom & Jerry (2021) - Review

 

Say bye-bye to Bugs Bunny, forget Fudd, and sayonara to Sylvester, for a large chunk of kids, the Looney Tunes pale in comparison to the marvelous misadventures of Thomas D. Cat and Jerome A. Mouse. This pair have been fighting for decades and their routine of cartoonish encounters has found a sweet spot for those who prefer their ridiculous slapstick to the pop-culture references and musical numbers of the Tunes.

If you do consider yourself a fan of Tom and Jerrys’ original adventures, then stay far, far away from Tim Story’s (“Barbershop,” “Ride Along”) new animated/live action extravaganza, because while it’s a mess, its not the kind of mess fans want to see Tom and Jerry involved in.

Instead of focusing on Tom and Jerry, like one would assume a film called “Tom & Jerry” would, it instead focuses on Kayla, played by Chloë Grace Moretz (“Kick-Ass,” “Hugo”), who must get Jerry out of the prestigious Royal Gate hotel before a wedding and hires Tom to help her catch him. Moretz is clearly doing the best with what she’s bene handed but can’t help but deliver an annoying and drab performance thanks to an absolutely helpless script.

The rest of the cast, consisting of Michael Peña (“Ant-Man,” “Narcos: Mexico”), Colin Jost (“Saturday Night Live”), Rob Delaney (“Deadpool 2,” “Catastrophe”), Ken Jeong (“Community,” “The Hangover”), and Pallavi Sharda (“Lion,” “Retrograde”), are all just so pathetically forgettable. The worst of the bunch is Peña, continuing his streak from “Jexi” of creating egotistical and vapidly idiotic villains who are just the poster child for annoying modern comedy films. At the very least Jeong realizes what kind of film he’s in, delivering his lines quickly and will 110% enthusiasm to be as cartoonish as possible.

Frankly, it doesn’t matter how good the acting is, which it isn’t, because the script from Kevin Costello (“Brigsby Bear,” “Jean-Claude Van Johnson”) is horrendous. Full of the same clichés and jokes that have poisoned family films like this since before the god-awful live action “Alvin and the Chipmunks,” the plot is an absolute snooze. At its best, it’s boring, and at its worst, it’s insulting with how much it overexplains to the audience. Even five-year-olds can tell when they’re being pandered too. Even if the jokes or plot were tighter, the film would still be a chore to get through because of one basic, fundamental problem.

We are not here to watch a young grifter learn to be honest and better herself. We’re here to see Tom and Jerry beat the crap out of each other in a big budget film. When the film focuses on that, its glorious. Like “The Three Stooges” a few years ago, there are moments of the film that focus on the duo’s classic slapstick that work wondrously. While the cel-shaded animation doesn’t always look as good as 2D would have, when it’s in motion, its glorious. There’s a real charm to watching Jerry clobber Tom with a real-world clothes iron or bowling ball, and the rube-goldberg machines of destruction that are built and meshed with the animation are a real treat.

If only the sections about Tom and Jerry were more than (at best) a third of the film that shares their namesake. Sure, there are inklings here that show that Story and Costello actually have some reverence for the source material. Tom’s angel and devil sides are here, voiced quite well by Lil Rey Howard (“Get Out,” “The Carmichael Show”), and it even features Spike, voiced mediocrely by Bobby Cannavale (“Third Watch,” “The Irishman”), Goldie, and Toodles. Droopy Dog even has two blink-and-you’ll-miss-it cameos that are the best jokes in the entire film.

Warner Bros. continues their fumbling streak with the characters of Hanna-Barbara after last year’s abysmal “SCOOB!” by taking Tom and Jerry and shoving them into a formulaic and annoying family film that seems almost ashamed to be about them. The few moments that let the pair strut their stuff and get crazy are wonderful, but they’re too few and far between an annoying and idiotic plot that relies far too much on cringy and clichéd jokes and a cast that tried far too hard with too little material. This one goes down like a ton of bricks. 1.5/5

Nomadland - Review

 

“Nomadland” is one of those truly rare films where, even if it isn’t for you, you can agree that it is a masterpiece. The attention to both visual detail and character that writer/director Chloé Zhao (“Songs My Brothers Taught Me,” “The Rider”) has in this project is staggering and coupled with another career best performance from Frances McDormand (“Fargo,” “Three Billboards Outside Ebbing, Missouri”), she delivers one of the absolute best films of the year.

McDormand plays Fern who loses her job at a sheetrock plant after the plant and company town in Nevada shuts down. After her husband’s death soon after, she decides to sell her belongings and live in her van, traveling across the country during the year and staying at a RV camp and working for Amazon during the winter.

To describe “Nomadland” is to describe people. It might seem like exaggeration to say that, but so much of the film is built around people and the human experience. There is a plot, sure, but it all goes out the window in terms of typical structure. Fern is the central point and Zhao has smartly made sure that everything in the story is in service of her journey and her point of view. If something requires more time to be spent from Fern’s perspective to communicate her emotions on the matter, then more time is spent, plain and simple.

McDormand’s performance is the ultimate show of an actor at the top of their game. She still maintains the same level of roughness and toughness that her characters always have, but there’s also a sense of underlying tenderness and loneliness. It’s the kind of role where a scene of her sitting in a lake or floating down a stream, wordless, says more than any monologue ever could.

There are other characters in the film, although most interestingly, only one is another actor. David Strathairn (“Good Night, and Good Luck,” “L.A. Confidential”) plays David, another nomad who befriends Fern on her journey, but the other major characters are all real figures in the nomad community playing versions of themselves. It lends an incredible amount of authenticity to the proceedings. When Bob Wells has his speech with Fern at the end of the film, it isn’t two actors talking to each other. It feels purely like McDormand is talking to Wells and a camera happens to be there.

That kind of realism is one that most filmmakers spend their whole life trying to achieve, and yet Zhao makes it look effortless. Her attention to characterization and the little moments throughout the film make things so enrapturing and comforting. It’s a big warm hug, “Nomadland,” the kind of film that feels like a thick blanket surrounding you while it snows outside.

Zhao and Cinematographer Joshua James Richards (“The Rider,” “Songs My Brothers Taught Me”) maintain a level of closeness with these characters thanks to the difference in wide and close shots. It seems obvious but given the small enclosures of the various vans that the nomads live in and the wide-open spaces of the Amazon warehouse or just the open spaces of nature, it creates a stark contrast between the spaces that Fern inhabits.

A film like this, with subjects like nomads, can be a minefield if the director/writer isn’t careful. Numerous times in the past films with similar subjects have either been decried as poverty porn or just simple saccharine. Zhao eliminates this here thanks to her careful attention to each individual. There’s never a point where the film shows pity or sorrow to a character for their situation.

They might for things like health or a traumatic event, but at no point does the film “feel sorry” for these people because they’re nomads. Zhao never feels like she’s coddling the audience or these characters and makes it absolutely clear that them choosing this life is just as valid and noble as any other decision one could make.

“Nomadland” is a wonderfully told masterpiece of a film. It’s gorgeous to look at, serene in its atmosphere, and contains a career best performance from McDormand. Zhao has always made quality films but here she has elevated herself to one of the finest filmmakers working today and someone who will be a joy to watch for years to come. 5/5

Willy's Wonderland - Review

 

If imitation is the sincerest form of flattery, I think the Five Nights at Freddy’s creator should get a security system installed at his house because “Willy’s Wonderland” seems obsessed. This is one of those odd cases where this low-budget horror film likely wouldn’t have gotten any attention outside of its similarities to the Freddy’s franchise if it wasn’t for one thing: Nicolas Cage (“National Treasure,” “Moonstruck”).

Some actors have renaissance that catapult them to critical acclaim. The likes of Ryan Gosling and Matthew McConaughey went from staring in low quality rom-coms to racking up roles in independent drama and awards each year. Nicolas Cage seems to have taken an opposite turn; his career started with beloved cult films like “Raising Arizona” and awards hits like “moonstruck” and “Honeymoon in Vegas.” However, in recent years he’s tumbled into what some refer to as his “Cage Rage” era.

Over the past few years, he’s starred in horror/thriller films like “Mandy,” “Joe,” “Mom and Dad,” and “Color Out of Space” where buckets of blood or various other liquids have been spilled at his own hand. “Willy’s Wonderland” is no different; Cage is a silent tough guy who agrees to clean a run-down family pizza establishment in exchange for the money to repair his car which broke down just outside of town. It’s a convoluted set-up for an extremely convoluted plot.

That plot can’t seem to decide whether it’s trying to be serious or silly, flipping back and forth between moments where teens have sex in a room where a group of children were murdered, or serial killers involved in bloodless satanic rituals. Its overblown and clearly is just an excuse to see Cage rip some animatronic creatures apart, which is where the film is at its chest best.

Cage is a silent force of nature, patching up wounds with duct tape and constantly drinking cans of Punch soda. It’s a role that seems made for an actor who just wants to let loose and take nothing seriously. If the rest of the film had his energy, it might be a legitimately enjoyable piece of cult horror wackiness.

Unfortunately, the rest of the film doesn’t have his energy. The group of kids who slowly are murdered throughout the film are just laughably bad, giving the appearance that we’re watching a Disney Channel Original horror movie. Emily Tosta (“Mayans M.C.,” “Party of Five (2020)”) Is at least trying to do something with her role. What she’s trying to do is a mystery, but she’s clearly trying. The only other actors even of note are Ric Reitz (“Drop Dead Diva,” “The Loft”) and Beth Grant (“Jackie,” “Lucky”) if for no other reason than they clearly understand what kind of material they have and ham it up at nearly every turn.

However, you don’t read a review for a film like “Willy’s Wonderland” for critiques on the acting. Hell, you might not read a review for a film like “Willy’s Wonderland” at all, but if you did, you read it to know if the gory fight scenes are worth the price of admission. In a way, yes. The lower budget has a clear effect on the animatronics and how they look; the first fight looks a bit goofy and not like anyone is actually hitting each other, but it’s clear that when the film is in Willy’s, that’s when it’s at its most entertaining.

It’s not every day you get to see an Academy Award winning actor curb stomp an animatronic gorilla with a urinal, and Cage’s wild-eyed commitment brings the absurdity to life. Really, it’s the little things that make it enjoyable. He’s on a strict timeline, so Cage’s janitor takes frequent pinball breaks and always changes to a clean Willy’s t-shirt when his gets soaked with oil and blood. These moments of weird consistency make the ride an eye rolling piece of popcorn carnage. We haven’t even touched on the color correction that would make Zack Snyder blush or the editing that feels like the editor forgets what scenes they’re editing on a constant basis.

Is “Willy’s Wonderland” a good movie? Hell no, even Cage can’t save the bizarre plotting, editing, and laughably bad acting from the teens. Sure, if you watch this movie, you watch to see Cage drink soda, kick ass, play pinball, and stay absolutely silent. Is it a bit too much to expect more from this? Possibly, but it’s not hard to see a version of Willy’s where the fun is legitimate, instead of guilty pleasured. 1/5

Breaking News in Yuba County - Review

 

A violent suburban crime satirical dark comedy from the director of “The Help” isn’t exactly a sentence you’d expect to hear, and yet “Breaking News in Tuba County” is exactly that. Tat Taylor’s (“Get On Up,” “Ma”) dark comedy centered around Sue Buttons, a stressed out and unappreciated housewife who covers up her husband’s heart attack to make it seem like a disappearance so she can claim media attention.

That’s merely one layer of the plot, because it also involves Sue’s brother-in-law, his boss, his mafia contacts, Sue’s sister, Sue’s husband’s mistress, a police chief, and a whole lot more. In a word, think of it like “Fargo” but set in midwestern suburbia instead of Minnesota, eh?

Allison Janney (“I, Tonya,” “American Beauty”) stars as Sue Buttons and she does a fine job with the material she’s given. Janney excels at bringing these kinds of sympathetically conniving characters to life, and Buttons is no different. Its easy to sympathize with her just as much as despise her. She flips the switch between legitimately frustrated and conniving criminal so quickly that the line starts to blur even for her.

However, the rest of the film’s performances don’t come close. This is a truly jam-packed film, with the cast consisting of Mila Kunis (“Forgetting Sarah Marshall,” “Family Guy”), Regina Hall (“Girls Trip,” “Support the Girls”), Awkwafina (“Crazy Rich Asians,” “The Farewell”), Samira Wiley (“The Handmaid’s Tale,” “Detroit”), Jimmi Simpson (“It’s Always Sunny in Philadelphia,” “Westworld (2016)”), Juliette Lewis (“Whip It!,” “August: Osage County”), Wanda Sykes (“black-ish,” “Over the Hedge”), Matthew Modine (“Stranger Things,” “Weeds”), Ellen Barkin (“Switch,” “Animal Kingdom”), and many more. It’s not worth breaking down their individual performances though, because despite them all being across the board fine and serviceable, every single character in the entire film suffers from one extremely solvable problem.

For any star-studded crime comedy like this, it’s important that you care about the characters. It doesn’t require hours of backstory, but it does require some. However, the film’s biggest issue is that, apart from Sue, no one gets any of that backstory. No one gets any character arcs or moments of choice. It leads to a lot of watching famous people put on accents and say jokey lines while things happen around them.

Even despite getting the most character development, Janney never really feels like Sue. She feels like Allison Janney playing another Allison Janney-type character. Its incredibly frustrating that as the film continues and body’s start to pile up, none of it hits with any impact because you simply don’t care about the body’s that are piling up or the people doing thing piling.

Here’s a perfect example: Awkafina plays the daughter of a mob boss. Early in the film, he tells her that she lost his money because people don’t fear her. She then makes it her mission to make people fear her. However, the two scenes we see her in prior to being told people don’t fear her are of two people being very afraid of her. We’re being told one thing and shown another.

More frustrating is that the film is only around 90 minutes. While short movies are fine and length isn’t immediately a point of criticism, the fact that its this short for a mystery film with a clear lack of character development makes this increasingly frustrating. Its easy to see a version of the film that’s around 30 minutes longer with more meat on its bones to make it a better product.

This lack of audience care for the characters therefore makes those perfectly fine performances across the board seem worse. If you don’t care about the people on-screen, then it becomes a lot easier to nitpick bad accents, weird line deliveries, and leaps in logic. Even moments that do manage to be emotionally effective, like a home invasion towards the film’s end, are soured due to a truly bizarre musical score that sets said home invasion against a wacky whistle and banjo track.

“Breaking News” is a film that just seems like it has contempt for its own characters. They move through the plot simply to further the plot. Someone needs ransom money, so let’s rob a jewelry store! Are there other avenues to get the money? Sure, but they’re bad people, so robbing it is! It’s almost as if first time screenwriter Amanda Idoko wanted to write a crime comedy and then halfway through just started hating every character involved.

Its sad because apart from the music and lack of character development, there isn’t much to criticize. The film is shot competently, and the pacing feels right. It doesn’t drag too much, and there’s even something to be said for its large number of female and POC cast members, even letting Wanda Sykes, a lesbian, play a lesbian.

But if your film is centered around characters you’re supposed to care about, it doesn’t matter how average or fine the rest of the film is. If you botch the characters, everything else tumbles down around it. “Breaking News in Yuba County” is a film that will quickly fade from your mind soon after watching it. It wastes a clearly game cast with a poorly written plot concerned more with stacking teetering plot threads than it is with the characters trying to solve them. 1.5/5

Barb & Star Go To Vista del Mar - Review

 

Do the first crowds of people to see cult films know their seeing something special? Did audiences who flocked to see “Shaun of the Dead,” “Anchorman,” or “PopStar: Never Stop Never Stopping” think “Oh, this is a moment people will talk about for years!” Because that’s how it feels watching Kristen Wiig (“Bridesmaids,” “Saturday Night Live”) and Annie Mumolo’s (“Bridesmaids,” “About a Boy (2014)”) latest collaboration “Barb & Star Go to Vista Del Mar”: like watching a cult film being born.

Wiig and Mumolo are the titular Barb and Star, two lifelong best friends who decide to go on a trip to sunny Vista Del Mar, Florida. That’s the barest of descriptions for two reasons: one, the film is so absolutely bonkers that to explain what the plot is would ruin it and two: even if you were to explain the plot, it’s the kind of thing that only really works in motion.

Fair warning, this is not a movie for everyone. While a phrase like that is normally reserved for gruesome horror flicks or overly long dramas, “Barb and Star” need that warning because things are just that gleefully silly and wacky. It’s less of a sense of humor and more of a vibe.

One of the crowning achievements of that sense of humor is the sweetness at its core. Despite the overwhelming wackiness on display, at no point does it ever feel meanspirited. Neither Barb nor Star are ever the butt of the joke, despite the seemingly massive targets on their backs. Wiig and Mumolo clearly care about these two and that care extends to the audience. By the time the film ends, there will likely be a spot in your heart carved out for these two middle-aged goofs.

Jamie Dornan (“Fifty Shades of Grey,” “Once Upon a Time”) seems absolutely liberated after years of playing Christian Grey. His role as the attractive and slightly daft Edgar is delightful. He leaps and prances, singing to seagulls and falling in love. Dornan seems far more committed to this silly movie than he ever did in the “Fifty Shades” series. Wiig also plays his possible girlfriend Sharon Gordon Fisherman with virtually the opposite attitude of Star with understated success. The other two major cast members, Damon Wayans Jr. (“New Girl,” “Happy Endings”) and newcomer Reyn Doi are both good, but the film simply seems far less interested in them, with Wayans borderline being wasted.

Quotes flow freely and constantly from ever moment of the film. From little “blink and you’ll miss it” ones to entire set piece moments, the entire adventure seems custom designed to be as comedic as possible. Even if a joke doesn’t land, in less than 5 seconds another one will come along that likely will. Its also a great example of the broadness of the comedy spectrum. This isn’t just people telling jokes; “Barb and Star” employs a lot of cameos, musical jokes, physical gags, etc. Hell, there are even jokes using the film’s sets.

One could easily damn “Barb and Star” will the comedic equivalent of the “jack of all trades” cliché, and it does have faults. Things don’t really launch into comedy nirvana until they reach the titular Vista Del Mar, and things do slow down a bit for plot to happen about an hour or so in. But it almost doesn’t matter because at the end of the day, the goal “Barb and Star” doesn’t seem to be about being a comedy.

Its about the sweetness. That sugary center of goodness that lets us kick up our feet and give in to the ridiculousness. That’s where Wiig and Mumolo’s adventure really shines. From the tips of their wigs to the bottoms of the culottes, this is a hysterical adventure with a duo you’ll want to spend many, many more vacations with. Barb and Star forever. A hundred years, Barb and Star. 4.5/5

Earwig and the Witch - Review

Expectations are the bane of any film critics existence. Should one consider a film’s marketing and the studio or director’s past works when judging it? Or should one just take a step back and examine it for what it is, severed from those predispositions? Well, here’s the thing, anyone who’s seen a Studio Ghibli film before knows that its virtually impossible to go into a new film with no expectations. Yet, even if that were possible, “Earwig and the Witch” would be a disappointing 90 minutes in just about every way.

The latest Ghibli film, and the first to be animated in CGI (more on that later), is directed by Gorō Miyasaki (“Tales from Earthsea,” “From Up on Poppy Hill”), son of studio co-founder and legendary director Hayao Miyasaki. After an overall average first film with “Earthsea,” it seemed like Gorō’s skills were sharpening with the wonderfully bittersweet “Poppy Hill” and the epic and graceful television series he directed “Ronja, the Robber's Daughter.”

Yet “Earwig” is a complete step backwards, even beyond “Earthsea.” While most regard that film as being Ghibli’s worst, even its biggest detractors can admit that the animation is still gorgeous, and it nails the atmosphere of its world, while the plot and characters are what leave something to be desired. “Earwig” ticks nearly all of those boxes, however.

The main character, a young girl named Earwig, voiced in English by newcomer Taylor Paige Henderson, is painfully annoying. Where Ghibli has toyed with young female protagonists who begin as annoying before finding their place in the world (“Spirited Away”), Earwig has almost no redeeming qualities to her. The plot simply continues to allow her to be terrible to all those around her. She even states that her main goal with her best friend is to eventually get him to do whatever she wants.

Bella Yaga, voiced in English by Vanessa Marshall (“Star Wars: Rebels,” “Superman: Red Son”), is equally as annoying, but it at least fits her character as a witch. She’s manipulative and doesn’t seem to care remotely for Earwig, which just further motivates Earwig’s desires to either escape from her new foster mother or force her to teach her magic. Her familiar, a cat named Thomas, voiced in English by Dan Stevens (“Legion,” “Beauty and the Beast (2017)”), is a bright spot, with his droll delivery and petrified fear of Yaga providing some small bits of personality.

Meanwhile the third occupant of Earwig’s new foster home is the Mandrake, voiced in English by Richard E. Grant (“The Iron Lady,” “Can You Ever Forgive Me?”). He’s a towering monstrous fellow who enjoys his food and quiet. He’s an imposing force and the film uses him sparingly, which leads to him being one of the more interesting characters.

Earwig’s annoyance isn’t the fault of Henderson, merely the plot and dialogue are just poorly written. At times the overall plot grinds to a halt for nothing to happen for moments on end. At one point, Earwig creates a potion to protect herself from a potential threat. Yet despite said threat looming over her as she acts carelessly, egging it on, it’s another almost 40 minutes after she makes the potion that we even see or know if it worked or not.

“Earwig” has problems sure, but some could be somewhat argued over. But it’s the carelessness with which the plot is tossed around that hurts most of all. So many previous Ghibli movies are expert examples of building tension; “Howl’s Moving Castle” is a perfect example of that. While it is the first film script for one of the two screenwriters, Emi Gunji (“Ronja, The Robber’s Daughter”), the other screenwriter is Keiko Niwa, who’s written wonderful plot heavy Ghibli tales like the aforementioned “Poppy Hill,” “When Marnie Was There,” and “Ocean Waves.”

To talk about the visual for a moment, they’re painfully dull. All of the Ghibli charm and character that normally inhabits their characters is sucked out of the dull and mannequin-esque models. Rarely do their faces move more than slightly, and the few times that they do try exaggeration it often looks hideous. One moment in the middle of the film tries to execute the trademark Ghibli laugh to horrifying results. The environments fare much better, as they focus on the hyper detailed look Ghibli films are known for. Yaga’s brewing room is a particular highlight, and hand drawn sketches at the credits seem to almost be toying with the audience, offer crumbs of what could have been.

WARNING: THE FOLLOWING PARAGRAPH CONTAINS SPOILERS FOR “EARWIG AND THE WITCH.” PLEASE SKIP TO THE FINAL PARAGRAPH TO AVOID.

If the plot was boring an uninteresting, that would be one thing. Yet, the film somehow manages to butcher its biggest leading plot thread and pack so much interesting plot and character development into the ending epilogue that it might make your head spin. Instead of ending it with Earwig befriending a reluctant Yaga and Mandrake, the film jumps ahead 6 months to see Earwig now basically running the entire home?!?! Somehow this massive jump wasn’t included as a part of the rather light 80 minutes prior despite being far more interesting than anything that had come before.

Not only that, but the film also directly ends on a cliffhanger that seems to reintroduce Earwig’s mother into her life. While ending on a note like that wouldn’t be too out of place, its baffling that it was the first thing introduced in the film, never mentioned again after the opening credits, and then abruptly reintroduced directly before the film ends. For those who do manage to get drawn into the plot, it’s a maddening decision. And for those like myself who thought the epilogue was the most interesting part of the film, it borders on criminal.

END OF SPOILERS

If “Earwig and the Witch” had this visual style but kept the trademark Ghibli plotting, it would have been a fine, if dull looking, first time effort. If it had been a gorgeous CGI interpretation of the studio’s art style with a bland plot, it would’ve been disappointing but likely would’ve shown what could come in the future. Yet this is the worst of two worlds: a bland looking and boring fantasy adventure with an annoying main character and a bafflingly plotted adventure. Ghibli die-hards should consider viewing with caution and everyone else should stay far away from what can only be a witch’s curse. 1.5/5