Clifford the Big Red Dog (2021) - Review

It’s easy to be cynical about family films. There are obviously standouts, but not every movie can be “Paddington” and more often than not, studios are happy to cram beloved characters into formulaic plots just to sell toys and DVDs for car trips. And Paramount decided that, to bring “Clifford the Big Red Dog” to life in live action, they would go with Walt Becker, the director of “Van Wilder” and “Wild Hogs.” The results speak for themselves.

The film follows Emily-Elizabeth Howard, played by Darby Camp (“Big Little Lies,” “The Christmas Chronicles”), as she finds a tiny red puppy she names Clifford who, overnight, grows to be a gigantic dog, resulting in Emily and her uncle Casey, played by Jack Whitehall (“Jungle Cruise,” “Bad Education”), having to hide Clifford from a genetics company rune by Zack Tieran, played by Tony Hale (“Veep,” “Arrested Development”), who wants to take Clifford to find out what makes him so large.

This is, if it wasn’t already obvious, an incredibly generic and lifeless plot to shove a character like Clifford into. The fact that the books, PBS animated show, and animated film never even came close to a plot like this despite existing for years says a lot about the pure laziness on display throughout the entire film.

Despite Camp’s best efforts, Emily is just a bland and uninteresting protagonist, burdened by being “different” despite never showing us what it is that makes her different. She’s smart, sure, but she also goes to a fancy private New York school, implying that everyone else around her who makes fun of her for being “different” is also smart. Yet, the film and her character hinges on the idea that she’s lambasted for this the entire time she’s at school.

Whitehall is doing some absolutely pathetic work as Casey, but it's not entirely his fault. His woefully miscast, a handsome, slim, British lad being cast to play a lazy New Yorker uncle who eats candy for breakfast and doesn’t care about school. Clearly Jack Black was unavailable. Yet, despite this, Whitehall isn’t helping by clearly phoning the entire job in, regurgitating the rote plot when needed and otherwise hamming it up for the camera.

Hale also isn’t doing good work by any means, but his is at least kind of excusable given that everything based around the evil tech organization known as Lyfegro is terrible. It's just a boring antagonistic force that doesn’t even really make all that much sense in the grand scheme of the film.

That’s the biggest through-line with everything in this film: it's all just so boring. It’s hard to believe any kid would be entertained by this film. It's too slow to keep anyone’s attention under the age of 12 and it's too boring and simple to keep anyone’s attention over the age of 12. It alternates between extremely cloying jokes and sequences of forced, manipulative emotions.

At its core, the reason behind all of these issues is clear. This is a film that doesn’t respect its target demographic. This is the kind of film that gets made with the attitude of “it’s for kids, we don’t have to try” and gives a bad look to an industry still churning out gems like “Paddington” and “The Mitchells vs. The Machines.” It's lazy and just feels bad to see a family film in this day and age care so little about being anything more than being a future “3pm Movie of the Day” on Nickelodeon.

If you want a perfect example of how lazy this film is, in the beginning before Clifford has grown, the CGI model used for his tiny size is the same exact model as his large one. Nothing was adjusted for size or stature or anything, simply sized up in the post-production process because why bother? Even the CGI for Clifford in general is poor. It looks hazy and unfinished, as if he’s floating above all the other characters and sets instead of being a real part of the environment. A chase sequence later in the film features a CGI Emily-Elizabeth riding Clifford with, spoiler alert, some of the absolute worst CGI used for her in any big studio movie in recent memory.

There’s really nothing good to say about this 2021 live-action film of  “Clifford the Big Red Dog.’ The acting is hammy and poor, the CGI is bad, and it has so little respect for its target audience. It’s a film that clearly isn’t even trying to provide anyone with a decent experience, and yet it's so boring that it's hard to even get worked up enough to write a scathing review for it. It’s just lazy, not worth the time to think about, not bad enough to be funny and not good enough to be enjoyable. 1.5/5

Spencer - Review

 

There are a huge variety of ways to approach doing a “true life” tale, let alone a biopic specifically. The most common is, of course, showing as many real life scenes as possible all building up to a climactic moment in the subject's life. That’s all well and good, but there’s another, arguably better option. Instead of trying to recreate someone’s life, the filmmakers try to recreate their head space, way of thinking, and overall personality more than recreate their life’s events.

That’s the way director Pablo Larraín (“Jackie,” “No (2012)”) and writer Steven Knight (“Locke,” “Dirty Pretty Things”) have chosen to make “Spencer.” Instead of recreating large swaths of Princess Diana’s life, they’ve chosen to focus on one three day Christmas holiday chunk of time, the events of which aren’t even known to the public.

Kristen Stewarts’s (“Twilight,” “Personal Shopper”) performance is exactly as good as you’ve heard. She practically loses herself in Diana, bringing to life a woman who is clearly struggling and suffocating under the royal lifestyle and yet still finds the strength to make things as good as possible for her sons and those she loves in the Royal household. It’s a performance of quiet empathy and resilience; you get the sense that you’re watching someone at a turning point in their life, as if witnessing the moment Diana realized what was going on, who she would become, and what she needed to do to change it.

While her husband is in the film, his performance from Jack Farthing (“Poldark,” “The Riot Club”) is one of minimalism, both in terms of screen time and nuance. Timothy Spall (“Secrets & Lies,” “Mr. Turner”) on the other hand absolutely steals the show whenever he’s on screen. He manages to be both extremely kind and also ruthlessly rigid in the traditions Diana is attempting to buck, meaning the two butt heads in the calmest of ways. Sean Harris (“24 Hour Party People,” “Southcliffe”) also makes a large impression with a more minor role. As the Royal Head Chef and friend of Diana, he brings out some of the most vulnerable moments in the film, with his distinct accent and kind smile setting him apart.

But none of them have anything on Sally Hawkins (“Paddington 2,” “The Shape of Water”). Her scenes with Stewart are divine, displaying a warm friendship that is ruthlessly juxtaposed against the coldness of the rest of the royal family’s interactions with Diana. Their interactions are the heart and lifeblood of the entire film, and their friendship is used in cunning and chilling ways throughout the entire runtime.

It can’t be understated how genius the film’s use of Diana’s sense of reality is. Numerous moments play out with a thin air of mystery to them, leaving the audience and Diana questioning what’s actually happening around them. The through-lines of a book about Anne Boleyn and Diana’s pearl necklace are perfectly woven into each scene, and even the ones where it feels like nothing much has happened are re-framed by the time credits roll.

This does mean that, despite the high level of quality on display, one caveat must be mentioned. For those expecting or wanting a film that details who Diana was, what she did throughout her life, or the events leading up to her death, this is not the film for you. Yet, for those who know what they’re getting themselves into, prepare to be entranced.

Cinematographer Claire Mathon (“Portrait of a Lady on Fire,” “Strange by the Lake”) helps the film feel as otherworldly and unreliable as Diana’s sense of mind is. It seems as though events closely tied to Diana are shot with an airy flow to them, whereas the Royal family is shot in a rigid, structured way. The method pairs wonderfully with Jonny Greenwood’s (“There Will Be Blood,” “The Master”) score. The cool trumpets give an almost noir feeling to the events, further portraying Diana as someone struggling with trusting those around her.

“Spencer” is a thrilling example of how forgetting facts in favor of communicating the truth to who someone is. Kristen Stewart is practically daring awards voters not to nominate her, and the entire supporting cast deserves accolades as well. It's a truly wondrous piece of cinema, cool and crisp, yet brimming with life and love for one woman gone too soon. 5/5

Red Notice - Review

 

Despite what it seems like Hollywood is trying to convince audiences nearly constantly, charm alone does not a movie make. In our more quippy, self-referential movie making landscape of the 21st century, every film seems willing to wink its way out of mediocrity, when in reality it often ends up doing the opposite. This is a long way of saying that throwing some A-list actors and quips at a globe trotting quest doesn’t immediately make for an entertaining film, and “Red Notice” is the perfect example of that.

The film follows FBI agent John Hartley, played by Dwayne Johnson (“Fast Five,” “Jungle Cruise”) as he teams up with art thief Nolan Booth, played by Ryan Reynolds (“Deadpool,” “Pokémon: Detective Pikachu”), to steal Cleopatra’s bejeweled eggs before The Bishop, played by Gal Gadot (“Wonder Woman,” “Keeping Up with the Jonses”), can steal them herself, so that Hartley can clear his name and that Booth can be the world’s number one art thief once again, all the while being chased by Hartley’s former associate, Interpol agent Urvashi Das, played by Ritu Arya (“The Umbrella Academy,” “Humans”).

Even for $200-million-plus action films, the plot is woefully underdeveloped and just plain doesn’t make sense half the time. It’s constantly contradicting itself with every twist, turn, and action sequence. It introduces far too many plot threads and ways for the characters to go about their goals for one film and it becomes headache-inducing to try and keep up with it all. It honestly has enough material in its barely two-hour runtime to make for two, maybe even three movies.

None of it is interesting either. Writer/director Rawson Marshall Thurber (“Central Intelligence,” “DodgeBall: A True Underdog Story”) got his start with comedy films, and yet his only successful action movie since has been the one that most embraced his comedic strengths. There are quips in “Red Notice” but no humor. It’s all just jabs and lines that characters spout from their mouths like fire hoses. None of it lands with any impact and it has all the storytelling nuance of the films put on display in Best Buy to show off the 4K TVs.

Worst of all, the numerous twists that Thurber tries to throw out all land with a thud. They either feel far too lazy, like the “I knew you were lying” cliché, or they betray everything else the film set up. What makes for a good twist is when you can see it coming, when, after watching the film and learning about it, you can rewatch the film again and see where all the clues were placed. “Red Notice” doesn’t have that intelligence or attention to detail, leaving it feeling like its big third-act twist was thrown in at the last minute just to have one.

This hasn’t even touched on any of the acting yet, which is something, to say the least. Johnson is clearly doing the best with an undercooked script, but even his raw hulking charisma isn’t enough to save some of the most laughable and grown-worthy lines of the year. Seriously, half of these feel cut from an SNL parody of these kinds of action movies. Reynolds doesn’t fare much better, but he is the most likable character in the entire film. He at least has a goal that’s consistent throughout the entire film, and while he’s mostly just being his typical self, he does also get the closest thing to an emotional arc that the film has.

And then there’s Gadot. Love or hate her, she clearly has star power given how quickly she’s risen up the ranks of the Hollywood ladder. However, she is woefully miscast here. The Bishop has a “sit back in the chair and do my bidding” quality to her that Gadot just can’t deliver. She’s not a bad actress, but this just isn’t a character she plays convincingly. She feels like the decoy that the real person would send out as a face, so they don’t reveal their true identity until they absolutely want to.

If anyone is at least trying to save the film, it's Arya. She’s just such a genuinely charming underused tool in the film’s back pocket and she’s a joy whenever she does get to be used. It’s a shame that, as the film goes on, she becomes little more than “police/law enforcement stand-in” rather than seeming like her own character from the film’s start. Oh, and the Ed Sheeran cameo that provides more happiness and joy in thirty seconds than the entire film provides over two hours.

It's kind of baffling just how boring “Red Notice” ends up being. For a film that trots the entire globe and goes from priceless eggs that belonged to Cleopatra to a bunker full of Nazi memorabilia, its remarkably underwhelming and just kind of boring. It throws logic out the window very quickly, and yet also seems committed to reminding you about the better films that exist in its genre. When Reynolds’s character whistles the Indiana Jones theme while walking into an abandoned bunker, it isn’t a fun reference, it just ends up being a reminder of other movies you could be watching.

If only it was edited like those other films. “Red Notice” has a horrific case of hyper editing, cutting back and forth jarringly fast for moments that would be perfectly fine if they just played out on their own. This is further exacerbated by the fact that the film features a large number of overhead, sweeping drone shots that, mixed with the editing, create a bizarre lack of any consistent fluid motion.

“Red Notice” is boring, frustratingly plotted, with an undercooked script and actors that are either just fine or are greatly miscast. This is an incredibly generic adventure that doesn’t seem to want to stand out in any way, instead just perfectly fine with being another cookie-cutter action film with no greater ambitions than being left on in the background during a TV dinner. 1.5/5

Finch - Review

 

Formula can be a dirty word in the film industry, being thrown around all over the place whenever any project comes out that has even the slightest bit of a repeated plot. Yet, even for films that are truly following a formula, if the people behind and in front of the camera are bringing their A game, it doesn’t matter how formulaic a film is, it can still be a blast.

Such is the case with “Finch,” a post-apocalyptic drama film starring Tom Hanks (“Forrest Gump,” “Captain Phillips”) as robotics engineer Finch Weinberg who builds a humanoid robot named Jeff, motion captured and voiced by Caleby Landry Jones (“Get Out,” “Three Billboards Outside Ebbing, Missouri”), to take care of his dog in the post-apocalyptic world after he passes away. With a small cast and very pointed emotional moments, “Finch” is treading some well worn ground before with an incredibly focused perspective. This is not a film about the fate of humanity or trying to save the world, rather it is firmly about Finch and Jeff and their relationship as it evolves throughout the film.

Hanks continues to prove why he’s one of the best actors the industry has ever seen. Even with material as well worn as this, he’s giving it his all, delivering some tough emotions and genuine hurt and care throughout this road trip adventure. There are numerous moments that seem tailor made to make you cry, and Hanks nails all of them, bringing an honesty to the film that helps ground it all. Landry Jones is also pulling some impressive vocal work here as well, embracing the oddball nature that marked so many of his in-person roles. His motion capture work brings an unmistakable physicality to Jeff that helps to sell his realism. It helps that the effects on Jeff are jaw-droppingly impressive, blurring the line between the puppeteered moments and the digitally created ones.

For a film based almost entirely around a humanoid robot, those effects are crucial to sell everything, especially if they’re meant to be as emotionally wrought as they are here. It’s impossible to tell what’s digitally created and what isn’t, or if there even was any physical puppetry at all in the film. It’s so ridiculously impressive, watching Jeff interact with the world and seeing how lifelike and realistic the closeups on his fingers and face are. It’s the kind of effect that makes you sit back and go “wow” and easily the most impressive looking digital creature since Gollum from “The Lord of the Rings” or Ceaser from the prequel “Planet of the Apes” trilogy.

Director Miguel Sapochnik (“Repo Men,” “Game of Thrones”) and writers Craig Luck and Ivor Powell (“Blade Runner,” “Alien”) have crafted a small, quiet movie that smartly focuses on the relationship between Finch and Jeff. It's not a bold statement to say that there’s a father and son quality to their relationship, and watching Finch reveal more about himself and the world to Jeff, who embraces everything with a wide-eyed (or wide-lensed) glee is genuinely heartwarming.

It’s playing with some tried and true stuff, but there’s a reason it’s tried and true. When executed well, which it is here, it creates some moments of genuine heartbreak and emotion. A lot of time is spent establishing who Finch and Jeff are by allowing the pair to bounce off of each other. It’s a fabulous dynamic with some amazing chemistry between Hanks and Landry Jones. It’s the kind of movie that just makes you sit back and smile because, no matter the plot, you feel like you got to know two characters by the end of it.

And that’s all there really is to say, honestly. “Finch” is a quiet, emotional movie tampered with some excellent performances and effects. The direction is unobtrusive, the script is serviceable, and the events are nothing new. But it’s all just a showpiece for two remarkably charming characters that you want to spend more and more time with as the film progresses. Can you really ask for more than that? 4/5

Eternals - Review

 

The MCU has amassed quite the collection of directors of the past few years. For every new Marvel movie, it seems like they’ve plucked an up and coming director to helm their latest big-budget hero blockbuster. So it wasn’t a huge surprise when it was announced that Chloé Zhao (“The Rider,” “Nomadland”) was announced to direct “Eternals,” Marvel’s latest epic and it has her grand style and scale mixed with the MCU’s formula on full display, for better and for worse.

Following a group of immortal alien protectors known as Eternals, the film shows them living their lives on Earth over thousands of years as they protect humans from creatures known as Deviants. The film takes many twists and turns beyond this initial introduction and suffice it to say that it's not nearly as simple as that basic concept would make it seem.

The ensemble cast consists of Gemma Chan (“Human,” “Crazy Rich Asians”), Richard Madden (“Game of Thrones,” “Rocketman”), Kumail Nanjiani (“Silicon Valley,” “The Big Sick”), Lia McHugh (“Into the Dark,” “The Lodge”), Brian Tyree Henry (“Atlanta,” “Widows”), Lauren Ridloff (“The Walking Dead,” “Sound of Metal”), Barry Keoghan (“The Killing of a Sacred Deer,” “American Animals”), Don Lee (“Norigae,” “Train to Busan”), Salma Hayek (“Frida,” “Beatriz at Dinner”), and Angelina Jolie (“Girl, Interrupted,” “Maleficent”), with Harish Patel (“Mr. India,” “Jadoo”) and Kit Harington (“Game of Thrones,” “7 Days in Hell”) in supporting roles.

A cast that large, larger even than the first Avengers film, means that there is a lot going on in the film, virtually from the start. There’s a lot to take in, and while the film is overall paced pretty well, the script can’t keep up with the lofty ambitions of the story. Zhao co-wrote the film with Patrick Burleigh (“Peter Rabbit 2: The Runaway”), Ryan Firpo, and Kaz Firpo (“Refuge”) and, as much crap as people give previous MCU films about all sounding the same, there’s something to be said for reliable writers.

“Eternals” goes from dizzying highs that explore the humanity and morality of these characters and their decisions to some of the shoddiest humor and dialogue in a Marvel film yet within moments of each other. It’s a film that works ridiculously well when these actors are emoting and working physically and yet when they open their mouths it's a fifty-fifty shot whether what they say is introspective and thoughtful or hammy and forced.

Which is a shame because the actors behind each role are clearly doing their best to deliver some lovable characters. Chan is the heart and soul of the film, beaming with hope and pure charisma. The same can be said for Henry, Najiani, Hayek, and Jolie; all are excellent thanks to their commitment to characters that are clearly incredibly optimistic and hope that they can do the right thing. Madden is also great but proves to be a bit more stoic and wooden, pulling the emotion when needed, and McHugh also struggles in some moments, delivering one of the most interesting characters with some of the worst lines in the entire film.

Patel and Ridloff provide more of the film’s comic relief, with the latter becoming an instant breakout hit. It’s always a great moment to see grand inclusivity, even more so when that character is ridiculously charming and lovable in their own right. Harrington and Lee are also great but prove to be far too underutilized. Meanwhile, Keoghan isn’t bad, really he just seems either miscast or that the film doesn’t really know what to do with his character, making him extremely important in one moment and then whisking him away the next.

Zhao has clearly worked hard with cinematographer Ben Davis (“Guardians of the Galaxy,” “Three Billboards Outside Ebbing, Missouri”) to make “Eternals” feel as grand as inhumanly possible, and it's a film that towers over you with its scope and scale. It’s an appropriately long, globe-trotting adventure, but Zhao smartly frames some of its larger moments in perspective to the characters. It creates a raw sense of awe that helps to show just how grand it all is and helps set it apart from other MCU films based in cities or similar locations. It’s also just absolutely gorgeous, thanks to fabulous usage of colorful and varied environments and some well-executed camera techniques. It’s without a doubt the MCU’s most gorgeously shot film yet.

With a score from Ramin Djawadi (“Iron Man,” “Pacific Rim”) pumping underneath every action sequence, Zhao crafts a kind of character driven action that smartly works to showcase each Eternal’s powers and personality throughout every fight. It makes for some unique and thrillingly engaging moments, coupled with the film’s stylized golden-weaved visuals to create a certainly distinct look compared to the heavily gray and militarized films of the Marvel past.

There is a lot to like about “Eternals” and it does clearly represent a bold new direction for the MCU going forward. However, the scope and scale proves to be too much for one film with this many characters. It's the kind of movie that crumbles under its own ambition. It doesn’t feel overly long, but it is still two-hours-and-thirty-seven minutes long and a lot of that time is spent discussing what’s going on and how the characters feel about it. It wears its heart fully on its sleeve, making no qualms with the fact that this is a tale of larger than life characters dealing with difficult emotions and situations.

Most of the time, this is great, as it puts a sharp new focus on the characters in a way Marvel hasn’t done in the past. It’s the most evident in these moments that this is a film helmed by someone with experience in character driven indie films as, for as cool as the action looks, this is where the film shines. These are three dimensional characters who are all struggling in some way, and thanks to the actors, it's enjoyable to just be with them as they try to figure all this out. It’s certainly more talking and less action than most might be used to for a film bearing the Marvel name, but it's not a bad thing. It’s an evolution that doesn’t get it 100% right the first time, but an evolution that clearly needs to happen for these films to continue.

This is a difficult movie to review, much less discuss, as there will certainly be details and moments left out that factor into the conclusion. It’s the kind of film that at one moment is working gloriously well and the next has blemishes all over the place. Yet, there isn’t strictly one “problem” with the film: the script has flaws, but it also is wonderfully dense. The performances are sometimes wooden but also a large majority are thrillingly strong. It’s a film that can inspire awe and eye-rolling in equal measure, yet is nevertheless fascinating to watch due to everything it's attempting to pull off with wide-eyed genuine sincerity.

“Eternals” will likely go down as one of, if not the most, divisive movie in the Marvel Cinematic Universe. Some will adore the gorgeous visuals, performances, and amount of time spent exploring the morality and character growth of a team as old and flawed as this. Others will bemoan the amount of talking, runtime, and lack of the trademark wit or sense of action from previous installments. It’s a messy, flawed movie with a lot of ideas that don’t all come to the same fruitful conclusions. There’s a lot to love, and also a lot to criticize, and rarely do the two not overlap in some way. Zhao has crafted a film that’s Marvel’s most unique and emotionally charged, with some of its most endearing and interesting characters as well, but not without challenges and flaws. 3.5/5

Last Night in Soho - Review

 

For his seventh feature film (counting the 2021 documentary “The Sparks Brothers”) Edgar Wright (“Scott Pilgrim vs. the World,” “Baby Driver”) goes back in time in a way and back to the genre that kicked off his career: horror. While decidedly less silly than “Shaun of the Dead” was way back when, “Last Night in Soho” represents a confident potential new direction for the UK filmmaker that charts new ground without leaving old fans out to dry.

Thomasin McKenzie (“Leave No Trace,” “Jojo Rabbit”) plays Ellie, a young fashion student who moves to a new apartment in Soho and begins to have visions of the same part of town in the 1960s and of a young woman, played by Anya Taylor Joy (“The Queen’s Gambit,” “The VVitch”) and her boyfriend, played by Matt Smith (“Doctor Who,” “The Crown”), as well as dealing with an elderly man in modern times, played by Terence Stamp (“Superman (1978),” “The Limey”). That little amount of information is the ideal way to experience “Soho” as much of the film’s strengths lay in experiencing it for the first time.

Wright is no stranger to constructing stories that rely heavily on stylized visuals, and while “Soho” skews closer to something like “Baby Driver” as opposed to the elaborate effects of “Scott Pilgrim,” it's nevertheless a gorgeous film to behold. Shot by Chung-hoon Chung (“The Handmaiden,” “IT (2017)”) the film practically glides through numerous segments punctuated by their stark contrast to Ellie’s day life. The neon blue and reds of her 60s visions contrast against the drab grays of her school life and create an emotional dissonance that feels palpable throughout.

This is a film that lives or dies off its aesthetic and thankfully Wright and his team have crafted a near perfect experience from a visual standpoint. As Ellie floats through these visions, the visuals accompanying them practically pour out of the screen and into the theatre. Velvet ropes and rooms covered in mirrors, night club stages and fog lifting from manhole covers, “Soho” is Wright’s most visually experiential film yet, even as it sees him tone down some of his more elaborate touches.

Gone are the extreme close-ups with accommodatingly jarring sound effects, the quick edits, the foreshadowing of events in the openings. The same director is clearly behind the camera, but it's a more mature voice. The tale is told with a more calm, less sporadic perspective, and while some fans might be upset with this calming of one of cinema’s more eclectic and recognizable voices, it's not entirely gone, just matured and refined. It’s also by far Wright’s creepiest and most unsettling film yet, with some upsetting moments and visuals coupled with a rocking and haunting score from Steven Price (“Gravity,” “Baby Driver”).

McKenzie does an excellent job portraying Ellie’s young, nervous nature as she’s presented with some bizarre situations throughout her jaunts back and forth to 60s London. It’s a fantastic performance that sells her good-hearted nature without leaning too much into it and creating a character who’s saccharine sweet. Taylor Joy also delights as the young singer she follows, portraying a mysterious, airy, almost angelic force. Her character is both gorgeous and yet also incredibly rich, that further cements Taylor Joy as a movie star in the making, if she already isn’t one. Smith meanwhile bucks most of his “Doctor Who” goody guy persona to play a devilish role that borders on being evil, allowing for a great back and forth as the audience tries to figure out what he’s up to.

“Soho” is, without question, at its best as you glide through each dream-like sequence and watch Ellie experience the era she so adores up close, warts and all. She’s a fabulously engaging heroine, and the film is made all the better by following her so closely. This is truly an experiential film, as most of the fun of it all comes down to experiencing it all alongside her. Some people describe superhero movies as “roller-coaster rides” but that term could also be applied to this as it really is a film where the joy comes from the experience, from the vibe, and less from the strict story it tells.

Because, while it isn’t bad, the script for “Soho” is likely the weakest of any of Wright’s previous films. Co-written by himself and Krysty Wilson-Cairns (“1917”), there’s a lot of subtext and actual text to chew through. Despite its midnight movie aesthetics, there’s some heavy material going on under the hood, and it's at its best when you’re following Ellie as she herself is learning what exactly is going on.

When the film tries to explain it all, that’s when things fall apart. Wright’s previous three films that delve a bit more into the “unexplainable,” aka his Cornetto trilogy, all have moments where their central ideas are explained in such a way to make them “make sense.” This moment also comes in “Soho” but it doesn’t feel as tight as in times past. It almost feels as though things would’ve been better off if the explanations had never come, but alas they’re here and the more the film talks about it, the weaker it is. Not bad, just weak.

“Last Night in Soho” is not a slam dunk unfortunately, but where it is lacking it's actually made up in other areas. While the strictly speaking “Plot” might be lacking in the ways it's explained, when it isn’t explained and instead is just experienced by the characters and audience, it's quite exceptional. A further refinement on Wright’s unique visual stylings and bizarre types of stories, coupled with some fantastic performances of some fascinating and endearing characters, “Last Night in Soho” is an unnerving and exciting film that easily slot’s into his well established repertoire. 4.5/5

The Harder They Fall - Review

 

It seems like every other week there’s some new kind of western “revival” type film coming out. Whether it's actually set in western times or a modern blockbuster with the trappings of one, the genre is still as popular as ever today as it tries to grow and evolve with the times. And then you have a film like “The Harder They Fall,” a film so effortlessly stylish and entertaining it appears effortless.

In broad strokes, the film follows outlaw Nat Love, played by Jonathan Majors (“Lovecraft Country,” “Da 5 Bloods”), as he assembles his gang consisting of Stagecoach Mary, played by Zazie Beetz (“Atlanta,” “Deadpool 2”), Jim Beckwourth, played by RJ Cyler (“Me and Earl and the Dying Girl,” “Power Rangers (2017)”), Cuffee, played by Danielle Deadwyler (“The Haves and Have Nots”), Bill Pickett, played by Edi Gathegi (“Proof,” “The Blacklist: Redemption”), and Bass Reeves, played by Delroy Lindo (“Da 5 Bloods,” “The Good Fight”), as they track down Rufus Buck, played by Idris Elba (“The Wire,” “Molly’s Game”), and his gang consisting of Trudy Smith, played by Regina King (“If Beale Street Could Talk,” “Southland”), and Cherokee Bill, played by Lakeith Stanfield (“Short Term 12,” “Sorry to Bother You”).

Yes, the cast is absolutely stacked to the sky, and each actor takes full advantage of the larger than life stakes and stylings of the film. Majors is a fantastic leader, constantly showing himself struggling with keeping a low profile while also making sure he gets what he wants. Elba is the film’s ace-in-the-hole, being dispersed on few occasions, but making the maximum impact when he is. King delivers a performance not seen by her before, maintaining a cold and ruthless persona that smiles in the face of her victims.

Beetz is just as fiery as some of her previous characters, and gets plenty of moments to shine against King in the film’s second half. Cyler’s wisecracking smart ass sensibilities come shining through and play wonderfully off of the more serious nature of Gathegi as the pair play close friends. Stanfield and Lindo continue to show why they’re some of the best actors working today by imbuing their characters with a very particular sense of morality that is purely fascinating to watch as events play out.

Yet, if ever there was a scenestealer, it's Deadwyler as Cuffee. Cuffee is, plain and simple, the heart of the movie, with an incredibly badass attitude, but also a humble, down to earth nature. She’s the film’s big emotional core, as her outsider nature allows her to question Love’s motives and decisions in a way that challenges the gang, and her charisma and fast friendships means that when bullets are flying in the third act, tension is always present.

When bullets fly, they definitely fly. Explosions and stylized violence cascade across the screen as shit hits the fan, and yet, even for all the camera tricks and fights, writer/director Jeymes Samuel and writer Boaz Yakin (“Remember the Titans,” “Now You See Me”) never lose the feeling of dread. They’re ruthless with who survives and who doesn’t throughout the entire film, leading to a palpable sense that at any moment, anyone could drop dead. It makes the action extremely satisfying to watch on a visual and emotional level, but it also backs up the film's emotional moments, allowing them to flourish. The big third act climax might have the least action, but it has the biggest emotional stakes and Samuel nails it and gives those moments the biggest impact.

Which is good because, despite being packed with great characters, dialogue, and action, the overall plot of “The Harder They Fall” is pretty typical western fare. Anyone who’s seen their fair share won’t be surprised by the events as they unfold, but it doesn’t mean they aren’t easy to get invested in. It once again goes back to the characters and how, if the writing and acting sells them, the story can come second.

“The Harder They Fall” is a fantastic feature directorial debut for Samuel and represents a clear understanding of the genre and how to deliver a flashy, emotionally charged film that also doesn’t skimp on its action. Its plot might be familiar to some, but Samuel smartly fills it with as many talented actors and whip smart dialogue as possible to make sure that, regardless of how many westerns you’ve seen, you’ll have a damn good time. 4/5

The French Dispatch - Review

 

If he’s anything, Wes Anderson (“The Grand Budapest Hotel,” “Fantastic Mr. Fox”) is a director who needs no introduction. For years he’s been entertaining audiences with his unique brand of off-kilter characters and humor, never losing sight of the heart integral to all of it. Yet, not every film in a director’s repertoire can be a masterpiece, and while his latest work “The French Dispatch” is a showcase for everything the director has learned since he broke onto the scene with 1996’s “Bottle Rocket,” it's also nowhere near a masterpiece.

Set in the fictional French town of Ennui-sur-Blasé, the film follows the Liberty, Kansas Evening Sun newspaper as the writers mourn the loss of their editor, played by Bill Murray (“Ghostbusters,” “Lost in Translation”), by creating a final issue and recapping three articles, as well as smaller vignettes, from their three main writers, J.K.L. Berensen, played by Tilda Swinton (“Michael Clayton,” “Vanilla Sky”), Lucinda Kementz, played by Frances McDormand (“Three Billboards Outside Ebbing, Missouri,” “Fargo”), and Roebuck Wright, played by Jeffrey Wright (“Westworld (2016),” “Casino Royale”).

Anderson’s iconic style is absolutely intact throughout the entirety of the film and on a bigger and bolder display than ever. “Dispatch” is a classic example of a filmmaker using every skill they’ve learned over their career and then some. Stop motion, green screen, changing aspect ratios, subtitles, color changes, it’s all being used to great effect. Anderson also employs a new “real time freeze frame” technique that immediately feels right at home in his style and for the first time in his career, he also employs some two-dimensional animation, and it’ll easily leave fans begging for a full 2D animated film from him. Most shocking of all, for the briefest moment, Anderson abandons his trademark smooth angles and precise turns for a sequence involving handheld cameras that leaves quite the artistic and emotional impact.

The cast is absolutely stacked, even for an Anderson picture. Beyond those previously mentioned, there’s also small roles from Owen Wilson (“The Royal Tenenbaums,” “Wedding Crashers”), Benicio del Toro (“21 Grams,” “Fear and Loathing in Las Vegas”), Adrien Brody (“The Pianist,” “The Darjeeling Limited”), Léa Seydoux (“No Time to Die,” “Belle Épine”), Timothée Chalamet (“Little Women (2019),” “Lady Bird”), Lyna Khoudri (“Papicha,” “Gagarine”), Mathieu Amalric (“Munich,” “Quantum of Solace”), Stephen Park (“A Serious Man,” “Fargo”), Liev Schreiber (“Ray Donovan,” “Spotlight”), Edward Norton (“Fight Club,” “American History X”), Williem Dafoe (“Spider-Man (2002),” “The Lighthouse”), Saoirse Ronan (“Little Women (2019),” “Lady Bird”), Elisabeth Moss (“The Invisible Man (2020),” “The Handmaid’s Tale”), and Jason Schwartzman (“Rushmore,” “Scott Pilgrim vs. the World”), capping off with narration from Angelica Huston (“The Royal Tenenbaums,” “The Addams Family (1991)”) from time to time. Some of the actors stick around for large chunks of the film, while others are there for mere moments, yet everyone still maintains the trademark Anderson atmosphere and commitment to this surrealist world and style that’s been solidified and has captivated for the last two decades.

Seydoux and del Toro are immediate standouts; their story oozes romance and lust from every pore and the pair make for a wonderful duo, exuding a weird detached love for each other that feels like the most honest thing the film has. Chalamet, Khoudri, and McDormand are all far more comedic than the other stories, and McDormand’s character is the one who goes through the most of an “arc” throughout the film, and they’re a simple delight to behold. Wright, Schreiber, Park, and Amalric are also standouts in the film’s final story that has all the makings of a “Police Squad!” episode that decided to take itself very seriously that week, and that’s not a criticism.

Each story is told wonderfully by its writer, with Swinton absolutely stealing the show as she narrates her own tale, and each has their own style, really giving an insight into the types of work that each of them write and why they write it. In this, Anderson has nailed a clear tribute to writers and journalists, both who do “important” reporting and the little, human interest stories that keep news feeds rolling along. The film is also, broadly, clearly a tale of love, as each of the three main stories features some kind of love at its center, and the frame narrative is about how to properly tribute someone you love. Most interestingly in that regard, Anderson and his co-story-writers Roman Coppola (“Moonrise Kingdom,” “Mozart in the Jungle”), Hugo Guinness (“The Grand Budapest Hotel”), and Schwartzman has delivered a film about how to pay tribute to a great artist not by showcasing their own art, by by showcasing the kind of artists that were allowed to flourish under their wing.

For all the great things “Dispatch” has going for it, and it has a lot, it's missing one crucial element Anderson has typically excelled at and it's easy to see why. The film lacks a true emotional throughline for the entire film. Sure, there are emotional arcs in each of the stories, but the lack of one going throughout the entire film feels everything feeling far more segmented than it could have been. It’s an issue that typically crops up with anthology films, and while it's not impossible to avoid, it's one that isn’t really all that surprising.

“The French Dispatch” may not be his best film, but it's still a wonderfully quirky set of stories from Anderson and his crew. It’s packed with fantastically silly performances with every technical skill Anderson has learned on full display. It doesn’t have the start-to-finish emotional core that Anderson's other projects do, instead providing some delightfully fantastical stories with an equally fantastic frame narrative. It’s a good time, immediately recommended for Anderson die-hards, but for those who have yet to dip into his filmography and have only heard of his greatness, this latest issue from his cinematic zine comes up a bit short. 3.5/5

Ron's Gone Wrong - Review

 

Animation can be one of the trickiest tightropes to walk in the film industry. While there are many masterpieces that rank as some of the greatest movies ever made, there are just as many poorly made cash grabs that exist less for artistic integrity and more to be a ninety-minute commercial for an upcoming Nickelodeon series. So when a new studio breaks through the ether, it's always worth watching to see how they stake their claim in one of cinema's most potentially lucrative mediums.

Locksmith Animation, founded in 2014 by Sarah Smith (“Arthur Christmas,” “The Pirates! Band of Misfits”) and Julie Lockhart (“Shaun the Sheep Movie,” “The Pirates! Band of Misfits”), has broken through said ether with its first film, “Ron’s Gone Wrong,” directed by Smith, Jean-Philippe Vine (“Shaun the Sheep”), co-directed by Octavio E. Rodriguez (“The Epic Adventures of Captain Underpants,” “Coco”), and written by Smith and Peter Baynham (“Borat,” “Alan Partridge: Alpha Papa”). While there might not be a lot to write home about in terms of originality, the debut film for Smith and crew’s new studio is a silly, delightful romp.

Jack Dylan Grazer (“Luca,” “Shazam!”) and Zach Galifanakis (“The Hangover,” “The LEGO Batman Movie”) star opposite each other as Barney, an awkward middle-school kid and his new ‘B-bot,’ Ron, respectively. The film centers around their budding friendship and the chaos that ensues due to Ron having a variety of malfunctions, such as lacking any safety features other B-bots have and only having the A part of his internal database downloaded.

These glitches lead to various hi-jinks which are the best parts of the film. The animation, while not as complex as that of a studio like Pixar, is still clean and crisp with its own distinct style. There’s also a more colorful look and physicality to everything compared to other Hollywood animation studios. This leads to a distinct look for the film’s locations and a great sense of physical comedy throughout.

It’s the chemistry between Galifanakis and Grazer that makes the film soar. The pair play off each other expertly and their budding friendship proves to be a nice anchor for the film’s shenanigans. It feels innocent, but not without its own issues, and since a large majority of the film is dedicated to the two of them, when the emotional cliches, like the angry breakup, occur, they’re at least emotionally effective.

Like Grazer and Galifanakis, the supporting cast does a pretty good job with the material they’re given. Ed Helms (“The Hangover,” “Captain Underpants: The First Epic Movie”) voices Barney’s dad with a high level of enthusiasm and a high level of audience apathy. Olivia Colman (“The Favourite,” “The Father”) voices Barney’s grandmother with a thick Russian adjacent accent and plenty of silly pronunciation gags and “weird grandma” moments.

Barney’s friends don’t really leave much of an impact though, or at least not as much as his family does. Kylie Cantrall (“Raven’s Home,” “Gabby Duran and the Unsittables”), Ricardo Hurtado (“School of Rock (2016),” “Glitch Techs”), Cullen McCarthy (“Mission Force One”), and Ava Morse (“Surprise Me!”) all do decent jobs with their material, but most aren’t given much to do and end up in the film for maybe ten minutes max. Meanwhile, Justice Smith (“The Get Down,” “Pokémon Detective Pikachu”) and Rob Delaney (“Deadpool 2,” “Catastrophe”) voice an idealistic young CEO and creator of the B-bots and his partner and COO, respectively. The pair play off each other well, Delaney in particular delivering a constantly amusing antagonistic voice, and prove to be a fun addition without stealing the spotlight.

Thanks to his experience working on projects like “Borat” and “Alan Partridge,” Baynham ends up injecting a lot of oddball humor into the film. There are plenty of slapstick moments that lean into the film’s cartoony style and Galifanakis proves to be an expert at sincerely delivering some truly oddball statements. It's a movie filled with deadpan delivery and honest, silly humor that’s endlessly charming because of the sincerity of it all. When Barney’s dad talks about how much he worries about his son or when one of Barney’s friends talk about how their social media has ruined their life now, it doesn't feel hollow because it's all so achingly sincere.

That’s what “Ron’s Gone Wrong” has up its sleeve compared to every other big budget animated film out now. Somehow, this is a film that is almost completely devoid of cynicism, precociousness, and any kind of sarcasm. It really just wants to have a good time and sprinkles some surface level tech messages in for good measure. Everyone involved, the cast, the crew, the writers, seem committed to just delivering a light hearted good time, devoid of any self-imposed self-importance.

This means it's an easy movie to just kick back and have fun with. Its messages about tech may be the most surface level takes possible (“tech can help but also be bad”) and releasing in the same year as something as nuanced as “The Mitchells vs. The Machines” certainly doesn’t help, but the messages about friendship at the center of it all prove to be so well-intentioned it forgives their sappiness.

Friendship is a two way street, it's about more than just liking the same things, and the fact that friendship can blossom out of nowhere are all prevalent themes throughout the film. This, combined with its genuine sincerity and the silliness of it all means that it might be the most “good” movie out right now.

“Ron’s Gone Wrong” turns a premise that’s been well-worn for years and manages to inject it with a sense of good old fashioned sincerity and silliness. It’s a hard thing to do, making an animated film devoid of sarcasm in this day and age, and yet, somehow, Smith and her new studio have delivered a fun, charming, well-voiced, well-animated, and funny movie that practically dares you not to smile. It’s not the most creative bot in the box, but it's certainly the most eager to please. 4/5

Dune: Part One - Review

 

“Dune” is finally here. Well, that’s to say that “Dune” is half here. For anyone not paying attention, Denis Villeneuve’s sweeping sci-fi epic is a glorious sight to behold, and unquestionably one of the most game-changing science fiction films since the original “Star Wars.” But all that praise should be issued with an asterisk: it is, after all, merely part one.

For the uninitiated, “Dune” follows the House Atreides as they take control over the desert planet Arrakis from the House Harkonnen. There’s plenty of backstabbing, political intrigue, and worldbuilding that goes on from almost the immediate start of the film, but “Dune” is yet another showcase of Viilleneuve’s incredible ability to disclose large amounts of information in a brisk, interesting way. At no point does it feel like too much, like you’re being bombarded with over or under-explained science-fiction mumbo jumbo.

A large part of that success is due to a tight script from Villeneuve, Jon Spaihts (“Doctor Strange,” “Prometheus”), and Eric Roth (“Forrest Gump,” “Munich”). Villeneuve and Spaihts bring their knowledge of science-fiction scopes and Roth brings his experience with down-to-earth, human stories to create a tale that, despite the scale of everything, never loses sight of the fact that these are people dealing with both political and economic challenges, but also emotional struggles.

The cast also deserves heaps of praise for managing to wrangle characters of immense personality with names like Duncan Idaho into people you truly care about, regardless of the amount of time they’re on screen. Lead by Timothée Chalamet (“Lady Bird,” “Little Women”) as Paul Atreides and Rebecca Ferguson (“The Greatest Showman,” “Doctor Sleep”) as Lady Jessica, the entire cast excels at delivering the right mixture of commitment to the seriousness of this sci-fi opera drama and also embracing the camp of it all. Oscar Isaac (“Inside Llewyn Davis,” “”Star Wars: The Last Jedi””) shines as Duke Leto Atreides, Paul’s father, and the supporting cast consisting of Josh Brolin (“The Goonies,” “No Country for Old Men”), Stellan Skarsgård (“The Hunt for the Red October,” “Mamma Mia!”), Dave Bautista (“Guardians of the Galaxy,” “Blade Runner 2049”), Stephen McKinley Henderson (“Lady Bird,” “LIncoln”), Zendaya (“euphoria,” “Spider-Man: Far From Home”), David Dastmalchian (“Ant-Man,” “The Suicide Squad”), Chang Chen (“Brotherhood of Blades,” “Love and Destiny”), Sharon Duncan-Brewster (“Bad Girls,” “EastEnders”), Charlotte Rampling (“The Damned,” “Georgy Girl”), Jason Momoa (“See,” “Aquaman”), and Javier Bardem (“No Country for Old Men,” “Skyfall”).

It's worth listing virtually the entire cast because, even down to the smallest roles, everyone here is bringing their A-game no matter their screen time. It feels like a group of people who all sat down and decided that, to make this movie and world as good as it can be, everyone has to work together and be as good as possible, billing order be damned. And that’s what they’ve done. While there are certainly standouts, it's an across the board excellent ensemble that makes this world and conflict feel truly believable from beginning to end.

Chalamet is excellent, with his extreme likability meshing perfectly with the rich outsider archetype Paul falls into. He never feels entitled, instead coming off as a scared kid being thrust into a world he’s not prepared to take charge of. Ferguson, meanwhile, absolutely steals the entire film. Her portrayal of Lady Jessica is a taught and memorable one, fluctuating between a comforting motherly figure and also a teacher and mystical trainer for Paul and showcasing the internal conflict involved with such differing roles. Isaac is also just so good as Duke Leto, showcasing his inherent charisma and ability to be a stern leader without losing his smirk and warmth.

Some supporting cast members do stand out more than others. McKinley Henderson continues to exude his unique kind of warm grandfatherly energy from every one of his roles thus far, Momoa is just as weird and has just as much wide-eyed charismatic star power as you’ve heard, Chen is remarkably understated and emotional in his brief screen time, Duncan-Brewster also makes a marked impact with less screen time than others, and Skarsgård is just having a ball coated in layers of prosthetic makeup and dipping himself in all manner of steam and goo. If you need any further proof of the overall excellence of this entire cast, look no further than the fact that the “standouts” make up about half of them.

Visually, “Dune” is absolutely stunning. While its marriage of practical and digital effects is nearly perfect, what’s more impressive is the commitment to the realism of this world. Like the cast, the crew seems to be determined to make Arrakis seem as real as humanly possible and, despite being mostly sand, there’s a remarkable amount of personality in each of the locations and landmarks featured throughout the film. Much has also been made of this film’s version of the iconic sand worms, and it's just yet another example of how far this crew is willing to go to make sure this is as honestly weird as possible, without tipping into parody.

Greig Fraser (“The Mandalorian,” “Zero Dark Thirty”) has shot this film with an eye for the large and small. Shots that cover sweeping vistas and encompass hundreds of people in just one frame are juxtaposed against ones that are mere inches away from one single character. It’s an eye for both detail, but also balance, as Fraser employs a variety of techniques to show contrast between the various parties at play, as well as the opulence of their homes and other locations and the barrenness of the desert planet itself.

Hans Zimmer’s (“The Lion King,” “The Dark Knight”) score is also an absolute knockout, delivering pulse pounding themes when the action requires, but also not content to reside in the background otherwise. There are chilling vocalizations and thumping beats that combine to send a shiver down your spine. Zimmer has arguably created a score that feels as alive as the planet itself.

Villeneuve’s first chapter in the tale of Frank Herbert’s Dune is massive for sure. Clocking in at two-and-a-half-hours, it's no small feat. However, nothing ever feels like it needs to be cut or sped up. At no point do you feel bored, thanks to the cast committing so hard to the overall vibe of the project. It doesn’t feel short by any means, but it also doesn’t feel as though it drags or is longer than it is. It’s one of the few films that feels exactly as long as it is and uses that time to great effect. Even if your movie is this long, it won’t feel it if you use that time wisely.

It might seem like hyperbole, but given the scale of everything and the excellent cast and world building, “Dune: Part One” has broken into the mainstream consciousness in a way arguably not seen since 1977 when Lucas first unleashed a galaxy far far away on us. It’s an almost perfect science fiction adventure, packed to the brim with an engaging world and plot, populated by charming characters you so easily fall in love with. If there’s anything to criticize, it's that this is merely half of a masterpiece as we’ll have to wait until October 2023 for “Part Two.” That being said, for a film with source material that was clearly cut in half, “Part One” ends in a surprisingly good way, establishing an arc for Paul for at least this first leg of their adventure.

“Dune: Part One” is a staggering film, very nearly a masterpiece or at the very least half of one. It’s cast and crew seem to have been hyper focused on creating one of the greatest sci-fi films ever made and they’ve absolutely succeeded. Packed with information and yet never feeling too dull or overblown, and lead by some truly charming and memorable characters and performances, you’ve never quite seen something like “Dune.” 5/5