The Reel Life's Year in Film: Best of 2019

The end of 2019 is here, so its time to list the Reel Life with Jacob DiLandro's picks for the best, worst, and most mediocre films of 2019.

Bad Boys for Life - Review

 

Whatchu gonna do when they come for you? Because they’re back. Will Smith (“Men in Black,” “I, Robot”) and Martin Lawrence’s (“Boomerang,” “Death at a Funeral”) dynamic duo have returned, 25 years after Michael Bay’s directorial debut and 17 years after the so bad its good action cult classic sequel. With Bay no longer in the director’s chair and an older but wiser perspective on the story, could this be the best of the “Bad Boys”?

What’s most impressive about this threequel is the surprisingly large amount of time it spends on emotion and downtime. There’s plenty of action to be had here, but it doesn’t feel nearly as archaic or nihilistic as before. Some will likely long for the spastic, incoherent nature of Bay’s directing style, but the Belgian duo of Adil El Arbi and Bilall Fallah (“Black,” “Snowfall”), known as Adil & Bilall, ground the action and carnage in a thankfully intelligible way.

While there are still some of the classic 360 Bay shots, like “Bumblebee” these younger directors take the foundations that Bay laid and clean them up. Many action shots glide along, going on for easily double or triple the length of a typical Bay shot. Some shots of brutality linger in a very “John Wick” way, lending some menace to the villain and the proceedings.

It makes the entire film much more satisfying (and easier) to watch. No longer is there fear of motion sickness due to the sheer number of cuts, and the plot moves along fairly coherently, even if it isn’t anything particularly new. Someone is out for revenge, someone who knows our heroes and they have to solve the case before its too late. Classic and cliched stuff.

Yet, screenwriters Joe Carnahan (“Smokin’ Aces,” “The Grey”), Peter Craig (“The Town,” “The Hunger Games: Mockingjay – Part 1”) and Chris Bremner (“The Wedding Ringer”) make sure the films’ ample downtime is used to great effect. The action scenes are thrilling, but ironically the films’ best moments come from scenes of honest chats between Mike and Marcus. The pair debate things like retirement, non-violence, different approaches to their job, family life and growing beyond their angry, overly masculine ways throughout the film. These also aren’t just one-off conversations, as they’re integrated into the plot in meaningful ways.

Smith is as charming as he’s ever been, though this film also allows him to examine new depths with the bad ass bad cop Mike. Meanwhile Martin Lawrence is mostly a comic foible, but he also gets his own moments of surprising depth when examining his own life, mortality, and karma. Jacob Scipio (“The Outpost”) who plays the villain Armando gets some great moments of true menace here, and even his story isn’t as surface level as the previous films’ baddies. None of the three are doing groundbreaking work, but its solid across the board.

It’s the supporting cast that really shines. Vanessa Hudgens (“High School Musical,” “Spring Breakers”), Alexander Ludwig (“Lone Survivor,” “The Final Girls”) and Charles Melton (“Riverdale,” “The Sun Is Also a Star”) are a group of younger, more tech savvy special unit cops whom Mike and Marcus assist throughout the film. While the dynamic of a younger team vs the old veterans is a well-worn action movie cliché, they pull it off better than most. Leading this team is the extremely charming Paola Núñez (“Reina de corazones,” “The Son”), who’s no nonsense demeanor and casual nature with Mike steals the show. Joe Pantoliano (“The Fugitive,” “The Matrix”) also returns as the chief and is as humorous as one would expect, as are the handful of cameos from the likes of D.J. Khaled to Michael Bay himself.

It isn’t revolutionary, but the film’s love of Miami is in full effect, with multiple characters casually slipping in and out of Spanish and blending cultures left and right. The locations are gorgeous, with a slight tint bathing Miami and Mexico City in an orange glow. In a world of whitewashed and lukewarm white action heroes, the films heavy emphasis on Latinx culture lends it a kind of freshness akin to last year’s “Terminator: Dark Fate.”

Really, thanks to an engaging supporting cast, a more focused story and sense of action, a surprising level of emotional depth, and the always charming duo of Smith and Lawrence, it is no stretch to call this the best film in the series. Granted, it still isn’t anything award worthy, but given the typical cliché of January films and the previous two in the series, its an accomplishment to label these bad boys as pretty good. 3.5/5

Cats (2019) - Review

 

This is a genuine example of a once in a generation event. This is a live birth of a future midnight movie phenomenon, that will pack drive-ins for decades as audiences cackle at the screen, tossing cat toys and popcorn with wild abandon. Its rare to see something like this before the zeitgeist that will inevitably take it over, because “Cats” is just really that bizarre.

Don’t be mistaken, its also a pill of cat shit in virtually every way. This film is a textbook example of the stark difference between something being entertaining and something being good. “Cats” is thoroughly entertaining, at least half of it is, but few, if any, moments could even be called decent.

The cast is a who’s-who of Hollywood darlings and annoying comedic actors. Idris Elba (“Luther,” “Finding Dory”) seems to be having a lot of fun as Macavity, the villain of the film, and therefore is probably the least embarrassed of the final product. He’s the only one who gets out alive though, as the likes of Judi Dench (“Shakespeare in Love,” “Chocolat”), James Cordon (“Peter Rabbit (2018),” “Ocean’s 8”), Taylor Swift (“The Lorax,” “The Giver”), Jason Derulo, Rebel Wilson (“Pitch Perfect,” “Isn’t It Romantic”), Ian McKellen (“X-Men,” “The Lord of the Rings: The Fellowship of the Ring”), and Jennifer Hudson (“Dreamgirls,” “Sandy Wexler”) all seem like they’re being dragged limp through the set, propelled only by their agents offscreen with fishing rods baited with cash.

Its less upsetting to see such A listers tumble into this garbage pit of a film. Oh no, Swift was in a bad movie! What is she to do? Her career will be soooooo hurt by this. No, what’s legitimately upsetting is seeing the chunk of the cast made up of legitimate ballerinas and stage dancers forever have their resumes tarnished with such a film. Francesca Hayward, who gets an “Introducing” credit in the trailers, needs a bit more introducing in the film, as all she really does is stare wide eyed and do some, admittedly impressive, ballet moves. A few of the dancers even overshadow the famous actors and are actually good, like Laurie Davidson as Mr. Mestoffelees or the brief stint from Steven McRae as Skimbleshanks.

The few moments that make “Cats” entertaining are slap dashed and clearly accidental. A sequence involving Derulo thrusting his crotch at various female cats in a milk bar and he screams “MILK” is the kind of hallucinogenic experience most people take fashion drugs for. What about the moment when Wilson’s character strips off her skin and eats singing and dancing cockroaches, who are also played by humans? Or when Swift literally drugs the entire cast into a purring sleepy mess as she sings about her crush?

All of these moments are bewilderingly enjoyable, thanks to the mixture of bad effects and poor acting, but that’s not the linchpin of it all. Tom Hooper (“The Danish Girl,” “Les Misérables”), the ACADEMY AWARD WINNING director of “Les Misérables,” has tried to create a three-act structure within a musical that has famously never really had a plot. It results in a story that’s insanely hard to understand, not because of the songs, but because of the film. The weird bits that are actually fun to watch are so spread out, with stretches of some semblance of incredibly boring plot trying (and failing) to stitch it all together.

Let’s make one thing very, very clear, all of the problems with “Cats” are problems with the film and not the source material. This is an eclectic, very queer and extravagant musical that purposefully goes for the extreme and outrageous that Hooper and Universal have tried to squeeze into a PG-rated, less than 2-hours Hollywood musical. These constraints just turn this into a bloated and uncanny mess.

Yet, it is so bizarrely entertaining. You laugh at it, not even remotely with it, and eventually after the horror of the visuals subsides, it becomes clear; this was never going to be good. Even if the effects were done in time and they were flawless, it’s an unfilmable musical.

Midway through the movie, there’s a musical number featuring Skimbleshanks, the railway cat. The song is catchy and the visuals of it all are purposefully weird. This is what the film should’ve been; a purposefully and knowingly weird musical that knows its place as a piece of bizarre Broadway pop culture. That strangeness has been contorted into a self-serious piece of nightmare fuel that the Hollywood musical will never recover from. “Cats” is extremely entertaining and utter garbage. 1/5

Knives Out - Review

 

The game is afoot in Rian Johnson’s (“Star Wars: The Last Jedi,” “Looper”) latest mystery flick. He cut his teeth on the genre in the early 2000s with movies like “Brick” and continued to put mystery elements in later ones like “Looper.” But “Knives Out” is a straight up mystery movie, complete with a cast of potential murderers in primary-colored outfits. As one of the cops aptly says, “It’s like the guy lived in a Clue board.”

While the basic premise might sound like that of the past (or upcoming) “Clue” film, Johnson’s script and direction quickly turn it into anything but. It’s virtually impossible to discuss the plot without giving anything away, so to keep things as brief as possible, Johnson keeps the mystery at a believable level, without making it seem too easy to guess, keeping the guessing at a maximum and the rug-out-from-under-you shenanigans to a minimum.

Luckily, the cast is up to the task. This is an ensemble piece first and foremost, so while there are definite story leads, everyone shares the screen relatively equally. Jamie Lee Curtis (“Halloween,” “A Fish Called Wanda”) is particularly entertaining, flashing a devilish grin and snarky retort at any opportunity. Michael Shannon (“The Shape of Water,” “Revolutionary Road”) turns in a convincing sad sack role, and Chris Evans (“Fantastic Four,” “Snowpiercer”) returns to his pre-Captain America days of playing a delightfully fun to hate douchebag. Lakeith Stanfield (“Sorry to Bother You,” “Dope”) also makes an appearance as the straight man cop to the legendary Detective Benoit Blanc.

That detective is played by Daniel Craig (“Munich,” “Skyfall”) who seems to be following a bit in the footsteps of his last southern fried role in “Logan Lucky” by completely ditching his British accent for a slight southern drawl. His detective isn’t real; he feels like a cartoon caricature, someone who’s read one to many Poirot novels and yet he keeps getting it right. That juxtaposition mixed with Craig’s completely committed performance makes him a delight.

It helps that he has a great opposite to play off in the form of Ana de Armas (“Blade Runner 2049,” “War Dogs”). While initially seeming like a bit role, or one that could easily get lost in the fray, her journey is the linchpin of so many of the film’s best aspects. Johnson’s script and Armas’ pure talent work to create a girl you want to see succeed, or at the very least to reach in and give her a hug. Plain and simple, you root and feel for her the entire time she’s onscreen.

The rest of the supporting cast rounds out nicely with the likes of Don Johnson (“Miami Vice,” “A Boy and His Dog”), Toni Collette (“About a Boy,” “Little Miss Sunshine”), Katherine Langford (“13 Reasons Why,” “Love, Simon”), Jaeden Martell (“IT,” “Midnight Special”), Noah Segan (“Looper,” “Brick”), Edi Patterson (“Vice Principals,” “The Righteous Gemstones”), a small cameo by Frank Oz (“Dirty Rotten Scoundrels” “The Muppet Movie”) and a delightfully warm, yet short cut, grandfatherly performance from Christopher Plummer (“The Last Station,” “Beginners”). There are layers or double sides to all of them, whether it’s the 12-year-old boy who’s also a Nazi alt-right troll, or the definitely-not-a-Gwyneth-Paltrow-callout lifestyle guru.

Good thing the have a particularly lavish house to be holed up in. Much of “Knives Out” is about juxtapositions, and it manages that even in the sets. The crudeness of some of the family is shouted out while sitting in lavish chairs and in front of a gold mantle above a roaring fire. Likewise, seeing a detective as renowned as Blanc sit in a car, earbuds in, and sing along to “Losing My Mind” from the Sondheim musical “Follies” is such a bizarre delight.

The film is, without a doubt, a pure delight. It’s got great production design, a wonderful cast, and a director with something to say. Quite literally, in fact, because that’s what pushes “Knives Out” up above the rest. Yes, there is subtext, but it is so cleanly woven into the film that by the time the big undercurrent or message of the plot becomes apparent, you’ll immediately want to rewatch the film to see if the pieces really did fit together.

As the last shot fades out, it becomes apparent that Johnson has stuffed the film with so many details, plot references, and Easter eggs that a second viewing is practically required. However, with a film so fun, so delightfully twisted and wonderfully intelligent, with a completely willing cast, a star turn from Ana de Armas, and an undercurrent of razor sharp subtext, “Knives Out” is an absolute bullseye. 5/5

Frozen II - Review

 

5 years, 1.2 billion dollars and countless hours on the radio later, “Frozen” might very well be the most successful of Disney’s newest princess films, or animated films period. Something about it caused both rapturous applause and seething contempt from equal parties across the globe. So, of course here comes “Frozen 2,” except there’s just one tiny little thing about this sequel: it is nothing at all like the first.

To delve too much into exactly how and why it’s so different would be to wade into spoiler territory, but suffice it to say that directors Chris Buck (“Tarzan,” “Surf’s Up”) and Jennifer Lee (“Frozen,” “Wreck-It Ralph”) and their co-writers Marc E. Smith (“Zootopia”), Kristen Anderson-Lopez (“Coco,” “Winnie the Pooh (2011)”) and Robert Lopez (“Coco,” “The Book of Mormon”) have taken these characters far outside of the princess film realm and into the depths of pure fantasy.

There are mysteries and secrets abound in “Frozen 2” and most are actually pulled off quite well. Some are woven into the world in such interesting and detailed ways that one would be hard pressed to believe that this sequel wasn’t always a part of the plans. There’s danger, mystery, death, secrecy, and fantastical spirits that make this seem more like a take on a Tolkien story than the past eras of Disney.

It’s all the better for it, as the personal journeys of Elsa, Anna and the rest are taken to new depths. Olaf says it best in a very on the nose, albeit funny, line “I hear that forests are places of transformation. I can’t wait to see how this place transforms each of us.”

Elsa, voiced again by Idina Menzel (“Glee,” “Wicked”), goes on some pretty harrowing escapades here, and the animation accompanying them is as gorgeous as Menzel’s performance. Her vocals are truly incredible, and the songs and emotional work she’s given are stunning. Kristen Bell (“The Good Place,” “Forgetting Sarah Marshall”) as Anna has, unfortunately, once again be relegated to a more comedic role, but the film gives her infinitely more things to do here than in the first film, especially in the second half.

If anyone gets the short end of the stick, it’s Josh Gad (“The Book of Mormon,” “Murder on the Orient Express”) as Olaf and Jonathan Groff (“Looking,” “Mindhunter”) as Christoph. Both do fine jobs and Gad’s solo song is once again the comedic highlight, but their side stories don’t really have an impact on the overall film and disappear by the time the action and dramatics heat up.

Speaking of heat, the film introduces numerous other elemental effects to the plot, and it results in a colorful and jaw-droppingly beautiful film. Yes, the typical CG backgrounds and landscapes have a painted beauty to them, but there’s also an abundance of 2D animated effects. Numerous scenes have backgrounds that fade to black, while characters belt out songs with 2D effects traipsing across the screen in front of them. It’s a sight to behold, and by the time Elsa is galloping across oceans with sapphic colored lights across the sky, it remains a visual feast for the ages.

One might have concerns over the overall direction of the story, though not necessarily bad ones. The tone is much darker than before, dealing with multiple deaths and symbols of grief. The film’s key moral, the idea that the past can be contextualized and fixed without destroying what it built afterwards, is heavy and important. However, like “Cars 3” a few years back, these themes are so heavy, and the film is so much closer to a typical fantasy adventure that one might wonder if kids might actually like it.

Don’t worry, it still contains a litany of songs, again provided by Lopez and Anderson-Lopez, and while none of them have the earworm lyrics of the first, they’re more thematically relevant and grander. Yes, “Let It Go” will never leave the public consciousness, but when Elsa belts out “Show Yourself” while diving deeper into a mysterious island as a storm rages around her, your mind will quickly let the past songs go.

With a more serious, fantasy adventure tone, even more great songs, gorgeous 2D and 3D animation and a cast of voice actors that continues to be excellent, as well as a story that is far more mysterious than it initially appears, “Frozen 2” lives up to and might actually be better than its just fine original. A wonderous and joyous mystery awaits. 4/5

A Beautiful Day in the Neighborhood - Review

 

There are few, if any, people in the world who can evoke the same emotions as Fred Rogers. Not happiness, sadness, empathy or tears, but calmness and content-ness. The feeling that, for a few brief moments, when he talks directly to you through the television screen, everything will be okay. The idea of taking on a film about a man like that seems like a daunting, harrowing task. Maybe even impossible.

And yet, director Marielle Heller (“The Diary of a Teenage Girl,” “Can You Ever Forgive Me?) and writers Micah Fitzerman-Blue (“Transparent,” “Maleficent: Mistress of Evil”) and Noah Harpster (“Transparent,” “Maleficent: Mistress of Evil”) have created a film that is difficult to describe. Does it capture the man as we remember him? Yes. Does it do so with reverence and with a few details that shed some light on who he was off camera? Yes. However, very smartly, they make sure that from the beginning it’s clear that this movie is not about Mister Rogers.

It’s about Lloyd Vogel, played by Matthew Rhys (“The Americans,” “The Post”), an investigative reporter assigned to cover Rogers for an issue on heroes for Esquire. Rhys makes Vogel so effortlessly relatable. He straddles the line between showing his anger and deep-rooted fears of the world, without turning him into a sad sack or a ball of rage. His performance, and the script, make conscious efforts to make sure that the audience knows exactly what the characters are feeling at all times, even if it isn’t strictly “realistic.”

Feeling is more important than plot, and Heller knows this. She flips the film back and forth between shots of Rogers and his show, Vogel’s life, fantastical representations of his struggles, and conversations between the two men. At times it feels almost ethereal, and the fantastical sequences are so abrupt and surprising that they become a kind of magic.

And then there’s Tom Hanks (“Toy Story,” “Philadelphia”). It’s genuinely surprising that Hanks has had a career as long and as successful as it has been, but his portrayal of Rogers might just be one of his finest. The kindness and empathy come across in droves, but there is a clear effort to not boil him down into just a nice guy. There are conflicts and frustrations that Hanks communicates with mere vocal timing and facial tics that are the signs of phenomenal actors. He embodies the goodwill of Rogers in the absolute best ways and is the best part of an already tremendous film.

The supporting cast is great as well. Susan Kelechi Watson (“This is Us”) makes her film debut here as Andrea, Vogel’s wife, and melts with charm and grace. She’s such a wonderful sense of heart and warmth that it’s hard to believe this is her debut. Chris Cooper (“Capote,” “American Beauty”) also delivers a career best performance as Vogel’s father, and while his screen time may be limited, his impact is not.

There is simply no other way to describe this film other than magical. It reaches inside you and, using Rogers, pulls at a kind of longing most films don’t have a fraction of the guts to attempt. It’s so wonderful pure in its motivations, just a film that wants to ask if you’re okay and why you aren’t.

It’s a wonderful experience, to just sit with Rogers and Vogel for 100 minutes and by showing the impact of Rogers on someone whom he touched very particularly, it does more to tell us about the man than a two-and-a-half-hour examination of his entire life ever could. The way it’s structured and the depths to which it takes what could have been a gimmick of presentation are extremely admirable and unique. The camera floats through sets large and small, using the work of Cinematographer Jody Lee Lipes (“Tiny Furniture,” “Manchester By the Sea”) to continue to elevate the film’s ethereal feeling. There might not be another biopic structured like it.

A calming film, one that just wants to sit with you and make you feel okay. For 100 minutes Heller, Hanks, the writers, and everyone involved delivers audiences a person so wonderous and so painfully real that it makes us all feel like we might one day be okay. Tear inducing, sweet, childlike in its whimsy and offering enough so that everyone can take what they need from it, it truly is “A Beautiful Day in the Neighborhood.” Would you be mine? 5/5

Ford v. Ferrari - Review

 

Watching cars, driven by attractive stars, zoom down tracks constructed for giant and white knuckle third acts is nothing new to film. Race movies are a genre probably as equally as old and beloved as Western or Spy films. It takes a lot to reinvigorate something like a race car film. However, James Mangold ("Logan," "Walk the Line") has done just that. “Ford v. Ferrari” is a fabulous two-and-a-half-hour-long epic that's as thrilling to watch as it is to feel.

Matt Damon ("The Martian," "Good Will Hunting") and Christian Bale ("American Psycho," "The Dark Knight") prove to be a fabulous duo, working extremely well off each other. There’s a complicated friendship between the two and it's communicated so well that it feels inconspicuously real. The coolness and collected, boiling under the surface rage of Damon’s Carroll Shelby is the perfect counterpart to the overblown, explosive passion of Bale’s Ken Miles.

Jon Bernthal ("The Walking Dead," "The Wolf of Wall Street") also pulls in a wonderful subdued performance as Ford’s VP Lee Iacocca. He clearly feels for Miles and Shelby, and wants to help them, but has his hands tied due to his duties to the company. Tracy Letts ("The Post," "Lady Bird") delivers a great supporting role as Henry Ford II, the CEO of Ford, and Caitriona Balfe ("Super 8," "The Dark Crystal: Age of Resistance") is a scene stealer as Mollie Miles, Ken’s wife.

Each race is shot with such delight and life-threatening precision that it makes it a literal joy to behold. Miles’ real-life ability to push his cars as far as they’re able to go is excellently communicated here thanks to cinematography from Phedon Papamichael ("Nebraska," "Walk the Line"). Marco Beltrami ("3:10 To Yuma," "Logan") and Buck Sanders ("Velvet Buzzsaw," "The Hurt Locker") score the races and quieter moments with the gentle strums of guitars and jazz instruments, delivering an undeniable feeling of Americana to the proceedings

Not only is the intensity of each throttle rattling moment incredible, but the emptiness of some of the races also provides a wonderful kind of yearning. The yearning and loneliness that can come from being so excellent in a particular aspect is one of the film’s moment unexpected delights.

Also unexpected is the fact that this is not a film about racing. Yes, it's a film about people who race, but that isn’t what the film is about. This is a movie about creative types, expertly disguised as a movie about cars that go fast

Numerous moments are motivated by the sheer desire to create something as pure as possible, constantly interfered with by the suits sitting up top. Even when there is an attempt to do things right, there’s an element of betrayal from the ones funding the small creatives types that echoes throughout the entire film.

Yes, it might seem like a red-blooded American made film, and it is. But it also manages to show a little bit of the darker side of the American grown factory company. Miles and Shelby are quintessential American types, and their fight to maintain their creative and moral integrity while also working for big business is engaging at all times.

Screenwriters Jez Butterworth ("Edge of Tomorrow," "Get On Up"), John-Henry Butterworth ("Edge of Tomorrow," "Get On Up") and Jason Keller ("Mirror Mirror," "Machine Gun Preacher") deliver some truly clever dialogue, and build a film with just as many white knuckle scenes of speed as there are smaller moments. They understand a basic, but extremely important writing detail; the races will be better if the characters are invested in, and build as much detail and meat on their bones as possible.

The quieter moments wherein characters are given time to just ruminate on the aspects of their creative lives versus their personal ones lend the film an element of gravitas. Miles’ talking to his son about the perfect lap, and Miles’ son talking to Shelby about their friendship might just be more palpable than the race sequences themselves.

This is a relentlessly entertaining film, from frame one, that sucks you into the creative plight of two men, determined to be as good as they possibly can be at what they do. It’s expertly shot, with a unique musical score and a sense of purpose and emotional weight that comes out of nowhere for the kind of film it is. This is a wonderful film on nearly every level. “Ford v. Ferrari” sails over the finish line with flying colors. 5/5

Charlie's Angels (2019) - Review

 

“Charlie’s Angels” isn’t “Mission Impossible.” While that might seem obvious, there really isn’t a way to keep the identity of the series, in any off its incarnations, and be as serious as something like Cruise’s spy series.

That is part of the charm though. Given all of the dark and self-serious spy series or action thrillers in existence these days, it’s refreshing to see something as openly cheesy as Elizabeth Banks’ (“Wet Hot American Summer,” “The LEGO Movie”) “Charlie’s Angels.” There’s an open reverence to the past eras of female-led spy series, and the film has a retro-futuristic look to much of its sets.

It’s just all around a fun movie to watch and to experience. Banks proves to be a surprisingly excellent action director. A sequence in a rock quarry is one of the film’s best, as it dips and flows from character to character and moment to moment with surprising competence.

Also surprisingly competent is the cast, especially the main three. Naomi Scott (“Lemonade Mouth,” “Aladdin (2019)”) is charmingly innocuous for most of the film, and her slow evolution from bumbling scientist informant to full-fledged Angel is entertaining to behold. Ella Balinska (“Casualty”) has a stern presence that works well with her character’s demeanor, but absolutely stealing the show is Kirsten Stewart (“Twilight,” “Zathura”). Her wise-eyed crazed persona is excellently utilized here, and she’s a charmingly chaotic delight.

Elizabeth Banks’ role as one of the many Boselys is fine. She leans more into the cheesy side of the character’s persona, as do the rest of the film’s many Bosleys. The supporting cast is otherwise enjoyable, but no one particularly stands out to a major degree.

While everything is shot well, with competent electronic music thumping underneath some surprisingly entertaining action sequences, the plot is the film’s biggest kneecap. It’s a deep-fried bundle of cliches. Some moments come and go seemingly because the genre requires it, not the story.

Some plot moments are so out of left field they seem shoved in at the last minute, and then the film’s twist initially seems well thought out, until there’s a twist with the twist that ends up turning what could have been an interesting story take into a mediocre “oh, okay” moment.

Even some of the lines of dialogue are less clever than it seems the writers thought. Evan Spiliotopoulos (“Beauty and the Beast (2017),” “The Huntsman: Winter’s War"), David Auburn (“Proof,” “The Lake House”) and Banks create a charismatic film that has handfuls of humor that work and some handfuls that don’t. It's not that the jokes flop, it's just that there are some that get slight chuckles or none, surrounded by other jokes that are far better.

Pacing is surprisingly strong, despite what initially seems like an overly edited studio flick. The film flows briskly and keeps pace throughout, never dropping or dragging, even when it seems close to buckling. Unfortunately, the same cannot be said for the editing, as a few scenes have bizarre cuts where things just seem oddly set up or cut too quickly.

The film’s best aspect is without a doubt its atmosphere. This new “Angels” film has such a great sense of fun and delight, and it even manages to be silly in a few spots. There doesn’t seem to be a reason for it, other than to just create a more fun film to watch.

That’s where the film shines, as pure escapist fun. The plot has problems, and not all of the jokes work, but the chemistry of the cast, its sense of excitement and fun and the surprisingly excellent pacing end up creating a simple and silly fun time at the movies. It's less jiggle, more filler and just a basic fun time with some Angels. 3.5/5

Last Christmas - Review

 

For every rom-com, there are buckets of expectations and clichés that come along with them. Boy meets girl, the opposites attracting, the man with the secret, the possibilities go on and on. This Christmas themed rom-com from director Paul Fieg (“A Simple Favor,” “Bridesmaids”) and a screenplay by Emma Thompson (“Nanny McPhee,” “Sense and Sensability”), Bryony Kimmings and Greg Wise does a bit to poke fun at those clichés, but not much.

The one truly reliable thing throughout the film is how damn charming everyone in it is. Emilia Clark (“Game of Thrones,” “Solo: A Star Wars Story”) plays a delightfully cynical brat with Kate, and she manages to straddle the line between annoying the audience with her obliviousness and allowing audiences to want her to be happy. Henry Golding (“Crazy Rich Asians,” “A Simple Favor”) is also charming, but his occasionally spills over into sugary sweetness, risking putting audience members into diabetic comas. Michelle Yeoh (“Crazy Rich Asians,” “Star Trek: Discovery”) is wonderfully sympathetic as the owner of a Christmas shop that Kate works for, and Emma Thompson chews the scenery to bits as Kate’s very Yugoslavian mother Adelia.

The script is the most interesting and confounding part of the film. While it maintains a consistent level of cheeky humor, thanks to Thompson’s comedic skills from projects like “Nanny McPhee,” there aren’t really many laugh out loud moments. There are chuckles throughout, but for a film that seems to want to throw the clichés and premise out the window, it’s surprisingly lacking in belly laughs.

Details also flood the screen, and they’re a welcome addition. They help to flesh out the characters and their lives, without drastically changing the story. For example, the fact that Kate and her family are Yugoslavian, and that her mother frequently falls asleep worrying about Brexit doesn’t change the story, but it does help to flesh their live out and makes them feel like real people.

It is also extremely admirable that Kate’s life is delved into as much as it is, because it means the film focuses entirely on her life. This also puts her self-destructive tendencies into full view, and as she makes the changes necessary in her life, it kind of makes the movie a story about dealing with depression. Its not just about that, and its clear that depression wasn’t the main point, but it’s a welcome addition, nonetheless.

Then there’s the twist. Anyone who’s seen the trailer for “Last Christmas” knows that it practically screams “I have a twist” at you in just how coy it is. Thankfully, the film tones the coyness down a bit, but the twist is still absolutely wild. How does it work? What are the everyday implications of it? What does this actually mean for the kind of person Kate is? None of these questions are answered, and while a film doesn’t have to answer every question it puts out, given how “Last Christmas” ends, it definitely owes some answers.

It’s not as if the film is bad, it’s charming, and thankfully ends up playing the twist like a silly secret, rather than a grand and intelligent reveal. Early on, there’s a sequence wherein Michelle Yeoh’s character is star-struck by a man entering the shop, and while the lighting and music becomes impeccably cheesy at that point, it is clear it’s on purpose.

Moments like those seem few and far between. If the entire film had the self-awareness of that one scene, its likely that it could have been an instant classic. Likewise, Kate is a constant screwup who drinks a lot and makes some really bad decisions. But they serve to bolster her charm, until they unexpectedly and unceremoniously cease happening.

“Last Christmas” has quite a bit on its side, and while the issues are outright bad, they serve to make the film more lukewarm. A second pass on the screenplay, or even a more self-aware tone could’ve helped improve it, but its deliciously cynical tone, charming actors, and sense of silly secrecy make for a fun, if cliched and simplistic, holiday romance romp. 3/5

Doctor Sleep - Review

There’s a lot to unpack here. Not just the immense pressure in creating a sequel to “The Shining,” but the novel “Doctor Sleep” itself is quite long and covers a large swath of Danny Torrence’s life. It’s a testament, then, to the pure skill of everyone involved that “Doctor Sleep” is anything but a dull boy.

Ewan McGregor’s (“Big Fish,” “Trainspotting”) performance here is one to be rivaled. There’s a worn warmth to this older Danny that he embodies so well. He clearly cares about those around him and has so many demons all locked up to try and have a normal life for himself. The arcs and motivations, as well as the broad strokes and changes in the third act never take away from the immense character work McGregor delivers, turning out a performance to beat.

Likewise, Kyliegh Curran, in her major debut, shows exactly why she should be watched in future years. There’s an equal parts determination and childlike innocence to her fascination with the Shining. She’s the perfect parallel to Danny, somehow still seeking out the wonder and good that can be done with their powers.

Meanwhile Rebecca Ferguson (“Mission Impossible: Rogue Nation,” “Florence Foster Jenkins”) is a delicious antagonist who sulks through the scenery and builds her anticipation. Note, she isn’t villainous, as she maintains a level of calmness and intensity that allows her to become menacing without ever taking the title of “evil villain.”

Her group of energy vampires are wonderous as well, as is the rest of the supporting cast. Particular standouts are Emily Alyn Lind (“Won’t Back Down,” “Lights Out”) as Snakebite Andi, a character whose screen time is limited but makes her mark quickly and effectively, Carl Lumbly (), taking over the role of Dick Halloran from Scatman Crothers, and Danny’s friend Billy, played by Cliff Curtis (“The Majestic,” “Sunshine”), a kind soul who makes a mark of warmth and normalcy on Danny’s life and the film.

Writer/Director Mike Flanagan (“Hush,” “The Haunting of Hill House”) continues to show impressive work thanks to an excellent control of space and lighting. Multiple sequences jump between enclosed spaces like bathrooms, bedrooms and kitchens to wide open spaces like forests and town squares. This also ties into the film’s heavy usage of doors and the framing of them, as entrances and exits, nothing in between. It’s clearly purposeful, and cinematographer Michael Fimognari (“The Haunting of Hill House,” “Fast Color”) uses these juxtapositions to build the two types of Shiners who exist in this world.

Here comes the elephant in the room though; this film, while based on the sequel novel written by Stephen King, is a sequel to “The Shining;” one of the most beloved films of all time, period. There’s a lot of pressure riding on this film, and Flanagan’s expert control of character work helps the story avoid falling into disrepair.

Virtually every story moment or major decision is punctuated with moments of intense thought and consideration. This is fantastic, because not only does it allow for true time to be taken getting to know the inner machinations of this world and characters, but it means that when those moments are taken away, they’re even more jarring and upsetting.

Huge amounts of time are spent just watching Danny live his life, get back on his feet, and learn to use his powers for good and comfort. While this might appear boring, Flanagan slowly reveals that, in order to show the differences and lengths between Danny, Abra, and the others, these distinct differences, large and small, must be shown.

This does lead to a fairly long runtime, and a pace that might be slower than most would like, but “Doctor Sleep” uses its deliberately slow pace very effectively, building an atmosphere of dread and unease, rather than deliberate horror.

Thankfully, it keeps that in common with the previous film. “Annabelle,” this is not, there is nary a single jump scare in the film, allowing the surprises, twists, and expertly crafted atmosphere to stretch out and breath, creating the horror naturally through the world itself.

It does rely heavily on “The Shining,” a bit too much for some people’s liking. But each moment spent back in the Overlook, or each reused shot feels deliberate and purposeful. Yes, it might be aping a shot or moment from the first film, but the ways that Flanagan, who also edited the film, utilize these moments feel like they couldn’t have existed in any other way. It’s not copying, its deliberate tribute.

“Doctor Sleep” is masterful, incredibly creepy, and an intensely watchable movie-going experience. It’s deep character works and wonderous performances, as well as some phenomenal cinematography make this an unmissable cinema experience. Whether you’ve been to the Overlook before or not, you shouldn’t miss this appointment with “Doctor Sleep.” 5/5