The Black Phone - Review

 

Silence can be the greatest tool at the disposal of any horror film. Silence means that at any moment, someone or something could be alerted to movement, someone’s presence, someone’s fear, and quickly make things worse. It’s possibly the most effective tool at building tension a horror director can use. Scott Derrickson (“Doctor Strange,” “Sinister”) clearly knows this well given his latest fantastically dreadful film, “The Black Phone.”

Starring newcomer Mason Thames, the film follows Finney Shaw, a young boy living in Colorado in 1978. After five local kids go missing, he’s also taken by a serial kidnapper and killer nicknamed “The Grabber”, played by Ethan Hawke (“Before Sunrise,” “First Reformed”), and tries to escape captivity while his younger sister Gwen, played by newcomer Madeleine McGraw, tries desperately to find him.

But that’s not even close to how supernatural things get. Thames and McGraw have genuinely, believable rapport and love on display. Not once do you question their sibling bond and they light up the screen together. Hawke, meanwhile, is chilling. Not a moment goes by without his unnerving manner of speaking filling your heart with dread. No scene with him is ever certain, and he’s unnerving the entire time, in every meaning of the word. For the most part, the film’s child actors are all fine, but some of them struggle with line delivery and a handful of moments early on could’ve used a second take.

“Black Phone” fills out the 70s aesthetic nicely, with tube TVs, brick houses everywhere and an overall maroon tint to this terrifying tale. It’s exceptionally put together, and the films usage of flashbacks and home video also helps create the unsettling atmosphere. Hawke’s mask is a feat of production and costume design. Not in that its particularly complex, but its so simple and brilliantly effective.

Derrickson and co-writer C. Robert Cargill (“Doctor Strange,” “Sinister”) craft a fun balance between a real-world hunt for the Grabber and the more supernatural elements at play. The titular phone is an enigma throughout the entire film, never ever being fully explained. The same goes for Gwen. So much of the film hints at its stranger, unexplained elements without sitting the audience down and explaining it all like their children. It’s remarkably refreshing in the way that it trusts the audience and helps to add to the tension as, again, nothing is fully explained.

The heavy use of sound throughout “Black Phone” is likely its best aspect. When a musical score is present, composed by Mark Korven (“The VVitch,” “The Lighthouse”), it plays with electronic and wavy synth notes in a tense and fun way. However, much of the film is just ambient noise and silent, meaning that when the phone does ring or a door does creek, it immediately fills you with dread. It’s a perfect exercise in creating and keeping tension.

Which is why the film’s handful of more comedic moments don’t really land. They’re funny, but it means that the tension the film’s worked so hard to build is deflated almost instantly. It gets it back every time though, and there aren’t many of these moments. On the other hand, the moments when Hawke delivers a line that makes himself giggle, it’ll chill your blood.

“The Black Phone” is a good ol’ fashioned horror delight. It’s lead by a terrifying performance and the aesthetic, with some great child performances and a fantastic use of tension and silence. It’s just a rock-solid film all around, the kind of horror film that will be enjoyed for quite some time. 4/5

Marcel the Shell with Shoes On - Review

 

If you’d placed bets years ago on what A24’s first animated film would be, chances are you likely would’ve either bet on something crude and adult or something wistful and abstract. Well, neither is here because instead director/writer Dean Fleischer Camp, in his directorial debut, and writers Nick Paley (“Broad City”), Elisabeth Holm (“Obvious Child,” “Landline”), and writer/voice of the titular shell Jenny Slate (“Gifted,” “Parks and Recreation”) have brought this little stop-motion shell boy to the big screen in the sweetest and most sincere of ways.

The film follows Marcel, the titular shell, as he lives with his grandmother Nanna Connie, voiced by Isabella Rossellini (“Blue Velvet,” “Death Becomes Her”). Filmed in a documentary fashion, Dean plays himself staying at the Airbnb where Marcel and his grandmother live and films them going about their lives and experiencing the world around them and the newfound fame from Dean’s YouTube shorts of the pair.

It's hard to truly communicate how incredible the film looks at times. It’s as if every single set is just a diorama rather than an actual house, with minuscule cinematography that boggles the mind. It’s not that the film attempts any sort of realism, but that what it does attempt is a cohesive look. The experience of watching this film is like being a kid again, simply looking around with wonder and a smile and saying “Yes, of course this is how a tiny talking shell would move around.”

Slate is an absolute delight. What must have started as just a funny voice she can do has evolved into a truly emotional, heartbreaking portrayal of this lovable young shell boy. She’s the heart and soul of the movie, imparting childlike whimsy and profound moments of observation in equal measures. Likewise, Rossellini is also a wonderful voice for Nanna Connie. She’s like the warm, spunky grandmother everyone wishes they had, helping to not only encourage Dean and Marcel, but also providing a sense of comfort in the film’s low stakes plot.

The low stakes, slower pace of the plot is absolutely not a hinderance however. It all comes back to Marcel and his grandmother and the banter back and forth. It feels so natural to watch, with the sort of cadence that makes it feel like the film was shot casually and then animated around the collected dialogue, like the old “Creature Comforts” shorts.

This casual nature extends to the humor as well. It’s not a film with jokes so much as with amusing scenarios and dialogue. It’s hard to truly communicate the sheer childlike delight that can spread across one’s face when listening to Marcel explain his “breadroom” where he sleeps on a piece of bread. It succeeds in both building the miniature whimsy of the world and also providing some truly amusing, delightful bit of humor.

But its not just a quirky movie about a talking stop-motion shell. There are some shockingly profound statements on family and fear, on how to toss fear to the side and simply live life. It’s surprisingly melancholy in its conclusion, successfully mixing it all together into a package that feels truly fresh and wholly original. It will gently rock you to sleep with Slate's soft voice and delightful music as its also causing you to silently cry through its emotional revelations.

“Marcel the Shell with Shoes On” is a quaint title for a film where calling it simply pleasant would be an understatement. It’s often time remarkable to behold as you wonder how exactly it was made, and that desire to learn quickly fades away as you get wrapped up in the adorable, tiny, philosophical world of Marcel and the rest of his kind. Slate is perfect and the film is often times exceptionally gorgeous. It’s hard to describe the kind of feeling one gets while watching a movie like this. It’s like a big hug, a warm delight. Or, more plainly, just a really really nice movie. 4.5/5

Elvis - Review

 

Every so often, there comes a watershed movie for a specific genre of film where any film made after can’t help but be compared to it. “2001” and sci-fi, “Psycho” and horror, “City Lights” and comedy. Well, back in 2007, “Walk Hard: The Dewey Cox Story” was released and forever changed the music biopic genre. It so thoroughly eviscerated the genre with its satire that even the best that have come since have been dinged a bit by its perfect parody.

Why then, you may be thinking, would you bring that up for a review of a serious, dramatic retelling of the life of Elvis Presley? Well, simply because so much of what Baz Luhrmann’s (“The Great Gatsby (2013),” “Moulin Rogue!”) “Elvis” does right threatens to be overshadowed by the mediocrity inherent to the genre that “Walk Hard” parodied so well almost fifteen years ago. Tropes and cliches so entrenched in the type of film this is that Luhrmann’s showman ship can’t help but be brought down some because of them.

The film recaps the life of Elvis Presley, played by Austin Butler (“The Carrie Diaries,” “Once Upon a Time in Hollywood”), via narration from his former manager Colonel Tom Parker, played by Tom Hanks (“Forrest Gump,” “Cast Away”), on his deathbed. This frame narrative is not only expertly done, but it helps to provide the audience with a lot of contexts to the events therein. It also helps to spice up the tale, as we’re told the story by a man who becomes increasingly less likable and eventually borders on completely gaslighting the audience.

Hanks’s performance is hard to judge. It fits the material certainly, going for big dramatic swings and at times veering into the comedic territory. It works with Luhrmann’s style and the type of story he’s going for, so even if its hard to say if it’s a good performance, it at least meshes with everything else that’s going on.

Butler, meanwhile, is a movie star. It’s hard to think of the last time an actor so fully lost themselves in a singular performance. Even lead roles from years past that went on to win major awards, like Rami Malek or Renée Zellweger, pale in comparison to the blood, sweat, and tears on display here. Every step in these blue suede shoes, every saunter, every drop of sweat pouring from Butler’s face sells this larger-than-life persona. Elvis went through so many different versions of himself throughout his life and Butler embodies all of them flawlessly because he isn’t going for caricature. This isn’t a Halloween costume or a bedazzled Las Vegas impersonation. This is a deeply respectful portrayal of one of the greatest musicians of all time.

The supporting cast can’t match up to Butler and Hanks though. While it could be argued that they don’t need to, it feels like the equivalent of casting a high school play with a teacher who used to act and have them be surrounded by a student ensemble. No one is bad, but no one is trying to match the energy from either Butler, Hanks, or Luhrmann. Olivia DeJonge (“The Visit,” “The Staircase (2022)”) gets the closest as Priscilla, Elvis’s longtime wife, but she becomes little more than a footnote to the story eventually. Richard Roxburgh (“Rake,” “Moulin Rogue!”) as Vernon, Elvis’s father seems almost wooden, and Helen Thomson (“Rake”) as Elvis’s mother is… well, there’s definitely a twinge of almost Norman Bates-ish motherly love between her performance and Butler’s.

Luhrmann is certainly a man with a distinct visual style, and as the Warner Bros logo first appears bedazzled in jewels and gold, it quickly becomes apparent that this film entirely belongs to him. Alongside co-writers Sam Bromell (“The Get Down”), Craig Pearce (“Romeo + Juliet,” “Moulin Rogue!”), and Jeremy Doner (“Damages,” “The Killing”), Luhrmann crafts a story spanning the entirety of Presley’s life. But it becomes quickly apparent in the latter half of the film that some trimming was not only possible but necessary. At two-hours-and-thirty-nine minutes, its not only a long film, but one that teeters into repetition in its latter half. The section on Elvis’s residence at the International hotel especially feels almost torturous, as it spirals on and on reiterating the same point that was made within the first ten minutes of the segment.

There’s a lot of ground to cover in this story, but not all of its feels remotely integral. Certainly, if one wanted to create an all-encompassing story of this man, then including as much as possible is a requirement. However, what no one seemed to tell Luhrmann is that not everything needs to be included to both make the overarching points he’s going for or to communicate to the audience who Elvis was. This length really hurts the last half of the film, specifically the International hotel segment, and it drags down what was an otherwise entertaining and high energy first half.

Regardless of that though, Luhrmann’s strengths as a visual storyteller are on full display. As shots pinball back and forth, realism is thrown out the window and he and cinematographer Mandy Walker (“Australia,” “Mulan (2020)”) pull out every kind of visual trick imaginable to be toyed with and reverse engineered. There are still quote-unquote normal parts of the film which as shot conventionally. But those segments make up possibly a quarter of the film’s runtime. For the rest of the film, it glides through visual metaphors, sweeping camera movements, and hyper exaggerated cuts. It feels at times like a film edited entirely like a music video, and it makes for not just a strong visual identity, but also proves integral to helping the audience understand Elvis, the artist.

A roadblock most films like this run into is how exactly to communicate to the audience how revolutionary the subject was at the time. Because obviously they were, why else would a film be made about them? Whereas previous biopics seem to fail in that regard, almost coming across as generic, Luhrmann cranks up his style and fully imbues this film with a sense of musical style, whimsy, and sex that forces you to watch. When Elvis dances for the first time, as mobs of young women clamor for him, the rapid cuts, bass drops, tight zooms, and copious amounts of sweat tell us only one thing: this man was all that mattered to them. And as Butler slides around on stages and fully commits to the symbol of sex and rock and roll that Presley was, Luhrmann’s goal for the overall film becomes evident: you will understand what he meant to those people, damn everything else.

If that’s the singular goal for his massive biopic of the life of The King, then Luhrmann unquestionably succeeds. It’s a film that lives and dies on its style and its performances, and even as the length becomes the film’s own worst enemy, those performances and that style are still there. It will likely leave you feeling less like you’ve seen a grand musical performance and more like you’ve spent all night in a Vegas casino, stumbling into the light and blinking as you try to regain your composure. You’re not quite sure what you’ve seen, but you know who you saw and that it was an experience regardless. 3/5

Cha Cha Real Smooth - Review

 

The sad movie about being young directed by a young person is a trend in filmmaking that, frankly, can be a bit grating. But every so often a film comes along with a premise that, while it could be summarized as simply as that, maintains a level of emotional intelligence and maturity that one would expect from a filmmaker far older and more experienced. Writer/director Cooper Raiff (“Shithouse”), while only on his second film, seems like he might be exactly that kind of wunderkind.

“Cha Cha Real Smooth” follows Andrew, played by Raiff, a recent college graduate who’s moved back in with his mother Lisa, played by Leslie Mann (“Knocked Up,” “This is 40”), his stepfather Greg, played by Brad Garrett (“Everybody Loves Raymond,” “Ratatouille”), and younger brother David, played by Evan Assante. After feeling aimless after graduating, Andrew finds a job as a “party starter” for local bar and bat mitzvahs and eventually befriends a young mom Domino, played by Dakota Johnson (“Fifty Shades of Grey,” “Suspiria (2018)”) and her daughter Lola, played by Vanessa Burghardt in her debut.

What makes “Cha Cha” so engaging from the start is the sense of emotional openness on display. At no point does it feel like Andrew or the other characters are trying to hide behind a sense of self-importance created by Raiff. Instead, it feels like a remarkably honest kind of filmmaking, one where you learn and connect with the characters by watching them react to the circumstances around them instead of talking about themselves or hearing others talk about them. It seems like a simple thing, but it works. You become endeared to Andrew watching him try and fail to figure his life out, not by hearing about him talk about it.

That isn’t to say there isn’t any talking here, there’s plenty of it. This is an indie dramady after all, and the dialogue is often exceptionally sharp and charming, much like its characters. It all flows naturally, without sounding dull or drab, and maintains a level of fun back and forth without sounding scripted or overly written. It’s a delicate kind of balance that’s impressive to say the least. Raiff even avoids delivering on plenty of easily encroachable stereotypes, like the angry stepdad or the antagonistic fiancé Joseph, played here with a soft spoken and gruff voiced charm by Raúl Castillo (“Looking,” “Atypical”).

Raiff gives Andrew a kind of equilibrium between being a clearly intelligent young man and also indulging in the worst of his irresponsible tendencies. You so desperately want him to succeed in life, because of both the excellent script and Raiff’s endless charm, but you also don’t want him to be coddled because you can see the kind of man he could grow into if he doesn’t learn to fend for himself. Likewise, Johnson is doing everything in her power to show that “Fifty Shades” was just a fluke. Domino is a complicated individual and Johnson doesn’t baby her in any way. She delivers a performance that’s layered and could very well be the highlight of her career.

Andrew’s family are all wonderfully charming as well. Mann keeps up her trademark level of silly emotions and Garrett is a beacon of tough manly love. Assante is an absolute highlight as, like Raiff, he imbues his character with an intelligence and charm beyond his years without making him feel fake. He’s still a kind, but he’s a wise kid. Every scene is stolen by Burghardt though, as she absolutely melts hearts from her first moment on screen. Not only is it a rare case of an autistic character being played by an autistic actor, but she’s just a beacon of warm lovable light throughout the entire film. She’s the kind of presence that makes you excited for a scene when you realize that she’s in it.

For as much charm and humor as Raiff builds into each scene, he also doesn’t let us forget that these are people who aren’t making good choices. There isn’t any hand holding here and there are plenty of bad decisions on display to further build out these characters. It’s a story that clearly comes from an emotional place for Raiff and that emotion is put on display in some great ways, both funny and heartbreaking. Again, it’s a shockingly emotionally intelligent film, especially when its easy to see how it could’ve gone for many much cheaper, broader strokes.

As only his second film, “Cha Cha Real Smooth” represents Raiff continuing to not only evolve as a filmmaker but find his stride as well. His performance is excellent, made even more impressive as he also wrote and directed the film, and he’s surrounded himself with a bevy of other extremely talented people giving great performances. It’s an emotional film that’s also remarkably light and is one of those special kind of crowd pleasers that makes you laugh and cry in equal measure, sometimes at the same time. 5/5

Lightyear - Review

 

In 1995, a kid named Andy got a toy from his favorite movie. This is that movie. That’s what the opening title crawl for Pixar’s latest animated adventure “Lightyear” says, and honestly, whatever the technical wizards at Pixar need to say as an excuse to make a space film is fine by me. Given the extremely talented and creative people who work there, regardless of what the film is, it’s pretty much a guarantee that they’ll be putting their top efforts behind it.

“Lightyear” unfortunately isn’t the creative marvel that one might expect from the studio. It certainly isn’t a slouch either. Far from it, it still contains all the same whiz-bang visual delights, top tier voice acting, and excellent low-key comedy that the studio is known for. It just lacks in the more original, creative aspects.

The film’s first act is honestly its best. It’s the best paced, has the best characters and really builds Buzz up as the kind of character worth rooting for to both succeed and get the change his life clearly needs. It’s some really great stuff, and the latter two-thirds, while still fun, don’t really match up to the unexpected emotional investment.

That latter two-thirds are where the film’s creative ambitions fizzle out. It turns into a much more routine “teamwork” kind of family film, complete with wacky characters and speeches about the values of working together and asking for help. It’s still executed well, giving off the idea of a well-oiled machine. It’s nothing you haven’t seen before, but it also isn’t executed poorly either.

Chris Evans (“Knives Out,” “Captain America: The First Avenger”) does a great job imbuing Buzz Lightyear with the same kind of gung-ho heroic archetype he played effortlessly as Captain America. It’s easy to see why Pixar chose him to voice this “original” Buzz, as he clearly checks all of the boxes of this 90s sci-fi action hero the film shows him to be. He’s just a lot of fun to hear have a lot of fun with the role.

Uzo Aduba (“Orange is the New Black,” “Steven Universe”) is a clear stand-out. It takes mere moments of hearing her and Buzz banter to fall in love with her character, Alisha Hawthorne. She easily matches Buzz’s overly eager heroism with a kind, softer demeanor, helping to build their friendship to an easily believable place. Also a stand out is Peter Sohn (“Ratatouille,” “Monsters University”) as Sox, Buzz’s personal therapy robot cat. Given how clearly marketable Sox is, it’s a testament to Sohn’s vocal performance that he really makes this metallic feline an instant scene-stealer. He’s extremely funny and just a huge delight.

Keke Palmer (“True Jackson, VP,” “Hustlers”) also excels as Alisha’s granddaughter Izzy Hawthorne. While more comedic than Aduba’s performance, Palmer still delivers her lines excellently, making Izzy a fun, eager to please addition to Buzz’s motley crew. Her emotional arc might be somewhat cliched, but it doesn’t make it any less effective by the film’s end. Taika Waititi (“Thor: Ragnarok,” “Our Flag Means Death”) and Dale Soules (“Orange is the New Black,” “The Miseducation of Cameron Post”) round out the supporting cast playing Mo and Darby, respectively. They’re clearly meant to be more comedic relief, and while they’re delivery is great, they aren’t so good as to elevate their characters from their two-dimensional origins.

Like each consecutive film from the studio, “Lightyear” puts the talents of Pixar’s digital wizards on full display. Not only is it impressive from a raw detail perspective, but the recreations of the styles of 90s science fiction films are delightful. The overly chunky design to the ships and suits, as well as details like forming hyper speed crystals from colorful goo, really help to build out the world of this space adventure.

For those who are able, thought, the film absolutely must be seen in IMAX. Not often does a film really truly justify the additional price, but “Lightyear” is the first animated film ever made to the format’s specifications and it’s incredible. The vast space sequences and visual splendors open up and dance across your eyeballs with visual splendor. It’s a sight to behold.

It’s unfortunate that, despite the beautiful visuals and committed voice cast, the film isn’t more creatively ambitious. That’s not to say its plot is bad, far from it. Writer/director Angus MacLane (“Finding Dory,” “Toy Story of Terror!”) and his co-writers Jason Headley (“Onward”) and Matthew Aldrich (“Coco,” “Spinning Man”) do a good job fleshing out the world and characters of this adventure. It’s the emotional arcs, such a staple of Pixar’s work, that feel stuck in the past. They’re fairly routine and while still admirable, it is fun to see a movie seemingly fueled by nostalgia bring up being obsessed with the past as a negative trait, it’s not really anything that hasn’t been seen before.

“Lightyear” is, like its archetypal titular hero, a well-oiled machine. It’s a visual delight and provides a fun science fiction adventure from start to finish, with a committed voice cast and a studio that clearly wants to pay tribute to the genre. Its almost unfortunate that it bears Pixar’s name, as the film’s emotional arcs and overall plot don’t live up to the studio’s creative highs. This is still a thoroughly enjoyable adventure for all ages, and one that’s sure to be enjoyed on a big screen. 4/5

Jurassic World Dominion - Review

 

In theory, it shouldn’t be hard to make a good Dinosaur movie. They’re an intersection of two of Hollywood’s favorite genres: the monster movie and the sci-fi movie. They’re creatures that seem so otherworldly and cool and yet really existed on our planet long before us. It’s a seemingly perfect concept and one that Spielberg capitalized on with the 1993 classic “Jurassic Park.”

Now, almost 30 years later, the finale (or so Universal says) of the Jurassic saga has come. Six movies after the original, “Jurassic World: Dominion” is here, and like other legacy sequels it features members of the original cast to seemingly remind audiences of their nostalgia for the franchise. Instead, it ends up reminding them that they could be watching a far better movie.

Set four years after the events of the previous film, “Dominion” sees Owen Grady, played again by Chris Pratt (“Guardians of the Galaxy,” “The LEGO Movie”), and Claire Dearing, played again by Bryce Dallas Howard (“The Help,” “Terminator Salvation”), trying to find their kidnapped adoptive daughter Maisie Lockwood, played again by Isabella Sermon (). Meanwhile, Dr. Ellie Sattler, played by Laura Dern (“Wild at Heart,” “Big Little Lies”), reteams with Dr. Alan Grant, played by Sam Neill (“The Hunt for Red October,” “Peaky Blinders”), as they search for the source of a massive swarm of prehistoric locusts that have been decimating crops across the United States farmland.

The fact that locusts are a large enough part of the plot of this dinosaur movie to mention in the opening summary leads directly to one of the film’s biggest problems. Trying to change things up or subvert audience expectations isn’t a bad thing by any means. But given how the ending of the previous film perfectly set up a sequel that saw dinosaurs running amongst human civilization, its massively disappointing that this film focuses so heavily on another isolated location where things run amok.

More than any of the previous films, it feels like another boring slog through everything we’ve seen before. The brief moments set in cities where dinos and humans exist in tandem are the film’s best parts. A car/dino chase through Malta is one of the best moments in the film and its over far too quickly. It not only feels like a squandered opportunity, but it feels almost like a lie perpetrated to the audience given what was set up by the previous film.

But that’s okay. Maybe the time spent in these isolated labs once again is still a fun romp. Don’t be mistaken though, its not. There’s zero weight to the events of the film and it all feels like busywork. Even the moments with the dinosaurs, which should be the coolest in the movie, just feel flaccid and weak.

To go on a bit of a tangent, one of the things that made the original “Jurassic Park” so terrifying and fascinating was that, despite the bloodthirsty beasts running around, only three people died by the end of it. Whereas this new “World” trilogy is practically a slaughterhouse of increasingly mean deaths. It sucks the humanity out of what should be a fun sci-fi romp with dinosaurs.

Although, the actors are doing the film any favors either. Pratt is sleepwalking through the film and this is yet another example of his best work is when his characters think they’re badasses but aren’t. Howard fares better, mostly because she seems to be tuning into her inner scream queen for most of the film. Sermon is fine. It’s hard to tell if her acting is subpar or if her character is just too cocky, but she’s far from the worst performance here. Dern, like Howard, is clearly in on the tone and joke of the film and is delivering enough cheesy one-liners to get through mostly unscathed.

Neill seems like he was kidnapped and woke up on the set of the film, stumbling around as if he had no input on his own casting in the film. Even the seemingly untouchable Jeff Goldblum (“Thor: Ragnarok,” “The Fly”) just feels like he’s on autopilot, doing his trademark hand gestures and philosophical lines with seemingly no thought. He does get the best, most badass moment in the film though, so that does help to make up for things. The other two legacy characters, Dr. Lewis Dodgson, played by Campbell Scott (“The Chaperone,” “Royal Pains”), and Dr. Henry Wu, played by BD Wong (“Mulan (1998),” “Oz”), fare just as badly, as if they’re husks of characters, reanimated for another trip through a science lab go awry.

Besides Dern and Howard, the two new characters are actually quite good. Kayla Watts, played by DeWanda Wise (“She’s Gotta Have It (2017),” “The Harder They Fall”), is a pilot who helps Owen and Claire with sneaking into BioSyn. Her cocky, smug attitude actually works, and makes Pratt’s worse by comparison. She moves with the kind of assured swagger that makes you relieved when she pops up on screen. Ramsey Cole, played by Mamoudou Athie (“Sorry for Your Loss,” “Underwater”), is one of BioSyn’s heads of communication and he actually seems to be having a good time. His part isn’t huge, and it isn’t Shakespeare, but he’s clearly one of the few actors who doesn’t consider it a chore to be here.

It's important to understand that, even as classic as the original film is, these movies don’t have huge expectations behind them. Show some dinosaurs, show some people quipping, show some fake science, and that’s it. But somehow, director/co-writer Colin Trevorrow (“Safety Not Guaranteed,” “Jurassic World”), writer Emily Carmichael (“Pacific Rim: Uprising”), and writer Derek Connolly (“Pokémon Detective Pikachu,” “Safety Not Guaranteed”) have forgotten to make any of it fun. When the whimsy of these creatures is taken, they become little more than giant CGI death machines, indistinguishable from any number of big gray aliens, robots, or faceless armies that have plagued blockbuster action films over the last fifty years.

The film isn’t a complete flop though. There are the handful of aforementioned cheesily good performances and the car/dino chase scene is great. Also, like the Star Wars sequel trilogy, there’s a larger emphasis on practical effects and puppeted dinosaurs. These moments really stand out compared to the CGI ones and they’re some of the best parts of the film. Even when they’re amongst the worst of the plot and acting, it makes all the difference seeing an actor actually react to a real creature right in front of them. It’s also a nice touch that the returning character actually have their own plot, instead of being stuck in the background of the newer characters. That plot is the boring, weird locust one, but still, the intentions are good.

But even with that, there comes a point in this two-and-a-half-hour-long film when you realize that, once again, you’re watching a “Jurassic Park” movie that’s once again set at an isolated facility for the fifth time and where a majority of the plot isn’t about dinosaurs but about locusts. It’s just the epitome of lazy filmmaking that can’t even get the nostalgia-bait aspects right. It’s a tyrannical turd that makes “Fallen Kingdom” look like a masterpiece. If this really is the last “Jurassic Park” film, although the film itself doesn’t seem to acknowledge this fate at all, then “Jurassic World: Dominion” makes a damn good case for why it should go extinct. 1/5