Lady Bird

LadyDirector: Greta Gerwig

Screenwriter: Greta Gerwig

Cast: Saoirse Ronan, Laurie Metcalf, Lucas Hedges, Beanie Feldstein, Tracy Letts, and Odeya Rush

A weird thing happened at the end of the new movie Lady Bird from first time director, Greta Gerwig. The lights came up in the theater and I heard a woman say, “Well, that was weird.” Then another person whispered, “That’s not what I thought it was going to be.” Lastly, someone else just said, “Artistic,” but in a dismissive way. Meanwhile, I sat there silent, listening to these strange criticisms while reflecting on how Gerwig was able to steal so many aspects and events from my life and just put it out there like that. Isn’t that plagiarism? I guess there are a few differences between the character Lady Bird and me. I was a good student, I didn’t have any siblings, oh and I call myself Gentleman Bird, but after that it gets pretty murky.

Saoirse Ronan plays the titular character, a confused high school student from Sacramento, California, who is desperate for a change, but is still pretty confused about who she is in the first place. In fact, Lady Bird’s given name is Christine, but she decided to rename herself Lady Bird, perhaps just to emphasize to the audience that she’s having a bit of an identity crisis. The year is 2002, and Lady Bird is in the midst of some pure adolescent angst. Her relationship with her parents, principally her mother Marion (Laurie Metcalf), can be described as strained at best, and the weight and eventuality of adulthood is weighing heavily down on her.

The film casually follows Lady Bird as she traverses her seminal senior year at her Catholic high school, which she attends at a great cost from her parents who while hard-working are not financially secure. Lady Bird is ashamed of her status and dreams of the day when she lives in the big house, has adventures, receives opportunity, and lives sophisticatedly. The problem for Lady Bird and the one she grapples with most throughout the film is that she has done nothing to warrant or really deserve any of those things. What’s more, her private Sacramento Catholic high school is filled with other kids who have done nothing to deserve those things…and yet they have them. The one thing Lady Bird does have going for her is an innate artistic spirit that is picked up on by her nun teacher Sister Sarah Joan (Lois Smith). Sister Sarah Joan encourages Lady Bird to take that spirit and apply it to the school theatre program, which she does along with her best friend Julie (Beanie Feldstein) and Danny (Lucas Hedges), a young man, Lady Bird finds attractive.

That’s the gist of the film. It’s really rather typical in terms of its story, but there are some bits of brilliance that do move the “coming of age” film needle. Lady Bird owes a lot to the sensibilities of predecessors like Juno, The Bling Ring, and most of all Terry Zwigoff’s 2001 film, Ghost World. All of these films take a different perspective at youth culture and its influences. They all attempt in their own way to diagnose what has lead to the overwhelming degradation in the aspirations of young people, and guess what, the young people are rarely the most to blame. Yes, what this film adds to the mix is a cutting and complex portrayal of the parent/child dynamic. In retrospect, the opening scene of the film (which I think runs the gamut of human emotion all within the course of two minutes) prepares the audience for this tumultuous relationship, and as this thread develops, it grounds the film and makes it more significant. Metcalf’s portrayal of Marion may be the stand-out performance in a film with several other stand-out performances. She is likely the name we’ll hear most associated with this film come Oscar time, and if not, Marion’s character is certainly the one who is left rattling around in my head at the end.

Lady Bird is not a perfect movie, and it’s not a groundbreaking movie. It is, however, excellent at what it does, and it is very easy to like. Even those people who left the theater with me who were caught off guard by Lady Bird, most likely liked the movie. This is probably because unlike many mainstream films, Lady Bird has several different methodologies that an audience can take away. It’s a coming of age story, it’s a religious parable, it’s a family drama, it’s a love story, it’s a story about rejection and acceptance, about friendship, and that’s just the tip of the iceberg. It is also a film that positions writer/director Greta Gerwig as one of the foremost emerging storytellers in cinema. B+

Lady Bird is rated R and has a running time of 1 hour and 34 minutes.

Advertisements

Coco

CocoDirectors: Lee Unkirch and Adrian Molina

Screenwriter: Lee Unkirch, Jason Katz, Matthew Aldrich, and Adrian Molina

Cast: Anthony Gonzalez, Gael Garcia Bernal, Benjamin Bratt, Alanna Ubach, and Edward James Olmos

So I was about to write a review of the Justice League because I saw it, and it was the only movie I’d seen recently. I was not too excited about reviewing it because the movie didn’t really give me much of an angle to take. It’s just an okay superhero movie that does what they all do. I was going to do it anyway because dammit, I’m a professional, and I have a quota to keep (as miniscule as it is)! And then the opportunity presented itself for me to take my 3-year-old daughter to see Coco. Now my daughter has only attended one movie and we made it about half way through before she decided she wanted to leave. This time, however, we stayed for the entire movie (including the 30 minute Frozen short film that preceded the feature), so thankfully I have a film that is much more fun to review than Justice League and here it is!

Coco TItle

Coco is another triumph of Pixar studios animation. Every one of their movies has such a distinct and unique environment, which is one of the cornerstones to their ability to stay fresh, inspired, and lively after all of these years. What may surprise you, however is that Coco marks only the fourth time in 19 films where the story focuses primarily on human characters. Only The Incredibles, Brave, and Up have previously done so. That alone, puts Coco in rarified air.

Coco is the story of a young boy named Miguel (voiced by Anthony Gonzalez), who lives in a small Mexican village with his family. Miguel’s family is in the business of making shoes, but what is most pressing to Miguel is his family’s total and complete ban on all music. It turns out Miguel’s great-great grandfather walked out on his family to pursue a career in music and ever since, his family has forbidden all members from engaging in, listening to, or most of all producing any form of music. Miguel, however, has the itch and when he discovers that an old family photo with his great-great grandfather’s face ripped off also features the famous guitar of one of Mexico’s most iconic singers Ernesto de la Cruz (voiced by Benjamin Bratt), Miguel concludes that he is actually related to the most famous musician in the world! That’s enough to inspire Miguel to challenge his family’s ban on music and compete in the village talent show on the Day of the Dead. Unfortunately, Miguel’s family catches wind of his plan and his Abuelita, grandmother Elena (voiced by Renee Victor) destroys his guitar. Desperate, Miguel breaks into the shrine to the late Ernesto de la Cruz where his famous guitar is displayed and steals it resulting in Miguel being suddenly cursed and transported to the Land of the Dead. The curse makes it so Miguel is no longer visible to the living world. Only a street dog named Dante and the skeletal dead relatives of the living can see Miguel. It turns out to break the curse, Miguel has one day to receive a blessing from his deceased relatives or he will remain in the Land of the Dead forever. Unfortunately, Miguel’s family will not give him their blessing without the condition that he never play music again. This leads Miguel to enlist the help of a lost spirit named Hector (voiced by Gael Garcia Bernal), who claims to have access to Ernesto de la Cruz, a man whose fame in life is only matched by his fame in death. Miguel hopes that if Ernesto grants a blessing to him, he will be able to return home and be a musician.

If there’s one thing you can say about Pixar, it’s that they don’t take a siesta when it comes to story. Justice League is about one-tenth as imaginative as Coco! I mean, first consider the ambition to make story about family, Hispanic culture, tribute, life, death, and tradition. Then consider the added challenge to do all of that in a film aimed at a young audience. Remarkable stuff. The name of the film, “Coco” actually is in reference to Miguel’s great grandmother. She was just 2 or 3 when Miguel’s great-great grandfather left his family. Now Coco is Miguel’s oldest living relative and her memory is fading. This detail develops the film’s most stirring and poignant theme, remembrance. Coco’s fading memory in the Living World is juxtaposed with how the Hector character in the Land of the Dead is in danger of being forgotten forever because his only living relative, and once you are forgotten in the living world, you are gone forever. Pretty deep. Hector’s reason for helping Miguel is not out of the kindness of his heart, but in the hopes that Miguel would return to the Living World and place a picture of Hector on his ofrenda, a Spanish word meaning offering. An ofrenda is a collection of offerings placed on a ritual alter during the Day of the Dead as a gesture of remembrance and an invitation to the Land of the Living for the dead to refresh themselves at the alter. Since Hector is not on anyone’s ofrenda, he is not able to travel to the Land of the Living during the Day of the Dead, he is not able to refresh his spirit, and he is therefore in danger of being completely forgotten. This resonates deeply with the adult audience because of our awareness of our mortality, reputation, and choices. Having attended this film with my 3-year-old girl, I can also speak to this message’s impact on her. Did she ponder her place in the universe and the afterlife? No, of course not. But she did think about Grandma and Nana. She did talk about her brother. She did see characters crying because they were happy and understand the importance of that feeling. That’s a pretty damn decent return on investment for a $7 movie ticket!

So emotions aside, is this a perfect movie? Not exactly, but it does belong in the upper tier of the Pixar conversation. It’s slow build at the start is easily overlooked due to its heart, lack of melodrama, pleasing music, and also its visual beauty. Every great Pixar film has a distinct visual style, but I think that objectively, Coco is the most beautiful film they have delivered so far. The color palate, the vibrant environments, and the hypnotic combination of sight and sound deliver an amazing cinematic experience. A-

Coco is rated PG and has a running time of 1 hour and 42 minutes. Be warned though, there’s a short film that precedes the feature starring Olaf and the characters from Frozen, and it is about 30 minutes long! It is an amusing short film, but if you were looking to be in the theater for less than 2 ½ hours, you may want to consider arriving to the show late.

IMG_2191
The People’s Critic and his protégé.

Thor: Ragnarok

ThorDirector: Taika Waititi

Screenwriters: Eric Pearson, Craig Kyle, and Christopher Yost

Cast: Chris Hemsworth, Tom Hiddleston, Cate Blanchett, Mark Ruffalo, Idris Elba, Jeff Goldblum, Tessa Thompson, Karl Urban, and Anthony Hopkins

Most franchises 17 films deep into their canon start to spin their wheels, cash in, and forget what got them there in the first place. I mean there are just so many that get this far, am I right? I know you’re all saying but 1989s Godzilla vs. Biollante was such a great 17th movie in a franchise! Well for every Godzilla vs. Biollante there’s a Timothy Dalton as James Bond.

That’s right, if you couldn’t quite catch my subtext there, the point I was trying to make is that Thor: Ragnarok is the 17th studio film in the Marvel Cinematic Universe (MCU), and it’s pretty rare to see a franchise reach film number 17 and for that film to be as entertaining as this one is. Thor: Ragnarok basically picks up where Thor: The Dark World left off…or it would if this were a traditional sequel, but Thor has appeared in two other films since the second Thor film, and the MCU has released 8 films since 2013’s The Dark World. Therefore, Ragnarok is more like a sequel to Doctor Strange than a sequel to Thor: The Dark World. So Thor 3 basically takes some of the characters from Thor 2 and Avengers 2 and picks up where Doctor Strange 1 leaves off with a nod to Guardians of the Galaxy 2’s conflict, which complicates the events from Captain America 3. And if that makes sense to you, I have some tesseracts I’d like to sell you.

If you didn’t follow that bizarre set up, here’s one that might make more sense: Thor: Ragnarok finds Thor (Chris Hemsworth) unsuccessful in his search for the remaining infinity stones and returning home to Asgard only to notice that the 9 realms have gotten a little disorganized in his absence. Why? Well, Loki (Tom Hiddleston) of course! Those sons of Odin (Anthony Hopkins) are at it again, but this time the brothers learn that they

thorragnarok-cateblanchett-throneroom
Cate Blanchett as Hela in Thor: Ragnarok

both have an older sister named Hela (Cate Blanchett), who has escaped from a prison she was sealed within long ago. Hela is Odin’s first born, and she was banished from Asgard for her unrelenting ambition. Now she looks to bring “Ragnarok” (or final destruction) to Asgard. Her first step is to get those brothers of hers out of the way, and so she casts them into space where the ultimately land on a trash planet called Sakaar and ruled by the Grandmaster (Jeff Goldblum). Now Thor must find a way to escape Sakaar and save his home planet from destruction.

While that synopsis is the gist of this film, the joyride that is Thor: Ragnarok is almost entirely separate from its plot. Humor is the key to this film’s success, and Disney/Marvel’s decision to tap Aussie writer/director/actor Taika Waititi most notable for his hilarious vampire comedy What We Do in the Shadows was a brilliant decision. This is easily the funniest Marvel film in the franchise. Every Marvel film brandishes humor here and there, but never has the humor been as clever, witty, and endearing as it is here. That’s not to say it’s not also an action film. Blanchett is wickedly brilliant as the scorned and rejected Hela, and for my money, she is now in the top three Marvel villains ever, only rivaled by Michael Keaton’s turn as Vulture in Spider-Man: Homecoming and the great Tom Hiddleston as Loki (villainy with a dash of heroism). Speaking of Hiddleston, he is once again great to see back donning the Loki horns. While he basically stole the show in Thor: The Dark World, he has far more competition in this film, but still does not disappoint. The competition I speak of is everywhere. Hemsworth, fresh off

ghostbusters-chris-hemsworth
Chris Hemsworth in 2016’s Ghostbusters

being the most comedic part of the 2016 Ghostbusters reboot, flexes his comedy muscles (along with his other muscles) and delivers a great performance. Mark Ruffalo gets perhaps his most involved plotline to date and has some fun stepping into Tony Stark’s shoes…literally. And then there’s Jeff Goldblum as the Grandmaster, who turns the mostly evil immortal from the comics into the most delightful occasionally sinister master of ceremonies to great effect! Just to add some legitimacy to this acclaim, the actors onscreen in this film net a total of 17 Oscar nominations combined. Really.

Thor: Ragnarok is the most surprising Marvel film I’ve seen based on the expectations I had going in. The trailers make the film look like it’s basically a video game where Thor fights Hulk gladiator style and Jeff Goldblum steps in to say, “Eh, Hellooo.” Those things do happen, but this is a cohesive, jaunty, fresh action comedy that works very well. Mark Mothersbaugh’s score is also not to be ignored, giving the film this quirky, electronic vibe that I loved.  A

Thor: Ragnarok is rated PG-13 and has a running time of 2 hours and 10 minutes. There are two post-film sequences; one midway through the credits and one afterwards. Both are adequate, but nothing you HAVE to stay for if you’re running late for dinner.

MCU Rankings Update:

Since originally ranking the Marvel films after Captain America: Civil War was released, 4 Marvel films have been released and we are about mid-way through “Phase Three” with only Black Panther, Avengers: Infinity War – Part 1, and Captain Marvel set to round it out. Thus, it is time to update the old rankings, and Thor: Ragnarok is the highest entry in nearly 4 years!

  1. Captain America: The Winter Soldier – A
  2. Thor: Ragnarok – A
  3. Iron Man 3 – A
  4. Marvel’s The Avengers – A-
  5. Captain America: Civil War – A-
  6. Iron Man – A-
  7. Avengers: Age of Ultron – A-
  8. Captain America: The First Avenger – B+
  9. Thor – B+
  10. Spider-Man: Homecoming – B+
  11. Ant-Man – B+
  12. Iron Man 2 – B
  13. The Incredible Hulk – B
  14. Thor: The Dark World – B
  15. Guardians of the Galaxy – B-
  16. Guardians of the Galaxy Vol. 2 – C+
  17. Doctor Strange – C+

Blade Runner 2049

BRDirector: Denis Villeneuve

Screenwriters: Hampton Fancher and Michael Green

Cast: Ryan Gosling, Harrison Ford, Robin Wright, Dave Bautista, Ana de Armas, and Jared Leto

Cells. Cells interlinked within cells – interlinked. Do they keep you in a cell? Cells. Interlinked. Within cells interlinked.

Yes, that’s a poor representation of the baseline test used by the LAPD to ascertain whether K (Ryan Gosling), a replicant blade runner, is developing dangerous emotions in the new film Blade Runner 2049.

That’s right, I said “replicant” “blade runner;” one and the same. 30 years of degradation will do that to a society. If you remember back to the 1982 original film, you’ll recall that blade runner units are special police squads tasked with locating and retiring (killing) rogue biological manufactured creatures called replicants that were used “off-world” to develop colonies in the early 21st century. These replicants soon mutinied against their human masters, and those who managed to escape to Earth were hunted down by blade runners. Now, 30 years later in the year 2049, the Tyrell corporation responsible for the original development of replicants is bankrupt and has been absorbed by tech giant, the Wallace corporation. Niander Wallace (Jared Leto) has resurrected the replicant, creating an entirely new breed capable of obeying humans, which allows them to serve at every level of society, even as blade runners, working with the police to help retire older rogue models that continue to persist.  In fact, Wallace also manufactures holographic companions for these new obedient replicants, allowing him to enjoy the double consumer bump of producing consumers who consume their producers’ products! I can picture Jeff Bezos at Amazon headquarters considering a way to get Alexa to want to buy her own Alexa!

Blade Runner 2049 opens with a magnificent sequence where K, one of these new Wallace replicant blade runners is on a mission to track down and retire an old rogue nexus-model replicant named Sapper Morton (Dave Bautista). While at Morton’s, K discovers the buried remains of a deceased female replicant whose death is evidenced by signs of complications from an emergency C-section; no replicant has ever been capable of reproduction. K’s superior, Lieutenant Joshi (Robin Wright) orders K to destroy the remains, and track down and retire the child for fear that public knowledge that replicants can reproduce may start a war. Conversely, Wallace is made privy to the discovery and desires to capture the offspring in the hopes conducting tests on the anomaly in order to create a self-sustaining replicant force that could increase his production off-world exponentially. Now K is caught in the middle between obeying his superiors and facing the reality that replicants are “more human than human.” Suffice it to say, his baseline gets all messed up.

K’s search for the replicant child makes up most of the second half of the 164 minute

screen_shot_2017-02-24_at_2
Harrison Ford as Rick Deckard in Blade Runner 2049

masterpiece, and his journey expands the world we remember from the 1982 film beyond LA, and also leads him to some familiar faces we recall from the original, most notably Rick Deckard (Harrison Ford) who has been hiding out in Las Vegas…or what’s left of it.

 

Blade Runner 2049 dethrones Baby Driver as the best film of 2017 so far. This is also the rare sequel that improves upon its original. Villenuve has been on the cusp of breaking out for some time now. He first arrived on my radar with the 2013 film Prisoners, which I thought was outstanding. That film also marked his first collaboration with his now go-to cinematographer, Roger Deakins, famous for his many films with the Coen Brothers and Sam Mendes. Deakins lends his lens to Villenueve for the third time here, and I think it’s his best effort yet. The visual landscapes, environments, and overall immersion experienced with this film are

screen-shot-2017-05-08-at-1-09-47-pm
Ana de Armas as Joi, an adaptive computer hologram companion in Blade Runner 2049.

breathtaking. Do yourself a favor and see Blade Runner 2049 on the big screen. In his previous film, Arrival, Villenueve used cinematographer Bradford Young, and Young received an Oscar nod for it. It turned out, while Villenueve was wrapping up Arrival, he was already working and storyboarding Blade Runner 2049 with Deakins. I mentioned in my Oscar predictions last year that I was excited to see Villenueve was coming off Arrival and going right into Blade Runner 2049 with Deakins. I now can comfortably predict that Deakins will receive his 13th Oscar nomination for this film, and, I also expect, his first win!

Blade Runner 2049 is a visual achievement, but it is also a triumph of science fiction and exploration into the flawed emotionality of the human being. Villenueve and original screenwriter, Hampton Fancher deepen the themes and ideas introduced in the 1982 original, creating a superb overall film that demands repeat viewings. A

Blade Runner 2049 is rated R and has a running time of 2 hours and 44 minutes.

American Made

AMDirector: Doug Liman

Screenwriter: Gary Spinelli

Cast: Tom Cruise, Domhnall Gleeson, Sarah Wright, and Jesse Plemons

I had an idea once for a movie where I’d pluck out a completely inconsequential character from a well-known film, and then base an entire story around that character. What I love most about this idea is that the film I write would stand firmly on its own two feet with no overt mention to the protagonist’s connection to the larger, famous work. Only those who pick up the subtle clues would ever even be able to connect them.

I had a similar experience watching American Made. I’ll admit that I am not up to date on my drug cartel history, but I do watch and love the Netflix series, Narcos. So as I’m sitting, watching, and enjoying Tom Cruise’s new film American Made, I suddenly start thinking, “I know the name Barry Seal. Wasn’t he in an episode of Narcos?” And then two things happened: 1. I felt what it would be like to have that revelation of realizing a frivolous character from one story is now the subject of another, and 2. I realized I knew everything that was going to happen in this movie. I loved realizing the first thing, but I was not as excited about realizing the second one.

The good news is I love Tom Cruise, and he made up for all the predictability that followed. So it turns out, yes, this is the story of Barry Seal – they guy from Season 1, Episode 4 of Narcos. Seal, played by Tom Cruise is a TWA pilot, who as America is in the grips of the Cold War during the 1970s catches the attention of a CIA agent, Monty Schafer (Domhnhall Gleeson). Seal has been smuggling Cuban cigar exiles into the states as a means of additional income, and Schafer sees Seal’s activity not so much as punishable but as exploitative. Schafer offers Seal a chance to work secretly for the government, taking reconnaissance photos of South American guerilla camps and delivering bribes to Nicaraguan and Panamanian politicians and military personnel for information.

Of course, the CIA doesn’t pay much, and Barry wants nothing more than to make a great life for his wife Lucy (Sarah Wright) and kids. That being said, it doesn’t take long for the Columbian drug cartel headed by Jorge Ochoa (Alejandro Edda), Carlos Ledher (Fredy Yate Escobar), and an up-and-coming-kid Pablo Escobar (Mauricio Mejía) to take notice of an American spy plane running in and out of South America on a pretty regular basis. The cartel sees Seal’s activity not so much as punishable but as exploitative…rinse, wash, repeat (see what I did there?).

The movie spends the rest of its focus watching Seal bounce back and forth between running drugs for the cartel and informing on “Commies” for the CIA. Meanwhile Seal just keeps getting richer, and richer and richer.

Still, the movie doesn’t jive like I wanted it to. I think director Doug Liman and screenwriter, Gary Spinelli bet on the fact that most people who see this film wouldn’t have seen episode 4 of Narcos. I also think they knew Tom Cruise in a plane is something people enjoy. Additionally, this marks the second collaboration between Liman and Cruise after 2014’s Edge of Tomorrow, or was it called Live Die Repeat? No one knows for sure. Anyway, that was a great movie and Liman directed the hell out of it, a film which was basically Groundhog Day meets Terminator and has Cruise reporting to Brenden Gleeson. So why couldn’t Doug Liman direct the hell out of a movie that is basically The Wolf of Wall Street meets Top Gun where Cruise is reporting to Dohmnall Gleeson? He can and he pretty much does. Liman gets a great performance out of Cruise, and a little birdy tells me there are at least two more Liman/Cruise joints in the works. This is good news.

What doesn’t quite jive for me in this film are the circumstances, a deficit that I think mostly falls on the writing. There is a lot of coincidence and shrugging off of impossible situations in American Made. At one moment Seal is in a Columbian prison as government agents are about to raid his New Orleans home with his family asleep inside. The next moment, Seal and his family are living in Arkansas and they own an airplane hanger. It’s not quite that sudden, but it’s pretty close. Gleeson’s Agent Schafer character is also oddly underdeveloped and while I understand his persona is supposed to be mysterious, he seems contradictory and far more dramatic than necessary. Lastly, Jesse Plemons is in this movie as a local sheriff, and I have to assume there is a cache of great footage of him on the cutting room floor somewhere because what’s left of his character is barely an arc.

All in all, Cruise continues to entertain and gives more than just an action-packed performance. In a fall season where all there is to see is It for the 10th time, this is a worthy film that has far more high points than low ones. B

American Made is rated R and has a running time of 1 hour and 55 minutes.

The Worst Movie I’ve Ever Seen…

badcowork_introWith the backlash and outrage aimed at mother! this past weekend, my wife casually asked me, “What’s the worst movie you’ve ever seen?” As a movie critic, I was surprised at how I didn’t really have an answer to this question at the ready. I generally try to only see movies that I hope I’ll like, and while I am occasionally disappointed, I usually can find some aspect that salvages the experience from being completely worthless. However, her question prompted me to delve into my cinematic history, parse through the depths, and once and for all recognize one film as the worst one I’ve ever seen.

Now I want to be clear, since I try to avoid the bad ones, I have not seen classically hated movies like Gigli, Troll 2, or Battlefield Earth, so they cannot be the worst movie I’ve seen. Still, I’ve seen a lot of movies, and like any serious undertaking, this decision requires some preparation and a few ground rules. Obviously, when discussing any medium of art and expression, the overall reaction is entirely subjective. Therefore, I need to determine what it is to me that makes a movie terrible. After racking my brain, I’ve determined that the following 4 factors are critical in determining a film’s lack of value.

  1. Story – If the story is contrived, poorly written, implausible, or a combination of these things, then the movie is in trouble. A great story can salvage bad acting, but bad acting cannot save a bad story. Writing and originality factor into this piece of criteria as well.
  2. Acting – Yes, acting does play a major role in determining a movie’s greatness. So much of how we interact, empathize, and respond to a movie has to do with how we project our values and opinions onto the people playing the parts.
  3. Dullness – This is perhaps the most important factor of all. Movies can be good-bad or bad-bad. The difference has to do with dullness. If a movie is dull with poor pacing and extended periods of just nothing going on, then the movie is doomed. Many interior sub-areas influence this category including music, directing and editing.
  4. Technical – Sometimes a bad movie can be saved by its technical achievements or visual aspect. Additionally, sometimes a good movie can be mired in terrible technical blunders, mistakes, and shortcomings. And worst of all, sometimes a bad move can be made dreadful when the technical pieces put the last nail in the coffin.

Additionally, there are a few movies that I hated so much that I turned them off or walked out on them. Ironically, those films will not be considered in my deliberation since I never saw them in their entirety. For the record, this is a rare occurrence with me, as I prefer to see films through regardless of how bad they are, and the films I turned off or walked out on would likely not have displaced my ultimate choice for worst movie I ever saw.

Now that I have my criteria in place, I am ready to reveal the worst movie I’ve ever seen; however, if you know The People’s Critic, then you know I can’t do this without making it a list. So I give to you, The People’s Critic’s Five Worst Movies I’ve Ever Seen (by the way, I’ve seen mother! and it’s nowhere near this list).

5.  A Good Day to Die Hard

Die HardSo what went wrong? First of all, no more catch phrases or cliches. “Yippee Ki-Yay” is grandfathered in, but now we’re reminded that John McClane is “old” and “on vacation” at least ten times. This repetition serves no purpose except to go for a cheap laugh, but you’ll never hear the laughter over most of the theater slapping their hands to their foreheads in disgust. Furthermore, this installment takes place in Russia. In one scene, John is handed a tour book by his daughter, Idiot’s Guide to Russia. Clearly, it was the same book Skip Woods used to write the screenplay because the film exposes Russia’s traffic issues, introduces characters named Viktor, Yuri, and Anton, and its climax seals the cliché deal by taking place at Chernobyl. Oh, did I mention Yuri is introduced playing chess, so we know he’s a smart Russian? Disappointing stuff.

Then there’s the action. Atrocious sound stage garbage. Action confined in one setting for ten minutes with no real danger becomes dull in 30 seconds. The previous four films did not feel so confined to sound-stages as this one does (even though the first two had McClane trapped in a building and an airport respectively), and it ruins any tension or fun.

Finally, if one wants to make a sequel, then make a sequel. What happened to Bonnie Bedelia as McClane’s now ex-wife, Holly? Where’s good ole’ Reginald VelJohnson as Sgt. Powell? Why introduce all of those fun tech-geeks in Live Free or Die Hard only to strand them in that film? Screenwriters, listen up; these character actors will sign up if the story is there!

4.  Only God Forgives

Only God ForgivesNot a lot happens in Only God Forgives as several scenes are composed of people just moving around, albeit moving around slowly and deliberately.  Many scenes are composed of one-shots (one character in the frame) that last 30 seconds or more!  This results in manufacturing the slowest 89 minute film in recent memory.

There is not much good to be said for the film.  Ryan Gosling is practically emotionless, giving the blandest performance of his career, although clearly steered by director, Nicholas Winding Refn.

Winding Refn’s directorial choices are certainly strange from time to time.  With virtually no exposition, his film complicates matters by introducing confusing segments of “dream-like” scenarios (most of which include red dragon wallpaper) that may or may not be real. Furthermore, a major talking point for this film is its use of violence.  Only God Forgives appears to be an instrument for Winding Refn to release his own personal anger against spirituality, against God, against mothers – it’s an angry film.  Much of this anger manifests as violence and while occasionally off screen, two rather brutal scenes do not hold back. These scenes drip of anger but offer little redeeming quality (See No Country for Old Men for a film that accomplishes the task of personifying wrath).

Only God Forgives is a mostly failed attempt at expounding on the undertakings of an angry God.  Instead of making a film that analyzes and examines anger, he has made one that simply exudes his own.

3.  Savages

savaIs Savages pulp? Yes. Is Savages fiction? Oh God I hope so. But Savages is definitely not Pulp Fiction, despite its desperate attempt to be, including casting John Travolta. Savages is a gritty, hard-core examination of the cut-throat high pressure, high stakes game of marijuana cartels. Wait, what? Marijuana cartels? Oliver Stone crafts a screenplay, with help from Don Winslow who penned the source material, that does explain this unorthodox cartel’s extremely violent nature. The story is actually very simple. Young marijuana entrepreneurs gain the attention of a major drug cartel who kidnaps their shared girlfriend in order to force their hand to deal with them. Those entrepreneurs are played by Taylor Kitsch and Aaron Johnson. The shared girlfriend who drags her nails across the chalkboard with flat acting and dreadful voiceover is played lumberingly by Blake Lively. Why they want her back is the film’s biggest mystery. Her character, O, is named after Hamlet’s deranged, suicidal lost love and she hints from the first line of the movie that she may not be alive at the end, providing some powerful wishful thinking. The biggest problem with Savages is the same with most Oliver Stone movies that don’t work, its agenda. Now, this time there is no political agenda; instead it’s a “look how edgy I am” agenda. This agenda is completely fulfilled by putting the viewers out of their misery with one of the worst endings in recent memory.

I could go on about what doesn’t work in this movie, but I feel the point is made. Instead, I’ll quickly mention the things that do work. Benicio Del Toro’s character is introduced with brutal gusto. Also, the film is mostly in focus, even during the ridiculous number of close ups. That’s about it.

2.  Freddy Got Fingered

Freddy90s “comedian” Tom Green wrote and directed this mess, and I fell for it. I was 20 or 21 and Tom Green was kind of still happening, so I went to see it with some friends. Green was known for being a bit of a stunt comedian where he’d play pranks on unsuspecting people. Not bad, not great. However, as his popularity grew, his stunts became more gross-out related; queue Freddy Got Fingered, which demonstrates the rule that when gross-out goes wrong, it goes way, way wrong. Pink Flamingos, There’s Something About Mary, South Park, these films work on a subversive level, but Tom Green went for derivative and there he will sit for eternity. There are no words for the feeling you experience while watching the protagonist of a major studio film cackle wildly while manually stimulating a male elephant. No words. I hated this movie to the point that for a moment when my wife asked me what the worst movie I’ve ever seen was, this sprang to mind and I almost answered definitively, but it did manage to only reach #2. Which is actually perfect in that it achieves nothing, not even the distinction of being the worst.

1.  Sgt. Pepper’s Lonely Hearts Club Band

PepperNumber one on this list nearly lost its spot on a technicality, in that this was a film I had previously turned off in disgust, only to reluctantly return to and finish just to say I did it. This film is the ultimate disaster and personal retribution because not only is it a dull, pointless, poorly acted pile of trash, it also does irreversible damage to my previously untarnished images of The Beatles, Alice Cooper, Billy Preston, Peter Frampton, and Steve Martin (The Bee Gees were already kind of ridiculous to me). And that’s what put it over the edge; none of the previous films caused any real long-term damage like this one did. Why did this movie have to happen?

The movie is basically an incomprehensible variety show hoping to capitalize on Beatles covers but failing and collapsing into a gestating puddle of embarrassment and technical misery. I’m pretty sure director Michael Schultz literally put the camera on a tripod, hit record, and just left. I know that sounds like a hyperbole, but if you watch it, you’ll see what I mean – and this is a “concert film,” but the camera doesn’t do anything!

This movie commits the ultimate shame of masquerading a business deal as a film and hoodwinking young people to pay into it. Now it rightfully is dejected as the horrendous dumpster fire that it is, but it did do one thing for me; it gave me a definitive answer to my wife’s question (although I wish it had a different title, so I wouldn’t have to be so specific):

What’s the worst movie you’ve ever seen?

Why, it’s Sgt. Pepper’s Lonely Hearts Club Band – the 1978 movie, not the album. The album is a masterpiece; the movie is complete and utter garbage!

What do you think? What’s the worst movie you’ve ever seen? I’d love to know! Feel free to Tweet me @Peoples_Critic or respond in the comments.

It (2017)

ItDirector: Andy Muschietti

Screenwriters: Chase Palmer, Cary Fukunaga, and Gary Dauberman

Cast: Jaeden Lieberher, Jeremy Ray Taylor, Sophia Lillis, Finn Wolfhard, Chosen Jacobs, Jack Dylan Grazer, Wyatt Oleff, and Bill Skarsgård

Man, this is a strange movie. The movie is strange from the narrative perspective. The movie is strange from the psychological perspective. The movie is strange from the commentary perspective. The movie is strange from a meta perspective (starring one of the boys from Stranger Things, an obvious derivative of Stephen King’s novel It, of which this film is based). This movie is strange from the tone, to the look, to the mood, right down to the challenge of writing a review about It, that doesn’t confuse the title with the non-gender, singular English pronoun, “it,” when referencing It… at least not by accident.

Fans of It have already seen their beloved coming of age horror hit the screen once before, albeit the small screen. The 1990 mini-series based on King’s novel was very well received and has more or less stood the test of time, partially thanks to the ensemble cast that included John Ritter, Tim Curry, Harry Anderson, and Jonathan Brandis. That version’s pervasiveness in pop culture is likely the reason it took so long to get it on the big screen…that and the book’s 1,138 page length (King’s second longest novel next to The Stand).

It opens in the quiet little town of Derry, Maine with that same thrilling, iconic, and horrifying scene that opens the novel as well as the 1990 mini-series, only this time Bill (Jaeden Lieberher) and Georgie (Jackson Robert Scott) live in the 1980s. The decision to shift the time period from the 1950s to the 1980s is a good one, as King meant for the childhood of these characters to be based on their adult lives being contemporary. I won’t spoil the events of the opening scene, but suffice it to say, the tension is ultra high and Bill Skarsgård’s first appearance as Pennywise the Dancing Clown does not disappoint.

Strange things are happening in Derry, Maine following the tragic events that unfold in the film’s opening scene. Summer is here, school is out, and kids are disappearing. A group of kids find themselves united by some strange visions they’ve all experienced, all of which include the presence of an evil clown figure. “The Loser’s Club,” as they’ve come to be known includes the aforementioned Bill, chubby intellectual Ben, (Jerry Ray Taylor), chatterbox Richie (Finn Wolfhard), asthmatic Eddie (Jack Dylan Grazer), neurotic Stanley (Wyatt Oleff), outcast Beverly (Sophia Lillis), and eventually the ultimate fish out of water, Mike (Chosen Jacobs) whose backstory is only hinted at in this film, but will most likely play a much larger role in the upcoming second chapter.

The Losers all have one goal: to find, stop and kill the strange clown-like being that haunts their lives, preys on their fears, and attacks the children of Derry. Well, that and to avoid the dreaded bully Henry Bowers (Nicholas Hamilton), who makes a strong case for being even more threatening than the shape-shifting, demonic, clown monster!

It is mostly a pretty impressive effort. The film oozes with the horror tropes expected with the genre, but also manages to successfully execute the careful tonal shifts that made the book so beloved and treasured for all of these years. The length was certainly a challenge to overcome, and thankfully, director Andy Muschietti and the film’s three screenwriters made the evolved decision to focus only the young protagonists’ story in this film (the novel bounces back and forth between two timelines separated by 27 years). This decision allows the narrative to breathe and not feel too jumbled and busy by trying to capture so many characters in so many different situations. This also all but guarantees a follow-up film that will tackle the story of the adult Losers Club (the $123 million opening weekend probably didn’t hurt the chances of a sequel either). As a matter of fact, the young stars of the film have already selected who they think should play them as adults, and if I may say so – these are some great choices! Still, the film is solid as a stand-alone story on its own.

Speaking of the kids, films like this can easily survive and thrive with one-dimensional performances from the child actors. However, this film decided to ignore that laziness and cast the most perfect and outstanding group of young actors I’ve seen on film in some time. Mostly unknowns, each of these kids found a way to be memorable, convincing, and most of all authentic to his or her character from the book, allowing the film maker to spend more time with these characters and develop them well. So instead of a 100 minute thrill-ride, we got a 135 minute opus that feels eventful, crafted, and most of all, fun!

Here I am rambling on, and I have not even gotten to Bill Skarsgård yet. “It” can’t be easy

Clowns
Some killer clowns (from clockwise): Skarsgård, Curry, Nicholson, and Ledger)

to step into the great Tim Curry’s oversized shoes (a pun I expect will be commonly found in reviews of this film) as Pennywise.  However, Skarsgård’s performance, while clearly inspired by Curry is very much his own. He succeeds in the same way that Heath Ledger succeeded in taking on the role of the Joker in The Dark Knight after Jack Nicholson played him in 1989’s Batman (we’ll leave the Jared Leto version out for now). It’s a grimier, dirtier, more macabre Pennywise. In fact, the 1989 Batman film is listed on the marquis of the Derry town cinema; perhaps a reference to this dual “clown” generational performance, or perhaps just a hint at Warner Brothers’ Justice League coming out this fall.

Are there flaws here? Sure. At the end of the day, this is another reboot; a term becoming all too common in the mainstream entertainment world. What’s that one thing that was popular just long ago enough to be slightly outdated, but also nostalgically relevant? Let’s remake it! I’m not saying It is not a film worth making, but when it comes to criticism and recommending whether you should go spend your money or not, originality matters. Still, this still manages to “float” above the standard fare for the horror genre, and wisely attempts to tap into not just the horror but the heart as well. B+

It is rated R and has a running time of 2 hours and 15 minutes.