Werewolves Within - Review

 

In a year (or so) of delays, schedule reshuffling, and buyouts by streaming services, it's all the more impressive that a smaller movie can not only peek through the cracks but can even excel. Nobody would have been surprised if “Werewolves Within” had been dumped onto Netflix or Hulu when everything shut down, and it's a good thing it wasn’t because it likely would have meant that a wonderfully funny and delightfully goofy horror comedy would have fallen through into obscurity.

Starring a cast of character actors and lesser known stars, the cast of “Within” is one of its biggest strengths. From every bit part to the leading roles, everyone has the same winking, knowing delivery required for material this inherently goofy. It helps to strengthen the sense of place in this quiet mountain town, rather than betray it. The back-and-forths and quiet moments of interaction sell the fact that this is a real town with real people living in it.

Sam Richardson (“Veep,” “Detroiters”) is still absolutely the star however. A veteran of the Second City sketch group, Richardson has a clear understanding of how to build a character up with gags and jokes, rather than letting the character just become a vehicle for them. He makes for an endearing lead struggling with his own self-confidence, delivering both expert comedic timing and dramatic chops when it counts.

Meanwhile Milana Vayntrub (“Marvel Rising: Secret Warriors,” “Other Space”) is an absolute scene stealer and competes with Richardson as the film’s best asset. Yes, she was at one point the “AT&T girl” but she clearly has far more acting ability than that moniker would suggest. She, like Richardson, nails the sort of overacting required for a film like this, without ever losing the dramatic thread of the film’s events. The pair also have wonderful chemistry and play off of each other with such delightful and goofy ease.

Writer Mishna Wolff and director Josh Ruben (“SCARE ME,” “Adam Ruins Everything”) have crafted a town that lives right on the razor thin line between being too silly for its own good and too realistic for the silliness to land. This is the sort of the film that really shouldn’t work, but it does because of the commitment to the characters as characters. While it is based on a video game, that game was more of a free form party experience rather than a set narrative anyway, allowing Wolff and Ruben to take the basic premise and run with it. Sure, the characters are all built out of stereotypes, but Wolff clearly worked with each actor to make these stereotypes their own, delivering a cast of memorable characters you care for as the slaughtering starts. Ruben’s experience with groups like CollegeHumor also helps in balancing the exaggerated acting and tone with the suspense provided in the story.

For those coming in expecting a blood bath, you might be surprised at how long it takes for the killing to start. Ruben takes his time, establishing various characters and uneasy relationships so that it truly feels like anyone could be the malicious murderer. There’s a boatload of intrigue and it is a story with a surprising amount of twists and turns. It's rare that a film like this is set up in such a way that the identity of the killer is a mystery, and it's in that aspect that Ruben and Wolff succeed the most. When the reveal comes, it's shocking and unexpected but still makes sense.

An easy comparison to understand the vibe and style of the film immediately is the works of Edgar Wright, specifically the “Three Cornetto” trilogy. The quick cuts and sound effect, the color palette, the  over-exaggerated characters, the musical cues and score, and the specific type of black comedy all work just as well here as they ever have in Wright’s features. It's clearly an inspiration, not an imitation, for Ruben and Wolff.

There’s not really much negative to say about this fun, freaky romp in the snowy mountains of Vermont. Sure, it clearly doesn’t have a huge budget; it has its fair share of budget saving effects moments while also still having some equally good ones, but that just means that it comes down to the actors and script to elevate the film and they’re more than up to the task. It's like a mug of cocoa or a roaring fire: it's warm and sweet, even better with some friends along for the ride, and it leaves you wanting more. At just 97 minutes, it's the kind of film that one almost immediately wishes for a sequel to, if for no other reason than to see another spooky tale tackled with the same level of excellent spookiness and goofiness.

“Werewolves Within” is a delightful romp, a fun and somewhat scary film that clearly seeks to entertain above all else. Packed with a cast of committed character actors and two excellent leads, a script choked full of memorable one-liners, and a legitimately effective mystery at its center, “Werewolves Within” might just be the surprise hit of the year. 4.5/5

Luca - Review

 

For every film from Pixar about finding fulfillment in life (“Soul,” “Toy Story 2”), tackling depression (“Inside Out”), and the numerous stories about loss (“Up,” “Finding Nemo,” “Coco,” “The Good Dinosaur,” “Onward”), there are few tales from the studio that exist to merely just be enjoyed. As mentally satisfying as it is to chew over films like “Soul” and what they mean, its far easier, and sometimes far more enjoyable, to watch a low stakes film that seeks to purely entertain.

Such is the case with “Luca,” Pixar’s latest animated film and the feature directorial debut from Enrico Casarosa (“La Luna”). Every frame of the film is a gorgeous, auburn saturated Italian watercolor masterpiece, with an incredible accompanying score and overall sense of summer whimsy. It also demonstrates the fine line a film can walk between being a piece of pure entertainment without sacrificing depth under the surface.

Jacob Tremblay (“Wonder,” “Room”) and Jack Dylan Grazer (“It,” “Shazam!”) play Luca and Alberto, respectively, a pair of sea monsters who spend a summer on land in the Italian coastal town of Porto Rosso. There they encounter various charming characters, such as Giulia Marcovaldo, voiced by Emma Berman in her film debut, her father Massimo, voiced by Marco Barricelli in his film debut, and the antagonistic Vespa-obsessed Ercole, voiced by Saverio Raimondo.

Screenwriters Mike Jones (“Soul”) and Jesse Andrews (“Me and Earl and the Dying Girl,” “Every Day”) and Casarosa have created a true fantasy in the sense that the film easily transports audiences to the wonderful world of Porto Rosso. The cool blues and warm summer atmosphere help to accentuate the perfectly silly nature of the entire film. For a studio so consumed with making “serious” works, “Luca” serves as a fantastic reminder of how good their comedic work can be when they put their mind to it.

The various vocal performances throughout the film are also excellent. There’s always been a trend in “Hollywood” animation where most big actors are cast to voice roles but not really do any voice “acting.” Pixar continues their trend of mixing big name actors with lesser knowns and getting fantastic performances out of all of them. Rainmondo’s villain Ercole is wonderfully silly and idiotic without sacrificing any menace, Berman’s Giulia is a delightful anarchistic bookworm who offsets Alberto and Luca’s whimsy wonderfully, and Barricelli is an absolutely lovable teddy bear of a hulking father figure as Massimo.

Tremblay and Grazer absolutely steal the show however, and their chemistry helps to prop up one of the film’s biggest unforeseen boons, more on that later. Their friendship feels organic and natural, and the energy of their antics and pre-teen attitudes make the film feel as though you’re just watching a couple best friends hang out. It never feels artificial and strengthens the film’s emotional stakes, as their friendship is at the crux of it all.

Much has been made of the film’s themes of otherness, being an outsider, hiding your true self, and trying to discover what kind of person you are. These themes aren’t anything new to film, particularly for family animated movies, and yet there’s just something about the way Luca does it that feels so fresh.

It might be the aesthetic, the music, the summery feeling, but many people have pointed out one thing in particular: the film’s queer subtext. While this could easily be traced back to the themes of hiding your true self or otherness, the Italian countryside and chemistry between Alberto and Luca has had many fans reading queer subtext into the film. After all, the byline for the New York Times review of the film was “Calamari by Your Name.”

Also, it’s just likely coincidence that the film features two young boys as merfolk, a common fantasy creature most young queer boys find themselves gravitating towards. Nonetheless, these themes have been read by numerous corners of the internet from the film’s first trailer, and to see that the film doesn’t inherently shut these readings down. In fact, without spoiling anything, there are quite a few moments, intentional or not, that even seem to support these readings.

It’s a testament to the film’s commitment to subtext that doesn’t overload the film that these themes can be read or not, and it doesn’t harm the quality of the overall product. “Luca” is a delightfully entertaining treat that doesn’t sacrifice its emotion or humor for one or the other. It’s vocal performances and visual designs are some of Pixar’s best, and it’s another easy recommendation from the studio, whether its summertime or not. 4.5/5

Wish Dragon - Review

 

Imitation is the sincerest form of flattery, or so they say, but in the entertainment world you often need a bit more than just imitation to set yourself apart. “Wish Dragon” is a perfect example of this: it’s a perfectly fine and enjoyable movie and showcases a great new strategy of focusing on Chinese-centric stories made for and by the Chinese market by Hollywood studios, but it also leans a bit too much into another animated magic wish granting genie movie from the golden age of one of Hollywood’s best animation studios.

That being said, its leads are all delightful to watch and listen to. Jimmy Wong (“Video Game High School,” “Mulan (2020)”) voices Din Song, a college student trying to reunite with his childhood best friend Li Na Wong, voiced by Natasha Liu Bordizzo (“Crouching Tiger, Hidden Dragon: Sword of Destiny,” “The Society”), and ends up getting some help from Long, a magical wish-granting dragon voiced by John Cho (“Harold and Kumar Go To White Castle,” “Star Trek (2009)”) to achieve his goals.

Wong does a great job bringing the pathetic and lovable Din to life. He’s easy to like, if a bit apathetic, and his goals are sweet and admirable. Likewise, Bordizzo gives Li Na a spunky attitude without ever losing her sweetness. She’s plucky and funny and makes a great foil for Din’s overly cautious nature. However, both pale in comparison to Cho’s performance as Long. He’s an absolute scene stealer, bringing the same level of charisma to the role that Robin Williams once brought to his own fantastical, magical, wish granting creature years ago.

The magnetic nature of Cho’s performance helps the film maintain interest for a large chunk of the runtime. Long is the one with the emotional arc in this film, not Din, and it provides for an interesting contrast to the way these stories typically play out. The pair have great chemistry and build a believable friendship, leading to some great payoffs at the end as Long’s arc is played out.

Writing a movie certainly isn’t easy, and credit that first time writer/director Chris Appelhans (“Wonder Park”) is able to squeeze some creative concepts out of this well worn setup. Yet, he’s also written a film that has more than a little inspiration from other Hollywood animated films of the past two decades, to the point where some scenes are literally visually set up in the same way. The characters are likable, sure, but the overall plot is the result of a classic trope, diced up and reheated in a new setting. It really does showcase how great Cho, Wong, and Bordizzo are that they are able to keep characters that should be one note and forgettable alive with charm.

This also ties in to the film’s most forgettable and unfortunate aspect. Seemingly in an attempt to make the film more traditionally follow a three-act Hollywood structure or to try and build a franchise by establishing a “behind the scenes” puppet master, the film introduces a trio of henchmen who chase Din throughout the movie attempting to get the teapot Long is inside of. Yet they all feel painfully forgettable, as if they’d been written in during the last week of production.

Bobby Lee (“MADtv,” “Splitting Up Together”) voices the “Tall Goon,” who’s only quality is how much he likes puppies and Jimmy O. Yang (“Silicon Valley,” “Space Force”) voices the “Short Goon,” who’s only quality is how short he is. Maybe it’s just the comedic overblown nature that he voices with, but Yang at least manages to make “Short Goon” an entertaining and silly presence whenever he’s on screen. Meanwhile, Pockets, their leader, voiced by Aaron Yoo (“The Tomorrow People,” “21”) is just a painfully generic villain with no memorable or interesting qualities about him. He keeps his hands in his pockets the entire film, so that’s kind of interesting, but not in any way that matters. Just in an “oh, okay” way.

Will Yun Lee (“Witchblade,” “Bionic Woman”) voices Mr. Wang, Li Na’s father, and it's easy to see how a less “antagonistic” plot could’ve formed with him to still provide the film with some third-act emotional struggles while cutting Pockets and his goons. At least the film is still animated gorgeously though. It’s bright and colorful, with a distinct futuristic look mixed in with the older village Din lives in. Everything has a soft look to it, as if it's all made out of gelatin or plush material. It’s a delightful style that also manages to bring in some great lighting effects for night time sequences and disappearing dragons.

It’s disappointing because the film has a lot going for it besides that. The themes of friendship are well founded, Bordizzo and Wong have some pretty fun chemistry and Cho’s dragon Long is just such an entertaining, magnetic vocal performance. Yet, the painfully cookie-cutter plot and forgettable antagonists bring the whole thing down. It’s still an entertaining family adventure with great animation and morals, but it ends up flying just above the ground when it clearly could soar. 3/5

Censor - Review

 

What’s your favorite scary movie? There are many different kinds after all. There are slashers like “Halloween” and “Friday the 13th,” slow burn, creep-centric ones like “The VVitch” and “It Follows,” and more comedic takes like “Killer Clowns from Outer Space,” and “Evil Dead 2.” No horror fan is going to like everyone, but what makes “Censor” so extremely invigorating is that it is, without a doubt, a horror movie fan’s horror movie.

The film follows Enid, a censor working for the British Board of Film Classification during the early 1980’s at the peak of the “video nasty” period, where the UK tried to crack down on the large number of direct-to-VHS low budget exploration horror films being released. Her world is forever changed when she one day watches a film that begins to get under her skin and affect her day-to-day life.

“Censor” is a movie that thrives off of the psychological effect that films can have on us. Not only is it at its best when its toying with the viewer, causing them to question what they’ve just seen or if there’s actually anything horrific going on, but this idea that media can twist and affect us is fundamental to the plot itself.

Whilst she’s directed some shorts before, “Censor” is the feature directorial debut for Prano Bailey-Bond, and even if the film isn’t to your liking, she deserves to have praise heaped upon her for maintaining such a confident vision for her first feature. Every moment and scene is constructed in such a particular way, it's hard to imagine the film existing in any other way and still having the same effect.

Niamh Algar (“Raised By Wolves,” “Calm with Horses”) delivers an absolutely stellar lead performance as Enid, and she’s the lifeblood of the entire film. This is the definition of a movie carried by a single performance, as even though everyone else around her is great, if Algar doesn’t sell it, the entire movie falls apart. Thankfully, she’s extremely endearing and wonderful to get to know and we truly root for her to figure out what’s going on and to get to the bottom of the changes happening around her.

From a technical standpoint, “Censor” deserves a lot of praise as well. Not only does it maintain a thoroughly unsettling atmosphere even in its lighter moments, but it also manages to replicate the visual style of the “video nastys” and the panic surrounding them nearly effortlessly. Bailey-Bond injects plenty of medium changes and uncomfortable sound design into the film, doing everything to keep the viewer on edge for as long as possible.

All of this comes together in a third act that is truly something special; a wonderful combination of the endearing lead character of Enid, the horrific visual styles implemented up until that point, and the general horror of the unknown that we can sometimes get from horror films. It's a movie about catharsis and the feeling of both dread and relief that comes from movies like this. Sure, we feel some kind of relief when the villain rips the head off of a character, because that means it's at least over. But it’s also deeply upsetting. After all, these movies are all fake. It’s not real, isn’t it?

Yet, if there’s one massive thing that could be a deal breaker for some, it's the pacing of it all. Despite only being 87 minutes long, “Censor” is a deliberately paced film. If you like your horror films quick and dirty and covered in blood, then you might want to pass on this decidedly slower and more psychological affair. But this would be doing the film a disservice though, as it's a movie for horror movie fans. The more love you have for the genre, the more horror films you’ve seen, the more likely you are to fall head over heels in love with this trip.

“Censor” is a thrilling, confident, genre infused debut film that showcases a bright future for both its lead actress and its director. A horror film made for those who love the medium, coupled with a deliberately slow pace means this head trip won’t be for everyone, but those that do buckle up for it will be treated to a thrilling and confident horror experience. 4/5

In the Heights - Review

 

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

Cruella - Review

 

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

The Mitchells vs. The Machines - Review

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

Mortal Kombat (2021) - Review

 

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

Shiva Baby - Review

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

Godzilla vs. Kong - Review

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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