In the Heights - Review

 

Lin-Manuel Miranda’s name is synonymous with one thing: “Hamilton.” Even people who might not know who he is know “Hamilton” and describing him as one of the brains behind the massively successful musical makes him an instant favorite for many. However, that was not remotely his first big success, because way back in 2008, after an off-Broadway run in 2007, Miranda and Quiara Alegría Hudes’s first big success premiered; “In the Heights.”

If there’s one undeniable success that this film adaptation manages, it’s translating the thumping energy of the stage to the screen. So often musicals lose substantial amounts of energy when transitioning to film, just look at the 2005 adaptation of “The Producers. Same cast, same director, but it flopped critically and commercially. This momentum is important for any film adaptation of a stage show, and doubly so with a project like “Heights” where so much of each and every moment is about the people.

If the emotion or energy is lost, then the film fails. Luckily, director John M. Chu and writer Quiara Alegría Hudes have delivered a project that radiates with energy throughout its 143-minute runtime. That’s a hard thing to pull off, but whether its in slower romantic numbers or the numerous elaborately constructed hundred cast member dance sequences, things never wain. Chu might be most well-known for directing “Crazy Rich Asians”, but he cut his teeth on films in the “Step Up” franchise, and it shows here.

This is a hard film to describe in terms of just what makes it so special. It’s easy to give lip service to its cultural elements; it showcases a minority group that is rarely, if ever, the focus of major Hollywood films and part of the reason for its sense of electric energy is the freshness this new perspective lends the film. Yet, the most miraculous thing of all is this, as wonderful as it is to have a film this grand and diverse, it also works with that removed.

What’s at the film’s core; the story of love, family, home, wanting the best for those around you, ring true. The way its being told and the perspectives are unique, but the core of it all is intrinsically universal. Hudes has successfully taken her and Miranda’s musical from the stage to the screen without losing a drop of authenticity and heart, even as songs, lines, and various other elements were swapped around for this adaptation.

Just like any film, thought arguably more important in a musical, a story is nothing if the people bringing it to life aren’t giving it their all. Thankfully, there’s not a single weak link to be seen in this sprawling and lively cast. Anthony Ramos (“Hamilton (2020),” “She’s Gotta Have It (2017)”) is, without a doubt, an Oscar frontrunner as Usnavi, the film’s protagonist. His earnestness and warm heart are palpable in every single scene and lend everything a wonderful energy and sense of love.

If Ramos is making a strong case for a Lead Actor Oscar, then Corey Hawkins (“Straight Outta Compton,” “24: Legacy”) and Gregory Diaz IV (“Vampires vs. the Bronx”) are making equally strong cases for Supporting Actor noms. Hawkins plays Benny, a taxicab dispatcher, and Diaz plays Usnavi’s cousin Sonny. Benny is an excitable guy with a head full of ideas, and Sonny is a life of the party energetic teenager almost anyone can relate to. Its hard to say anything more descriptive than just that they’re excellent. The same goes for the rest of the cast: Leslie Grace, in her film debut, Melissa Barrera (“Siempre Tuya Acapulco,” “Vida”), Daphne Rubin-Vega (“Smash,” “Katy Keene”), Jimmy Smits (“NYPD Blue,” “The West Wing”), and, continuing the trend started by films like “The Farewell” and “Minari,” Olga Merediz, reprising her Broadway role as Abuela Claudia, stealing hearts as this year’s most lovable and wholesome film grandmother.

The music is excellent, the choreography is stellar, and the film is even mostly well-paced given its lengthy runtime. If there’s any complaints to be made, its that the romantic subplot involving Benny and Grace’s Nina isn’t as interesting as the rest of the film, but that hardly means its boring or poorly done.

“In The Heights” is a virtually complete success, with stellar performances and an entire cast and creative crew uniformly committed to bringing this modern classic of a musical to the silver screen. It might be too long for some, and it, unfortunately, won’t make non-musical fans reconsider their lives, but what has been presented is easily the best film musical, adaptation or otherwise, in years. 5/5

Cruella - Review

 

It’s always appreciated when a film knows exactly what it is. Yes, not every film is going to win awards or be remembered for years to come, but there’s a difference between a film that doesn’t achieve greatness and one that knows not to try. This might seem like a negative and that the people behind a film like that would be lazy, but “Cruella” is a perfect example of how that can end up making a film better.

Let’s get the most obvious thing out of the way first: the cast is absolutely stellar. Emma Stone (“La La Land,” “Zombieland”) is electric and completely devours the scenery as she smirks and connives her way across the streets of London as Estella/Cruella. It’s the textbook definition of watching an actor have fun with a role, and she not only manages to deliver a legitimately good performance, but delivers some lines and moments that, in lesser hands, would have completely fallen flat.

Emma Thompson (“Nanny McPhee,” “Saving Mr. Banks”) does just as much delightful overacting as Stone and the sequences where the two are opposite are the highlight of the film. Its just such a wonderful treat watching two fabulous actors both trying to out evil the other. If looks could kill, their scenes together would be graveyards and its just a delicious delight.

Really, everyone in the cast does a pretty great job with what they’re handed. Joel Fry (“Game of Thrones,” “Yesterday”) and Paul Walter Hauser (“Richard Jewel,” “BlacKkKlansman”) play Jasper and Horace, respectively, and the pair are scene stealers and the heart of the entire film. The fact that they result in the film about the puppy murdering villainess having a big beating heart is something that we’ll get to in a bit but suffice it to say that their and Stone’s talents make it easy to root for these underdog antagonists.

The supporting cast, as well, do their jobs well. Kirby Howell-Baptiste (“Why Women Kill,” “Infinity Train”) provides a sweet only friend to Cruella in the form of Anita Darling. Kayvan Novak (“What We Do in the Shadows”) is amusing, if all to brief, as bumbling lawyer turned songwriter Roger Radcliffe. John McCrea (“Giri/Haji,” “Dracula (2020)”) is another amusing and underutilized character as Cruella’s friend and lead designer Artie. Mark Strong (“Kingsman: The Secret Service,” “Shazam!”) is also here as the valet and right-hand man of Thompson’s Baroness. Strong is definitely the film’s oddest casting choice. He does a fine job, but he nevertheless stands apart whenever he’s on screen.

It’s clear that director Craig Gillespie (“Lars and the Real Girl,” “I, Tonya”) has tried to put as much of the antagonistic spitfire from his last project “I, Tonya” into this film, and while he mostly succeeds, this is still a Disney live-action property. There’s a certain kind of anarchic energy that the film maintains virtually effortlessly in its visual design. Its shockingly well shot, with cinematographer Nicolas Karakatsanis (“The Loft,” “I, Tonya”) delivering some truly wonderful sequences throughout the film’s runtime.

Really, the film has one big flaw and that’s the story at its center. Let’s make one thing very clear: a film’s script and its story are two very different things. This is an important distinction, because while the moment-to-moment dialogue and scenes can be, and frequently are, positively electric with joyous chaos and gleefully wicked dialogue, the overall story it’s all crammed into is decidedly less so. There’s a third act twists that feels rather out of place and brings the villain origin plot to a screeching halt as the writers seem determined to justify Cruella’s antagonistic deeds.

It’s as if these two major components (the script and the story) are working against each other, and its telling that none of the film’s three story writers, Aline Brosh McKenna (“The Devil Wears Prada,” “Crazy Ex-Girlfriend”), Kelly Marcel (“Saving Mr. Banks,” “Fifty Shades of Grey”), and Steve Zissis (“Togetherness”) wrote the script, which was instead written by Dana Fox (“Couples Retreat,” “How to Be Single”) and Tony McNamara (“The Favourite,” “The Great”).

However, despite the conflicting energy between the script, actors, director, pretty much everyone involved and the story, “Cruella” still maintains a delightfully high-strung amount of B-Movie energy throughout its entire runtime. Is all of it good? Not really, but it succeeds in taking big swings far more than it misses and the film as a result is never ever boring. It’s as if Gillespie and his actors looked at a plot that tried to “humanize” Cruella and decided to execute it in the least nice way possible.

This is a B-Movie with a budget, wonderfully cast and performed, directed with energy, and serving as a vehicle for some wonderful acidic confrontations and lines of dialogue. The film succeeds in spite of a sanitized overarching plot and manages to be all B-Movie thrills without the guilt. 4/5

The Mitchells vs. The Machines - Review

It’s hard to think of another film studio who’s so quickly turned from being the laughingstock to a dream team. While Sony Pictures Animation always had some creative spirit, evidenced by films like “Surf’s Up” and “Cloudy with a Chance of Meatballs,” it wasn’t until Chris Lord and Phil Miller came along that the world really started to pay attention. Now, blending the overexaggerated cartoony nature of “Meatball” and “Hotel Transylvania” with the heart and art style of “Into the Spider-Verse” Lord and Miller have brought us the epic tale of “The Mitchells vs. The Machines.”

While on the surface a fairly routine tale of a family bonding road trip interrupted by a technological uprising, it’s in the details where the film truly shines. The way the story is communicated feels wholly unique, thanks to the two different art styles at play. There’s the most obvious one; the film’s bright colors and thick grease pencil lines makes everything pop with energy and leads every paused moment to look like a work of pure hand drawn art. It’s a thrilling unique look and one that Sony will hopefully continue to build upon outside of the world of animated Spider-Man.

Secondly is the film’s heavy use of filters, 2D drawing, sketches, and freeze frame humor that work on multiple levels. Director/co-writer Mike Rianda (“Gravity Falls”) uses them as a way to capture the odd humor of these characters and their adventure but also a way to get to know Katie Mitchell, voiced by Abbi Jacobson (“Broad City,” “Disenchantment”). With her dream to be a filmmaker, every moment viewed through her eyes has some sort of effect applied to it to truly show the world through her eyes. It’s a frankly genius way to use art and stylistic decisions to communicate something to the audience, much like the animation of “Spider-Verse”, and it’s a great addition.

Speaking of Jacobson, she leads a truly hilarious cast that brings wonderful comedic timing and emotional depth to their performances. Rounding out the cast is Danny McBride (“Eastbound and Down,” “Pineapple Express”) as her father Rick, putting more emotion into this role than possibly any of his prior, Maya Rudolph (“Bridesmaids,” “Big Mouth”) as her mother Linda, an overzealous oddball of heart and emotion, and Mike Rianda as her brother Aaron, a Dino obsessed pre-teen who might be the film’s single best comedic tool. Eric Andre (“The Eric Andre Show,” “Man Seeking Woman”) is also here doing a great tech billionaire parody, Olivia Colman (“The Favourite,” “Fleabag”) is frankly kind of chilling as the evil AI PAL, and Beck Bennett (“Saturday Night Live,” “Ducktales (2017)”) and Fred Armisen (“Saturday Night Live,” “Documentary Now”) voice a pair of defective robots who are absolute scene stealers for virtually the entire film.

Technology is a huge theme here. It’s not just a stand-in apocalyptic problem the family needs to work together to overcome. Like many other family films, the themes of screen time, mobile phones, and connecting with family are hugely at play here, yet the film does something daringly obvious: it doesn’t pick a side. It avoids siding with the technophobic parents or the tech obsessed kids and demonizing the other. This leads to a tale of emotion, where people are forced to explain their feelings and it’s a truly heartwarming tale because of it. It doesn’t take the easy route to its story, requiring more creative effort in how it’s approached, and it does wonders.

This is, without a doubt, a film with an identity and a personality. This isn’t just evident from the visual aspects, but also in how openly cheesy and silly it all is. While not as overly cartoony as previous Lord and Miller productions like “Meatballs” or “The LEGO Movie”, Rianda and co-writer Jeff Rowe (“Disenchantment,” “Gravity Falls”) have created a film that wears its heart firmly and proudly on its sleeve. There’s a lot of emotional family talk, karaoke, home movies, and celebration of identity going on. It might rob the film of the “seriousness” of other modern animation projects from studios like Pixar, but it also gives everything a layer of authenticity. You really, genuinely, care and believe that this group of four weirdos and their possibly mutated dog are a family.

This big beating heart, wonderful sense of emotion, fantastic visuals that work on multiple levels, and absolutely stellar voice cast, all wrapped up in an infectiously great musical score from Marks Motherbaugh (“The LEGO Movie,” “Thor Ragnarok”), help prop up a plot that’s technically kind of routine (this is the second Sony Pictures Animation film from Lord and Miller that features a kill code). Yet, that’s not an issue when you’re watching an adventure so brilliantly realized and blissfully silly. This might very well be the first must-see movie of 2021. 5/5

Mortal Kombat (2021) - Review

 

Despite some small victories with movies like “Detective Pikachu” and “Sonic the Hedgehog,” Hollywood is still chasing the green light of the good video game film adaptation. Sure, there have been plenty of them, but only a handful have risen above the level of mediocrity and even those could be argued for or against.

First time director Simon McQuoid’s “Mortal Kombat (2021)” is yet another body to add to that pile. If all you’re looking for is flashy fights and quippy one-liners, then you might be satisfied, but there’s hardly anything else going on in the film worth paying attention to.

Cole Young, played by Lewis Tan (“Into the Badlands,” “Wu Assassins”) is recruited by Sonya Blade, played by Jessica McNamee (“CHiPS (2017,” “Battle of the Sexes”), and Jax, played by Mehcad Brooks (“Supergirl,” “Desperate Housewives”), to team up with Lord Raiden, played by Tadanobu Asano (“Electric Dragon 80.000 V,” “Midway (2019)”), Liu Kang, played by Ludi Lin (“Power Rangers (2017),” “Kung Fu”), and Kung Lao, played by Max Huang (“Dragon Blade”), to face off against the evil Shang Tsung, played by Chin Han (“Marco Polo,” “Skyscraper (2018)”), and his fighters in a deadly competition known as Mortal Kombat over the fate of two worlds: Earthrealm and Outerworld.

Screenwriter Dave Callaham (“Wonder Woman 1984,” “Zombieland: Double Tap”) and first time writer Greg Russo have clearly done the best they possibly could when being handed an adaptation like this. Mortal Kombat as a franchise has both incredibly low expectations; give us some fights and drama, and yet the more recent games have incredibly extensive stories involving time travel, resurrections, and decades long peace treaties.

So, its understandable then that Callaham and Russo would try to take things down to a simpler level for both fans and newcomers. However, the way they do that is by introducing Cole Young, an entirely new character to the series. Young stands out like a sore thumb, nothing to do with Tan’s performance, and he takes himself way too seriously compared to the other characters.

In a world populated with a lightning god, a potty mouthed Aussie with a laser eye, and a mystical warrior with a saw blade hat, Cole being just a guy who can fight well feels far too vanilla for everything else going on. He just isn’t as interesting as the rest of the characters. Even if Sonya or Kano or Jax are too over the top for you, they at least have clear personalities, whereas Young’s defining trait is being the son of a Mortal Kombat mainstay and also just being the main character.

Tan’s performance is fine, which can also be said for just about everyone else in the movie. Sure, some like Josh Lawson (“Bombshell,” “House of Lies”) as the potty mouthed Aussie Kano, are memorable, but that’s mostly because they’re louder and brasher than everyone else. Most of the memorable cast members are so purely because they’re representing legendary characters; Lin and Huang have a great brotherly dynamic and Brooks and McNamee have chemistry when they actually get to share the screen, but the two are apart for a majority of the film despite clearly being good friends who work well together.

Really, the film’s biggest issues could be easily smoothed over if focus was shifted from Cole to Sonya. She’s an actual character from the series, she has a much more defined motivation than just “protect my family from unknown threat”, she has some charisma and energy, and she goes through the most semblance of an arc of anyone in the entire movie.

But, that’s not what McQuoid delivered. What is good, undeniably so, is the fight scenes. The movie is pretty shameless at how it sets it all up, but its in a way that doesn’t detract from the film. This is a movie where a guy’s main weapon is a saw blade hat, after all. These moments are choreographed well, and while not as smooth as the fights from films like “John Wick”, they aren’t over edited to hell and back like “Transformers” or “Suicide Squad (2016).”

These fights are clearly the reason to see the film, and everything else comes second. They happen in a gloriously gory fashion, and even the ones that don’t end in death and dismemberment still have the benefit of being choreographed well and are undeniably fun to watch. Its the sort of film that puts up just enough basic storytelling competence to make you sit through the parts in between fights to get to the rest of the fights. Its easy to gloss over how boring Cole is as a character when you’re watching him slice a combatant apart to gleefully bloody abandon.

Like the fights, the film also succeeds on the visual front. Not just in terms of CGI elements either. Each character bridges the gap between being faithful to their game counterpart and being more “realistic.” Sonya Blade is still a military vet, but she wears a bit more clothes now than in the games, Kung Lao’s saw blade hat is unmistakable, and Liu Kang’s bright red bandanna is instantly recognizable. The sets and production design is also top notch, providing some great locations for the fights that pay tribute to their game counterparts.

“Mortal Kombat (2021)” has it where it counts. Its fun to watch these fights take place in a universe where a simple punch to the jaw can result in someone spitting up a mouthful of blood. Its ridiculous but it takes itself just seriously enough to not be a complete eye rolling affair. It would be nice if the writer’s had trusted in these characters who, at least, have preexisting personalities instead of inventing someone who has a bad case of “main character syndrome.” But its not a terrible film either, a perfectly mediocre, decently acted, and violent affair that might be worth half paying attention to if you’re a fan. 2.5/5

Shiva Baby - Review

First Darron Aronofsky, then the Safdie Brothers, and now Emma Seligman, there’s something about Jewish directors and creating the most stressful films of the last decade. However, whereas Aronofsky trades in extravagant psychological horrors and the Safdies explore larger than life characters ripe for downfall, Seligman has set her sights on a far more relatable place: an awkward family gathering.

Seligman frames the events of “Shiva Baby” with a tight and claustrophobic perspective, which heightens the inherent anxiety of the events dramatically. For anyone who’s graduated from college within the last two decades, the discussions of “What are you doing with your life?” and “You’re taking classes on that?” will seem horrifyingly familiar. It’s the quiet anxiety of dealing with so many family members with such particular opinions that Seligman captures so perfectly.

However, it would be nothing without Rachel Sennott (“High Maintenance,” “Call Your Mother”) as Danielle. She’s utterly intoxicating and quickly likable. You so badly want her to succeed, to make the right decisions, and yet she and the film pump even more anxiety into watch her stumble. We don’t know how far she’ll fall over the course of just one day, and its Sennott’s fantastic performance that keeps you riveted from start to finish.

Molly Gordon (“Booksmart,” “Animal Kingdom”) and Polly Draper (“Thirtysomething,” “The Big C”) are also excellent. Gordon plays Maya, Danielle’s longtime best friend. Not only does Gordon milk the extensive history between Maya and Danielle throughout the short runtime, but she, like Danielle, provides a frustrating portrait of a drifting 20-something college student. You so badly want her to succeed and help Danielle, and yet she can only do so much.

The same goes for Draper as Danielle’s mother, Debbie. This is not just another “oblivious mother, if only she knew better” type rolls. Debbie is clearly far more in-tune with her daughter than Danielle would like to admit, and the repertoire between the two of them is the heart and soul of the movie.

The dialogue goes off at a rapid-fire pace, and the entire film drips with quotable lines and moments of pure silent dread. You’d be hard pressed to find a film that better captures the feeling of a family gathering, Jewish or not. From the quiet comments that you can’t tell if you’re meant to hear to the claustrophobic packed like sardines nature of everything to the awkward across the room glances, the entire film feels so painfully real, as if we’re plucking 77 minutes directly out of the middle of Danielle’s life.

Much has been made of the horror movie-esque score from Ariel Marx (“The Tale,” “To Dust”), and while it is good, there are moments where it feels like a bit much. Its tempting to critique these moments, which drown out all other sounds and dialogue, as overpowering. Yet, as these few moments almost make you cover your ears as you watch the film, the goal has been achieved and the anxiety has been fully passed on to the viewing world.

If there are any complaints to make about Seligman’s awkwardly hilarious and tense directorial debut, one could make note of the lack of overarching “plot.” Its yet another indie movie that follows a character and less a specific arc structure or character development spreadsheet. Yet something like this is less a complaint and more a preface as to what kind of film this is.

Because at the end of the day “Shiva Baby” is tense, awkward, and teeth grindingly funny with a standout central performance and a true sense of realism most veteran filmmakers cannot achieve. With a full slate of projects lined up in the future, Seligman has proven herself with one 77-minute directorial debut that she’s got a bright future ahead of her. 4.5/5

Godzilla vs. Kong - Review

Adam Wingard (“You’re Next,” “The Guest”) might just be the smartest person to ever work on Warner Bros.’ MonsterVerse. This cinematic universe of films all based around Godzilla and his Kaiju friends has had its ups and downs ever since it tentatively started with Gareth Edwards’s 2014 “Godzilla.” While the films haven’t been awful per se, they’ve always left audiences wanting a bit more. “Godzilla (2014)” could’ve used more Godzilla, “Kong Skull Island” felt a bit too serious (if cheesily so), and even to its defenders, “Godzilla King of the Monsters” had far too much human subplots for a movie built on Kaiju chaos.

The reason that Wingard, the director of “Godzilla vs. Kong” seems to be the smartest person to work on this series yet, is that he understands this. “GvK” feels like a final draft of a gloriously action-packed thesis statement on Kaiju films. The previous ones got certain things right, and this one combines it all into one thrilling package that might just be the best one yet.

First things first: yes, this is a movie where the prime attraction is seeing a monkey the size of the Sears tower fight an equally large radioactive laser spewing lizard. If you’re going in expecting anything more, then you’re likely an idiot. That doesn’t mean it can’t provide more than your average smash and grab blockbuster, look at “Fury Road” or “John Wick”, but these are the exceptions, not the rule.

When Kong and Godzilla are slugging it out, it’s a glorious showcase of visual effects and cinematography. The action is framed in some excellent ways, whether shooting Kong and Godzilla like their average sized actors or peering up at them from the perspective of one of the many humans caught in their fight. Cinematographer Ben Seresin (“World War Z,” “The Mummy (2017)”), utilizes scope and scale excellently here, as is color. While there doesn’t necessarily seem to be a reason for it, Wingard throws as much neon around as humanly possible, allowing the film to escape the rather drab looks of the previous MonsterVerse films. Its hard to be bored when everything is lit up in bright greens, pinks, and blues.

These phenomenal fights are also underscored, no pun intended, by a thrilling musical score courtesy of Tom Holkenborg (“Mad Max: Fury Road,” “Alita: Battle Angel”). With every note the strings sing blended with thumping electronic beats, its as if he’s found a way to turn the impacts of fists and feet into a melodic rhythm.

That’s just speaking on the fights though, and while Wingard clearly knows that’s what people came to see, this still has to be a film with a plot, and that’s where the 5 different writers come in; story writers Terry Rossio (“Aladdin (1992),” “Shrek”), Michael Dougherty (“Godzilla: King of the Monsters,” “Krampus”), and Zach Shields (“Godzilla: King of the Monsters,” “Krampus”), and screenwriters Max Borenstein (“Godzilla: King of the Monsters,” “The Terror: Infamy”) and Eric Pearson (“Agent Carter,” “Thor Ragnarok”).

As much as it has been improved from the abysmal characterizations in “King of the Monsters”, the humans and their plots here haven’t been improved by that much. Effectively, there are two “teams” that the film swaps between, one following Kong and one following Godzilla. This allows for the information about each Kaiju to be relayed in a way that avoids infodumping too much, and its even kind of thrilling as these two groups never truly cross paths. However, the Kong side has far more interesting things to work with, as well as just better performances from Alexander Skarsgård (“Big Little Lies,” “Battleship”), Rebecca Hall (“Vicky Cristina Barcelona,” “Christine (2016)”), and newcomer Kaylee Hottle. Skarsgård hams it up with just how earnest his Dr. Lind is, landing somewhere around a professor with some rugged Han Solo-like charms. Hall’s Dr. Andrews is more no-nonsense, and her bond with Hottle’s Jia is the lifeblood of the film. There’s a real kind of care that establishes an emotional connection that’s easy to root for. Likewise, Hottle is pulling some pretty great work for her first role. She and Kong have a friendship and connection that’s easy to believe, and she’s yet another example of Hollywood having a deaf character who isn’t some sort of burden and is instead the film’s emotional lifeblood.

Unfortunately, while far more intriguing with its easter eggs and winks at general Kaiju history, the Godzilla team is far less interesting compared to Kong’s. Millie Bobby Brown (“Stranger Things,” “Enola Holmes”) is barely passable, mainly just due to how annoyingly her character is written. Julian Dennison (“Hunt for the Wilderpeople,” “Deadpool 2”) isn’t bad so much as he’s just painfully forgettable, with the only bright spot being Brian Tyree Henry (“Atlanta,” “Widows”) chewing every piece of the digital scenery he can. He clearly understands what kind of film this is and abandons all subtly to go for the gold in overacting. He’s plain and simple the best part of Godzilla’s plot.

Despite making strides towards a brighter future for the MonsterVerse, “Godzilla vs. Kong” is by no means a perfect film. Yet, it’s as close as this new MonsterVerse has gotten, and thanks to Wingard direction, the cinematography, music, action, and some of the acting, it might just be the best of this new series. It eschews many of the previous films more glaring flaws (not enough Godzilla, the boring middle of “Skull Island,” the length and too many humans of “King of the Monsters”) and brings it all in under 2 hours. Its leaner and meaner, and while it may be junk food, its bright, colorful, and the kind of junk food that takes your breath away. 4/5

Nobody - Review

 

From “Mr. Show” to “Better Call Saul,” Bob Odenkirk has never shied away from a challenge. The man established himself in the 90’s as one of the shining stars of absurdist comedy and yet somehow managed to successfully transition into character dramas without breaking a sweat. Now, you’re just as likely to see him in a budget indie comedy as you are in a big Oscar drama. However, his boldest career move has just been made, turning him into a bonafide action star.

Odenkirk stars as Hutch, a man with a dark past that gets unearthed as people come after him and his family. The plot is nothing special and has a lot more in common with the paint-by-numbers approach of the yearly Liam Neeson revenge film than the stylized world of John Wick. Odenkirk does a fabulous job with the limited material he’s given though, and it’s a kind of gradual transformation that you believe.

Like the “Wick” films, the real meat of the world comes in the small details. Hutch’s father, his record player, his basement, his secret two-way radio, all these are set-dressings that smartly create a kind of secret world without directly explaining everything to the audience.

These comparisons to “John Wick” are all apt because “Nobody” shares the same writer, Derek Kolstad (“John Wick,” “The Falcon and the Winter Soldier”), and producer, David Leitch (“Atomic Blonde,” “Deadpool 2”), as the Keanu Reeves blockbusters. This means that the action is absolutely top notch, building from a relatively small-scale start in a bus to an extravaganza of explosions, bullets, and makeshift death traps.

Its truly a spectacle to behold, showing off the skills of director Illya Naishuller (“Hardcore Henry”) and made even greater by Odenkirk’s commitment to it all. During numerous scenes, its obvious that the star is straining himself and really giving his all. How much is him and how much is stunt doubles is unknown, but Odenkirk clearly commits 100% of the time.

His performance is also what helps the film feel largely guilt free. As opposed to recent “rampage” movies like the “Death Wish” remake and “Honest Thief,” because Hutch, and more importantly the writer, knows that he isn’t a good person, it means that the violence takes on a more carefree tone. Almost the entire movie exists with its tongue planted firmly in its cheek, from the various deathtraps Hutch assembles, to the absurdity of his monologues.

If there’s anything to fault the film for, it’s its general one note nature. That’s not to say its not an enjoyable piece, it’s a fun blast of action and popcorn thrills propped up with a legitimately great leading performance. Yet, when compared to films like the “Wick” series, its more realistic nature doesn’t hold a candle to the intrigue and mythology of Reeves’s exploits. Is that bad? No, not at all. But it just means it doesn’t grip your brain with both action and intrigue, just action.

Overall, this is an extremely solid piece of genre thrills with an extremely compelling central character and performance. Those looking for a night of outlandish action and thrills should look no further than this “Nobody.” 4/5

Zack Snyder's Justice League - Review

 

Typically, when someone sees the moniker “Director’s Cut” on a film, it’s a label stating this is the director’s true vision. Maybe in the theatrical version some scenes were cut or elements were changed, but rarely do these fundamentally alter the film. There are some exceptions: “Blade Runner: The Final Cut,” the definitive version from Ridley Scott released 25 years after the original theatrical run, and “Superman II: The Richard Donner Cut,” original director Richard Donner’s version of the film he was replaced on mid-way through production, also released 25 years after the original.

Yet both of these films still resemble their original theatrical counterparts in some way, Donner’s just less so. There really hasn’t been a “Director’s Cut” like “Zack Snyder’s Justice League,” if you can really call this film just a “Director’s Cut.” Plain and simple, even if he hadn’t left the project in 2017, there’s no way this sprawling 4-hour-long 4:3 superhero opus would be what Warner Bros. released in theatres 4 years ago. Yet somehow here it is, warts and all, plopped down on HBO Max for the public to ogle over.

Its impossible to judge this film without first understanding why its such a big deal. For those who aren’t aware, Zack Snyder, the director of “Man of Steel” and “Batman vs. Superman,” among other action heavy films, was slated to direct “Justice League” and was midway through filming until his daughter, Autumn, tragically took her own life in May of 2017. Snyder announced he would be leaving the project to spend time with his family and Warner Bros., instead of putting the project on hold, hired Joss Whedon (“The Avengers,” “Buffy the Vampire Slayer”) to finish the film in Snyder’s absence.

However, he did more than just that; at Warner’s behest, Whedon rewrote much of the film to be lighter in tone, reshot much of what Snyder had already shot, and made sure the film was under a 2-hour runtime. All of these were supposed to address complaints many had with recent DC films; length, dark tone, etc., and technically they did. While it technically received the highest RottenTomatoes score than the last few DC films, barring “Wonder Woman (2017),” reactions were far more divisive than Snyder’s previous films. Much was made of the clashing tones between what remained of Snyder’s dark tone and Whedon’s new lighter, quippy work.

As years went on, many were curious what Snyder’s original version would’ve looked like. While it wasn’t ever in a finished state, with effects, sound, and editing needing to be completed, the desire to see Snyder’s version persisted until Warner Bros. announced in 2020 that they would devote $70 million to let Snyder finish his version of the film, to debut on HBO Max. And with that out of the way, here’s the review.

Suffice to say, I’m not a fan of Snyder’s work. I think “300” is a glorified tech demo for his visual style, I find “Man of Steel” to be aggressively mediocre, “Batman vs. Superman” is my “get drunk and make fun of a film” movie of choice, and “Sucker Punch” might very well be one of the worst films I’ve ever seen. Despite this, I truly love “Watchmen,” specifically the 215-minute Ultimate Cut version. I think it’s a work of pure commitment and love of a source material. Sure, its much louder and more obvious about what it wants to say than the comic, but it goes for broke with no compromises.

That sentiment is largely how I feel about “Zack Snyder’s Justice League,” a towering 4-hour long epic of a film. Snyder truly goes for the throat in nearly every single aspect of the film, from the aspect ratio so “artsy” it seems like a joke to the segmented nature of the film itself. Truly there is nothing else out there like this film, save for possibly the Donner Cut, and it shows in every aspect.

Plot-wise, the film still follows the basic outline of the 2017 version, albeit far more fleshed out. Following the death of Superman, three Mother Boxes are awoken on Earth. These boxes have the power to, when joined, wipe out and reshape a planet to the joiner’s desires, and Steppenwolf has come to Earth to find them for Darkseid. Batman and Wonder Woman realize this and assemble a team to hopefully stop Steppenwolf before Darkseid arrives.

While this overall plot is the same, there are some key differences. First of all, Cyborg and Flash’s plots are far more fleshed out than in the 2017 version. Cyborg there seemed like a sort of MacGuffin man, designed to access the Mother Boxes and that’s it, whilst Flash was the team’s comic relief. Here the pair are at the heart of the film; Flash, dealing with his father’s incarceration, is in awe of the massively important people suddenly working with him, and Cyborg is dealing with his anger at his father for saving his life by turning him into a part man part machine. Both still serve the same overall purpose, but they have larger parts to the film and actual arcs that are easy to get invested in.

Batman and Aquaman don’t arcs that are nearly as fleshed out, but they’re still there. Batman’s comes more in the second half of the film and deals with his faith in others and in humanity, something initially crippled by the events of “Batman v. Superman” and Aquaman has a rather brief arc about where his allegiances lay, something that would be explored much more in his own 2018 film. Wonder Woman meanwhile doesn’t have much of an arc, if any, merely serving as moral and physical support to the rest of the ensemble.

The performances from the entire cast are all great, showcasing fabulous casting choices for each role. Ben Affleck’s (“Argo,” “Good Will Hunting”) Bruce Wayne is an older and more grizzled take on the billionaire, clearly aged from years of crime fighting and willing to do more damage than a younger Dark Knight would, and less concerned with being a playboy. Jason Momoa (“Game of Thrones,” “See”) might be less bro-y than in his own film, but he’s still able to imbue a character once thought to be a laughing stock with a badass swagger and strength that only he seems to be able to provide. Gal Gadot (“Wonder Woman (2017),” “Ralph Breaks the Internet”), while clearly being the weakest actor of the main cast, still deliver a good performance, embodying the strength and heart that makes Diana such a beloved character. When he does appear, Henry Cavill’s (“Mission Impossible: Fallout,” “The Man from U.N.C.L.E.”) Superman is also an absolute highlight, with the same country boy smile and sense of righteousness that allowed him to save “Man of Steel” from the perils of forgetfulness.

If anyone’s performances deserve outright praise, its Ray Fisher (“True Detective”) and Ezra Miller (“The Perks of Being a Wallflower,” “Fantastic Beasts and Where to Find Them”). Fisher’s Cyborg is a tortured soul with a lot to deal with and a conflicted sense of self. Fisher’s performance communicates this greatly, and it allows the film to truly serve as a showpiece for the character slowly coming out of his own shadow and realizing who he is. Miller, meanwhile, turns what could be just a comedic role into a delightful one. His Flash is still the youngest and most immature of the group, but he knows when and how to use his skills to help the group effectively. His youth and optimism are balanced against the jaded nature of Batman and the rest of the group to create an effective portrayal of someone who knows the odds are against them but still tried their hardest despite this. Also deserving praise is Ciarán Hinds (“Tinker Tailor Solider Spy,” “First Man”) who voices Stepphenwolf with a deep growl and a murderous intent. Yet, despite the roughness of his voice, Snyder’s vision for the character and Hinds performance create a villain who, if not empathetic, is one that is always enjoyable to see on screen, either for the performance of vastly improved visual design.

Thankfully, that’s where Snyder’s version vastly improves upon the 2017. Whereas the crunched production of the original forced much of the visuals to be rushed, Snyder’s version has quite excellent effects. Whether it’s the elaborate sets for sequences like the Kryptonian ship of Steppenwolf’s lair, or the improved visuals for Cyborg and Steppenwolf. Overall, the film just looks far more pleasing, with Snyder’s color-correction creating a dark world that doesn’t feel nearly as foreboding as his previous efforts.

Despite its 4-hour runtime, the film also feels quite brisk. Maybe it’s because the tone feels far more hopeful than Snyder’s pervious works or even the 2017 version, or maybe its Snyder’s desire to truly have his heroes feel like gods among men. Batman’s arc of trusting in others and becoming a more hopeful person lends the entire film an air of lightness. It simply doesn’t feel nearly as overly foreboding as it could have.

Tom Holkenborg (“Mad Max Fury Road,” “Deadpool”) returns to compose a brand-new score after he was let go from the 2017 version in favor of Danny Elfman and his score has a far more thumping and electronic base to it. Some moments heavily reuse past scores, like Hans Zimmer’s now ubiquitous “What Are You Going to Do When You Are Not Saving the World?” theme, but Holkenborg also creates a score all his own that perfectly underscores Snyder’s dramatic moments and the thunderously action-packed ones.

Despite the vast improvements over the 2017 version and Snyder’s own previous works, this is still by no means a perfect film. The climactic fight is still, no matter whether you watch it in the same ratio as “Citizen Kane” or “Hobbs and Shaw,” still a bunch of CGI heroes punching mindless baddies. This is also where the film begins to mirror the 2017 version quite a bit, and it becomes less enjoyable as a result. There are differences absolutely, but they pale in comparison to adding in entirely new arcs and scenes.

Chris Terrio’s (“Argo,” “Star Wars: The Rise of Skywalker”) script is also, for the most part, fine. He understands Snyder’s love of these characters and the desire to place them on their godly pedestals but not every line lands, and it becomes apparent that, in a 4-hour movie, almost every line gets used even when they weren’t exactly golden to begin with. And nothing, nothing, can prepare you for the true awfulness that is this film’s “Knightmare” sequence. Being a dream doesn’t excuse it being terrible.

“Zack Snyder’s Justice League” is absolutely one man’s vision, warts and all, and that’s something to be celebrated. So rarely does a director get to turn in their definitive version of a work when making something with a property as lucrative as this. His vision might not be golden, but its certainly a spectacle to behold. It’s a definite improvement over the 2017 version, because Snyder knows why people love these characters like Whedon knew with the Avengers.

People flock to Marvel films because they make Captain America or Thor feel just like us, despite their abilities and stories. Superman, Batman, Aquaman, they aren’t like that. These are people put on pedestals, these are gods amongst men. Snyder understands this and knows how to portray them in a way deserving of their status.

It’s impossible to separate this film from its director or the history behind it. Snyder left the project to mourn his daughter and returned to create a film about hope and faith, with two father-child relationships at its very core. When one character says “Dad, whatever happens I want you to know, your kid was one of them, Dad. One of the best of the best” its hard not to see a father trying to hold on to what’s left of his daughter. And that, at the end of the day, is what makes Snyder’s League work despite all its flaws. Like the average people these heroes protect, it may stumble, and it may fall, but it’s got the big beating heart right where it counts. 3.5/5

Raya and the Last Dragon - Review

 

Let’s be honest, even for those who are huge fans of Disney, their animated outputs haven’t exactly been amazing as of late. “Frozen 2” was for many a let-down, even as it attempted to do some more interesting things within the formula, and “Ralph Breaks the Internet” was much of the same, a film that tried to do interesting things bogged down by a formula. Many would argue the last time Disney themselves made a truly great animated film was 5 years ago with either “Moana” or “Zootopia.”

Well, the wait is over because “Raya and the Last Dragon” is here. Despite facing some massive behind the scenes changes just last year (the directors changed, as did the lead voice actress), “Raya” comes out far better than one might expect given that kind of behind-the-scenes turmoil. “Justice League” this is not, and it represents the biggest strides Disney has yet made to perfect their “princess” movie formula in a modern age.

Set in the land of Kumandra, shaped like a dragon, the film follows Raya as she seeks out the pieces of a Dragon Orb that could potentially help restore peace to the land. She’s joined by Sisu, a dragon, and a ragtag group of various other fighters in an attempt to succeed in their mission.

Without a doubt, the clear highlight of the film is Kelly Marie Tran (“Star Wars: The Last Jedi,” “Sorry for your Loss”) as Raya. It’s hard to believe she wasn’t the first choice for the role, as she brings a powerful emotional energy to the character. She’s fierce and also a little bit silly and over-protective. It’s the kind of performance where its clear Tran has put the effort in to think about how the film’s events and Raya’s life would have affected her and it’s a better performance for it.

Likewise, Awkwafina (“The Farewell,” “Crazy Rich Asians”) is also great as the dragon Sisu. Given that a role like this could have easily turned into the “comedian” sidekick role that Disney loves to shove into their movies, there’s a somberness to her performance once more is learned about her backstory. Awkwafina really brings a kind of dramatic touch to the character that makes it easy to empathize and really love Sisu.

The supporting cast all fill their roles well; Izaac Wang (“Good Boys”), Daniel Dae Kim (:Ost,” “Hawaii Five-0”), Benedict Wong (“Doctor Strange,” “Marco Polo”), and Sandra Oh (“Grey’s Anatomy,” “Killing Eve”) all perform their roles well; however the standout of this supporting cast is absolutely Gemma Chan (“Crazy Rich Asians,” “Humans”) as Namaari, Raya’s nemesis from the Fang lands. The pair have established history within the film, and their two differing perspectives make it an extremely engaging rivalry to watch. Namaari also has arguably more of an arc than Raya, and Chan’s performance showcases a warrior who is terrified to step out of line but equally scared of what not stepping out could mean. It’s thrilling stuff.

One of the big reasons these characters come across as so engaging, besides the voice work, is because the script from Qui Nguyen (“Dispatches from Elsewhere,” “Peg + Cat”) and Adele Lim (“Crazy Rich Asians,” “Digimon: Digital Monsters”) puts in the work to build this world and their backstories so authentically. While there are still plenty of jokes and lighthearted moments, “Raya” is the closest Disney has gotten in a long time to creating a drama. There are plenty of dark and somber moments that will surprise people. This isn’t a through-and-through comedy like “Wreck-It Ralph” or “Zootopia,” and it’s better for it.

“Raya” also stands out musically, with James Newton-Howard (“Treasure Planet,” “The Dark Knight”) returning to work with Disney for the first time in almost two decades. His score is incredible, blending various Southeast Asian instruments with an electronic baseline that creates a vibrant and pulse-pounding score. This mixes wonderfully with what truly is one of the most gorgeous animated world’s Disney has ever produced.

Clearly the restrictions of working from home hasn’t harmed the animator’s skills in any way, because beyond the textual worldbuilding, the world of Kumandra crackles with life and personality. Each of the various lands; Fang, Spine, Heart, Talon, and Tail, are all distinctly different and make up a gorgeous world full of energy. Disney has created one of its most expansive and fully realized original worlds yet.

That worldbuilding does factor into what might be the film’s biggest issue. How much this issue bothers you might vary but given how much effort has been put into building this world, its easy to see a film that is longer than the 107 minutes version we’ve been given. Really, this is an filmmaker’s dream, directors Don Hall (“Big Hero 6,” “Moana”) and Carlos López Estrada (“Blindspotting,” “Summertime”) have created a film and world so rich and engaging that it leaves audiences wanting more.

We haven’t even gotten into discussing the action, which is easily the best Disney has ever made. While “Big Hero 6” might come close, there’s a visceral impact to the sword fighting and action sequences in “Raya” that will leave audiences wincing with each hit. This pairs excellently with the gorgeous cinematography to further establish how amazing this film is to simply watch on every level.

“Raya and the Last Dragon” proves that Disney still has plenty of ways to evolve, by delivering one of its most mature and dramatic films yet, with great action and worldbuilding, without losing that Disney charm and lightheartedness. Kelly Marie Tran, Awkwafina, and Gemma Chan all deliver incredible voice work in this gorgeous world that leaves you wanting more. This is Disney at its best. 4.5/5

The SpongeBob Movie: Sponge On The Run - Review

 

Few things are as inescapable as SpongeBob. Even if you’ve never seen the show, you’ve seen the video games, toys, clothing, candy, movies, etc. Yet, for all the criticisms of the show’s waning quality and the titular character’s annoying laugh, the series’ output has remained remarkably consistent throughout its over 20 yearlong existence.

The same can be said for the latest film, “Sponge on the Run” as it recycles plot elements from earlier episodes and combines it with celebrity cameos and a surrealist sense of humor to create an effective and entertaining little slice of goofy cinema.

Every voice actor here is in top form, and thankfully, unlike the previous two films, all of the main cast gets their time to shine. Patrick, Mr. Krabs, Sandy, Squidward, Plankton, and Karen are all here and voiced by their original actors, delivering performances that are exactly on par with the regular series. Tom Kenny is clearly the star, as he is the sponge at the center of it all, and he gets the most emotional material to work with (as emotional as a SpongeBob movie can get, anyway).

It’s the celebrity cameos that are the most worth discussing. Awkwafina (“Crazy Rich Asians,” “The Farewell”) is here in a bit role voicing a recurring robot, Danny Trejo (“Machete,” “Spy Kids”) pops in for a couple moments as a ghost pirate El Diablo. Snoop Dogg has a moment to sing a song, and Tiffany Haddish (“Girl’s Trip,” “Night School”) has a delightfully absurd joke about her name.

Yet, out of all of them, Keanu Reeves (“The Matrix,” “John Wick”) steals the show. This isn’t just because of his ineffable “Keanu”-ness, but it’s because he’s a far larger part of the plot than any of the advertising might have suggested. He’s a source of almost self-parody, portraying the kind of guides that he needed in his 90’s action flicks, and he’s clearly having an absolute blast doing so.

However, the two largest pieces of this undersea cinematic adventure that fans will be most curious about have yet to be discussed: the plot and the humor. Thankfully, both are preserved well, without ever reaching the highest peaks of the series’ past. The plot is more straightforward than in the previous film, which essentially was a series of gags loosely tied together. While there are momentary diversions here that could’ve been cut away without affecting the plot, it’s all far simpler than before, with a through line that’s easy to follow, even as its being covered in gags of all kinds.

It also contains some of the best gags of the show’s last decade. It’s no coincidence that this is one of the weirder adventures and one of the funnier ones. Undersea casinos, robotic assistants, zombie ghost pirates, snail anti-aging cream, it’s all par for the course in this slice of the sea, and for those fond of surrealist Looney Tunes style gags or already fans of the series, it’s an absolute delight.

While it’s hard to completely recommend the film to those unfamiliar with the characters, it’s the new animation style that is almost completely worth the entire viewing experience. Mikros Image, who also animated “Captain Underpants”, has shown that it can translate iconic 2D characters to 3D animation extremely well, and “Sponge on the Run” is no exception. The film pops with color and dimension, giving an almost “3D in 2D” effect to the entire film. It’s a sheer delight watching the characters stretch and squash in more emotive ways than the TV series has in the last 15 years. Mikros also plays with frame rates and detail levels to pop between a silky-smooth modern look and an antiquated stop-motion style. It’s a gorgeous film in every respect, successfully translating the simplistic character designs into a flawless CGI style that is the new gold standard for 2D characters in 3D.

If there are criticisms to make, it’s mostly in the third act. The big confrontation feels extremely forced, and the flashback moments reek of studio meddling. It’s such a clear advertising ploy for the upcoming spin-off series that it’s impossible not to groan at its inclusion, even if you’re a longtime fan. Also, while it is a better overall film than the second SpongeBob cinematic adventure, it still can’t match the original in heart, emotion, or sheer cleverness.

For longtime fans and those who love surrealist, absurdism humor, or just absolutely gorgeous animation, “Sponge on the Run” is a blast, and a full, no holds barred recommendation. For everyone else, it is a delightfully silly time that they should be cautiously optimistic about. For better and for worse, it’s still pure SpongeBob, and it’s the best the series has been, on the big or small screen, in years. 3.5/5