Cast: Dean-Charles Chapman, George MacKay, Colin Firth, Andrew Scott, and Benedict Cumberbatch
1917 is first high profile World War I film since 2011’s…did you see that tracking shot? …uh, 2011’s War Horse directed by Steven…that tracking shot though… ahem, Spielberg – who has championed Mendes’s career since the beginning… I mean the first one was at least 30 minutes long right! Where did he even cut?… Now Mendes has emerged with his best film since 2002’s Road to Perdition….there are hidden cuts in there; there must be, but regardless – that tracking shot!
Ok, have I drawn enough attention to the obvious elephant in the film? 1917, shot as one continuous shot, is not the first to attempt this style of narrative, but it is certainly one of the most ambitious and successful at it! Films as far back as Alfred Hitchcock’s Rope or as recent as Alejandro González Iñárritu’s films Birdman and The Revenant have executed this technique. Sometimes this method is used ironically or as a stunt, but in the case of 1917, it is used to accentuate the point that the events of this film are happening in real time. Brilliant and legendary cinematographer Roger Deakins beautifully implements Mendes’s vision, all but guaranteeing him his second Oscar in three years after having had 14 straight nominations go the other way.
The plot of 1917 is rather simple: A pair of soldiers are sent on a crucial mission to deliver orders for a Colonel MacKenzie (Benedict Cumberbatch) to stand down before walking into a trap that would cost 1600 soldiers their lives. It’s a race against time (hence the single-shot shooting style) as the two men cross enemy lines in an attempt to deliver the message in time. The two men are Lance Corporal Blake (Dean-Charles Chapman) and Lance Corporal Schofield (George MacKay), British soldiers selected by General Erinmore (Colin Firth) because Blake’s brother is part of MacKenzie’s command that will be decimated by the Germans if the message is not received in time. The movie painstakingly documents these men’s journey through the trenches and across enemy territory in the hopes of preventing a tragic tactical mistake.
Mendes does an excellent job of crafting a simple plot but giving us a powerful story, a story that is personal to him. The idea for the film, which is fiction, is based on a story Mendes’s own grandfather, a World War I veteran, told him. The story was one of another soldier tasked with carrying a message into no-man’s land during the war. Sam Mendes used that story as the basis for 1917 and dedicated the film to his grandfather and the many others like him who fought for our freedom. This gives the film an added layer of quality, but regardless, 1917 is a film that is certainly technically brilliant; it managed 10 Oscar nominations without a single one in any acting category, which is precisely what happened with another technical marvel from 2015, Mad Max: Fury Road. Like that film, 1917 is also narratively engrossing in all the best ways making it one of the best films of the year. A
1917 is rated R and has a running time of one hour and 59 minutes.
The year 2019 was a pretty good year at the movies, and as the end of a decade, it really feels like a culmination of something and hopefully a fresh step forward to something new. If you haven’t already, read my Top Ten Films of the Decade post to get a sense of what the last ten years in movies can tell us about where we’ve been and where we’re going. However, the issue at hand is 2019. A lot of movies were released in 2019 thanks to the proliferation of streaming services and their dedication to releasing incredible amounts of quality content on top of the traditional studio and independent releases. So let’s get on to it. 2019: The good, the bad, and the ugly.
10. Knives Out – This one wins the audience award for sure. Of all the films on my list, no film had the audience howling like this one. Billed as a Rian Johnson whodunit, an all-star cast is full of suspects after a wealthy mystery writer suddenly falls dead, and foul play is suspected. Queue two-hours of dark, maddening hijinks that keep the audience guessing but most of all amused. This is a modern-day Clue or Gosford Park full of suspense and laughs. This movie feels like a subtle “jab” at one of the films in my worst of the year list, as one of his previous films was somewhat “sliced and diced” by another with diminishing returns. Well played, Mr. Johnson.
9. A Beautiful Day in the Neighborhood – I thought I knew what I was in for when I walked in to see this movie. After having seen the wonderful 2018 documentary about Fred Rogers, Won’t You Be My Neighbor, I expected a sentimental dramatization of the true events of Rogers’s life. That is not what this film is, and that is a good thing. A Beautiful Day in the Neighborhood is a perfect companion piece to the 2018 documentary rather than an adaptation of it by letting us see the power of people like Rogers and the impact a kind, contemplative person can have on all of us. Most will be surprised to find Tom Hanks’s portrayal of Rogers as more of a secondary role in this film. The main story follows Matthew Rhys as investigative journalist, Lloyd Vogel who reluctantly accepts a job to write a fluff piece on Rogers only to have his life changed immeasurably. A true heart-warmer, and an understated success for director Marielle Heller.
8. The Lighthouse– Two lighthouse keepers arrive for a four-week shift looking after a lighthouse. At night, there’s little to do but eat, drink, and talk and much of the film is dedicated to these activities, but that’s where we as the audience learn the most. These men have secrets. This actor’s journey of minimalist, psychological horror is one fascinating ride! Willem Dafoe puts out a vicious, raw, funny, and technical performance, and Robert Pattinson too gives a layered and impressive character. This is a challenging but amazingly engrossing film.
7. Parasite – Word of mouth has been non-stop for this South Korean comedic horror satire. Writer/Director Bong Joon Ho has been quietly dominating critical and box office success with films like Snowpiercer, The Host, and Okja just to name a few. With Parasite, it seems like he’s broken through completely by creating a universally relatable parable of class and culture that begins one way and takes a dramatically fascinating turn. Both halves of the film are tremendously compelling and enjoyable, but for entirely different reasons. This is Ho’s masterpiece in a catalog full of near-masterpieces.
6. Midsommar – This is the most beautifully shot film on my list this year. Ari Aster’s latest film is a slow burn with some of the most unsettling horror seen on screen in some years. A group of students arrive in a rural and secretive Swedish community with the hope of learning about their culture and studying their anthropological presence. The beauty of the film starkly contrasts some truly terrifying stuff, and the result is a highly effective and deeply effective.
The Top Five:
5. Avengers: Endgame – This movie is actually epic, and I use that term without hyperbole. The Russo brothers have assembled a true love letter that spans the entire run of the most successful film franchise in history. This is how a saga should end (a certain film in my worst of the year list should take notes). A strength of all four Avengers films is that even with such bloated cast of characters, every one of them gets a moment to shine. The heart, the humor, the excitement, and the impact of events is as strong as in any of the MCU films, and for my money this is the best Avengers film of the four, and it is also one of the best films of the year.
4. The Irishman – I had to sit with this movie for a while. I’m of the rare minority who when this 3-hour gangster volume ended, I wanted more. I knew I liked it, but I wasn’t sure if my nostalgia and good faith for what this film represented was why I liked it, or if it was truly good. Seeing Martin Scorsese revisit the mobster genre and direct Joe Pesci, Robert DeNiro, Al Pacino, and a host of other notables is hard not to tickle the fancy of any fan of cinema. So, over a month has passed, and the jury is in; The Irishman is a great film (but only one peg higher than a superhero movie, Marty!).
3. Marriage Story – Noah Baumbach has been a powerful force in telling human stories about the fallouts of the fractured family dynamic. His films The Squid and the Whale, Margot at the wedding, While We’re Young, and The Meyerowitz Stories all predominately explore this central theme, so it’s fitting that his latest film is simply called Marriage Story. Here Baumbach is in familiar territory, but never has been so keyed in on the complexities of coupling and then uncoupling in modern America. Baumbach teams up with Adam Driver for the fourth time in this crushing yet beautiful human drama about how marriage and family can be very different things.
2. Joker – At its core, Joker is a character-driven story about Arthur Fleck (Joaquin Phoenix), a meager, struggling performer hoping to someday be a stand-up comedian. Phoenix is excellent in this film allowing Fleck’s struggles to feel very real and human. His decisions, as radical as they are, all come from a raw and authentic place within the character that Phoenix is able to capture and put on display in a very captivating way. Joker as a film also does an excellent job of pitting this dynamic individual against a society that is crumbling into chaos and compartmentalizing into a vastly unsettling class struggle, and what transpires is compelling and profoundly unsettling. Not because it is necessarily “shocking” but because of what it does to us as viewers who will no doubt be feeling a variety of conflicting emotions by the end – all worth examining.
1. Once Upon a Time…in Hollywood – What we have here is a modern-day auteur at the top of his technical game taking chances and making movies that still make an audience appreciate the medium and the experience it can offer. There’s tremendous atmosphere populated with thrilling takes on movies, dreams, American culture, music and the divisive nature of society. Plus there’s a bitching soundtrack! Many will cite this as being the least “Tarantino” of all of his films, whatever that means; however, while the plot is perhaps more loose than his previous films, Tarantino captures the atmosphere of this dynamic time with great success. There’s a lot going on in this film. On one hand, we have Rick Dalton’s (Leonardo DiCaprio) quest for fame, attempting to leverage some television notoriety into a film career without aging out, becoming typecast, or losing his game all the while battling an internal conflict about whether he is worthy of fame in the first place. Then we have Cliff Booth’s (Brad Pitt) ambiguous, deliberate sojourn through the land of broken dreams. While the two main characters are on two very separate personal journeys, Tarantino craftily balances this film on the relationship between the two men allowing the film to move along nicely despite their uniquely different paths. There’s no arbitrary cliché-constructed conflict dropped on the audience for cheap drama. There’s a sense of history between them both, and this comes through mostly thanks to the exquisite performances given by Pitt and most notably DiCaprio. I have almost nothing bad to say about this movie other than it’s not Tarantino’s best, which is to say it’s still the best movie of 2019 by a long shot, just not the best movie of 1994.
…the Bad and the Ugly
3. Star Wars: The Rise of Skywalker – Just writing these words under this heading fills me with great sorrow. Star Wars movies made my list of the best films of 2015 (The Force Awakens), 2016 (Rogue One: A Star Wars Story), and 2017 (The Last Jedi). All that being said, it pains me to have to put Star Wars: The Rise of Skywalker on the list of the worst films of the year, but here it is. Just five short years after this critic touted J.J Abrams as the true geek-legend who will take the franchise light years beyond where it had been, he now ends it all by leaving me with a bad feeling about where the future of Star Wars once again sits. The film is action packed, but it is also, bloated, uneven, full of loose plotlines, and most of all it’s boring. The Rise of Skywalker did not just disappoint me as a film, but it actually made me like the previous two installments less knowing now where it all was heading.
2. Ford v. Ferrari – Speaking of boring movies, let me give you exhibit B; Ford v. Ferrari. To me, this films is another installment in a troubling cinematic trend. Every year, a handful of “Oscar darling” films are released that follow a virtual template of style and perceived wit. Essentially odd-ducks are paired up to navigate an unkind social climate full of architypes and caricatures that must be thwarted. Upon examining these films, what you really have is a film where everyone is uni-dimensional except the principal characters, and the film progresses with a style that broadly spoon feeds audiences hearty portions of quippy one-liners and unlikely conversations practically winking at the camera instead of being in the moment. The style of this film matches those precisely. These historic, character-driven dramas shot with this disingenuous style ring so false to me, and I wind up caring less and less. Ford v. Ferrari, unfortunately, has little gas in the tank and more or less feels like it’s just going in circles, taking too many pit stops before ultimately just being totaled (puns intended).
1. The Lion King – All in all, The Lion King is very rote, stale, and unimpressive (aside from the visual effects, which are stunning). The decision to play it so safe with this film is a real disappointment and the result is a clunky film with no personality. It boils down to a forgettable rehash that could have been a wonderful update on a classic. When these films do not bring something new to the table, it is hard to see them as anything but a shallow attempt to take our money with familiar branding. And that may have been their goal all along with these films, but if you want me to have a Hakuna Matata attitude about these things, at least make me feel the love. My statement with giving this film the unhallowed designation of being worst film of the year is simply to say to Disney…stop. You had a good year financially, so why not take that green and invest in the new. You hung up Star Wars and The Avengers as we knew them, so use this decade to give us what comes next, not a warmed over reminder of what once was.
Well that does it! What did you think about 2019 or about the decade as a whole in regards to movies? I’d say as a movie year, 2019 fits snugly in the middle of the 2010s decade. Nothing with the explosiveness of 2017 or 2014, but also not a mediocre year. Let me know what you think in the comments.
Screenwriters: Jez Butterworth, John-Henry Butterworth, and Jason Keller
Cast: Matt Damon, Christian Bale, Jon Bernthal, Caitriona Balfe, Josh Lucas, and Tracy Letts
Ford v. Ferrari was released November 15th, and that makes sense because it’s a finely set table of exactly what you expect in heaping quantities with few surprises, and when you’re done you need a nap.
Matt Damon and Christian Bale headline this cinematic slog through the American pastime of driving cars fast. Damon plays Carroll Shelby, a famous race car driver and designer who finds himself with a heart condition that forces him to end his driving career. Of course, you can take the driver out of the car, but you can’t take the car out of the driver, and soon Shelby is busy working for Ford to deliver a car fast enough to defeat Ferrari at the world renowned race at Le Mans. Shelby selects hot-tempered British mechanic Ken Miles (Christian Bale) to be his driver to the chagrin of Ford President Henry Ford II and VP Lee Iococca. Nonetheless, Shelby and Miles must work together with little to gain and everything to lose.
Ford v. Ferrari is this year’s Green Book. Now depending on who you are, that statement will mean different things. To me, it’s another installment in a troubling cinematic trend. Every year, a handful of “Oscar darling” films are released that follow a virtual template of style and perceived wit. Essentially odd-ducks are paired up to navigate an unkind social climate full of architypes and caricatures that must be thwarted. Movies like The Help, Green Book, and Driving Miss Daisy all fall into this category. Now like I said, you may see that list and say, well that’s a pretty good list! What’s the problem? To that I say, that upon examining these films, what you really have is a film where everyone is uni-dimensional except the principal characters, and the film progresses with a style that broadly spoon feed audiences hearty portions of quippy one-liners and unlikely conversations practically winking at the camera instead of being in the moment. Obviously, Ford v. Ferrari does not contain the racial subject matter that the other films I mentioned have, but the style of this film matches those precisely. These historic, character-driven dramas shot with this disingenuous style ring so false to me, and I wind up caring less and less.
We do have the essential ingredients to a film like this in spades though. The main characters of Shelby and Miles are portrayed strongly by Damon and Bale respectively. They ground the movie as best they can, especially through the racing scenes, of which there are many.
Director James Mangold is generally not guilty of producing these kinds of films. In fact, his 2017 film Loganwas raw and exporative despite being a “comic book” movie. Ford v. Ferrari, unfortunately, has little gas in the tank and more or less feels like it’s just going in circles, taking too many pit stops before ultimately just being totaled (puns intended). C-
Ford v. Ferrari is rated PG-13 and has a running time of 2 hours and 32 minutes.
When I heard that a film adaptation was in the works for Doctor Sleep, Stephen King’s sequel to his 1977 novel The Shining, I admit I was worried. When I read the 2013 novel, I remember immediately thinking, “Well, this will never work as a film.” Then, to my surprise, within a few years, it’s announced that it’s already in production, and with the talented horror-guru Mike Flanagan (Haunting of Hill House, Hush) as writer/director. That’s enough to get me in the theater, and fortunately, Doctor Sleep does not disappoint.
As I mentioned, Doctor
Sleep is Stephen King’s long awaited follow up to his horror classic, The Shining. The original film version
of The Shining from 1980 directed by
Stanley Kubrick has taken on a life and mythology of its own being hailed as
one of the greatest horror films of all time as well as inspiring countless
stories and documentaries about some of the strange occurrences associated with
the production. Doctor Sleep picks up
30 years after the events at the Overlook Hotel from the original novel. Danny,
now going by Dan (Ewan McGregor), is a fully grown, recovering alcoholic, and
still has the shine, a term referring
to his psychic abilities. Dan’s pretty messed up as one tends to be after a
haunted hotel possesses your dad leading him to chase you and your mom around
with an axe and just murder a bunch of people before freezing to death in a
hedge maze. Oh…spoiler alert.
Now, Dan is sort of a lost soul leading him to taking a job as a hospice nurse, a job that puts his abilities to good use, as his shine gives him an uncanny ability to help soothe the dying in their final moments – subsequently earning him the nickname Doctor Sleep. The shining is a pretty valuable thing – even more so to a group of steam-punk looking, cultish demons known as the True Knot. Lead by ancient matriarch, Rose the Hat (Rebecca Ferguson), the True Knot travels by RV across the country seeking out those with the shine, torturing them, and then devouring their essence, which they call steam. It’s a motley crew of weridos with weird names to say the least (a tip of the cap to Twin Peaks’s Carel Struycken as Grandpa Flick). They survive on steam and it must be extracted through pain and torture, which results in some very unsettling scenes in the film.
When the True Knot sense the presence of a young girl named Abra (Kyliegh Curran) who possesses incredibly strong abilities, Rose and her band of scoundrels look to hunt her down. Abra reaches out to Dan asking for his help to stop the True Knot from capturing and killing more people in their caravan of death!
I enjoyed Doctor Sleep much more than I expected I would. The performances are good, especially by Rebecca Ferguson as Rose. The horror is quite terrifying in parts, and while The Shining is on a different plane in terms of achievement and experience, Doctor Sleep is a well-told, strongly designed sequel. The nods to the first film are appropriate, but this is a fully realized, complete story all on its own. The adaptation from the source material is extremely faithful in most respects, but Flanagan also takes some massive left turns in other places, most notably with when Abra’s powers manifest and with the film’s ending. Stephen King said in an interview that it is important for readers to understand that the novel Doctor Sleep is a sequel to the novel The Shining and not the film. I think Flanagan took to that approach with this film in that the movie Doctor Sleep is a sequel to the movie The Shining and not the book, therefore the choices he made to deviate from the book make sense to the characters as we know them from the movie (even though I would have loved to see the novel’s ending play out in the film).
Doctor Sleep does
what it set out to do very well. It invokes the spirit of The Shining without needlessly relying on it to stay above water. The
inexplicable 152-minute running time does unsurprisingly result in the occasional
drag here and there, especially in the first act. Still, there’s plenty that
works and more than enough play in this film to keep Doctor Sleep from being a dull boy. B+
Doctor Sleep is rated
R and has a running time of 2 hours and 32 minutes.
Arrr – ye all be a scurvy lot, boastin’ a tall tale of the sea be ye? That is not a line from Robert Egger’s 2019 film, The Lighthouse…but it could have been! The Lighthouse is Egger’s follow up to his film The VVitch: A New-England Folktale, which gained the director a lot of attention in 2015. Now Eggers is back with a film about two lighthouse keepers that will no-doubt have people talking…like a pirate!
stars Willem Dafoe and Robert Pattinson as two lighthouse keepers off the coast
of Nova Scotia sometime in the mid-to-late 19th century. Dafoe plays
Thomas Wake, a grizzled, weather-beaten veteran and foil to Pattinson’s young,
idealistic Ephraim Winslow. Wake and Winslow arrive for a four-week shift
looking after a lighthouse as wickies,
the colloquial term for this occupation. It’s isolating, hard work, as you can
imagine, especially given Wake’s insistence that he is the only one who gets to
keep the light atop the lighthouse, leaving Winslow to most of the hard labor
and grunt work. At night, there’s little to do but eat, drink, and talk and
much of the film is dedicated to these activities, but that’s where we as the
audience learn the most. These men have secrets.
As the film progresses, we get quite a bit of insight on
these men. Both have questionable pasts that have brought them to this “rock”
as Wake calls it, and both are dealing with inner struggle that slowly reveals
itself. That slow burn could result in a slog of a film; Eggers’s dialogue
through the mouths of Dafoe and Pattinson goes a long way. First, a word about
Dafoe. Whether you know it or not, Willem Dafoe has been quietly scooping up
Oscar nominations left and right. Assuming he is nominated for this role (which
in my opinion is a sure thing), he would be receiving his third nomination in
as many years, placing him on the shortlist of actors like Meryl Streep, Al
Pacino, Jack Nicholson, and Marlon Brando who have accomplished such a feat!
Dafoe puts out a vicious, raw, funny, and technical performance as the gritty
Thomas Wake. The credits express thanks to the dark Romanticist, Herman Melville
for inspiring much of the dialect and language for the film, and Dafoe
masterfully spits this lugubrious, Melvillian
prose in such a captivating way that I searched in vain for the screenplay for
this film just so I could read and treasure every syllable of exactly what
resulted when poor Ephraim Winslow expressed disfavor with Thomas Wake’s
prepared lobster dinner. It is a scene for the ages.
Pattinson too gives a layered and impressive performance.
While his character has fewer eccentricities with which to chew the proverbial
scenery, his performance is solid and aggressively mysterious.
For a movie with really only two characters and one principle
setting, The Lighthouse is actually
quite confusing; however, I would preface this with the understanding that this
confusion is mostly deliberate. Writer/Director Robert Eggers layers the film
with texture. Shot entirely in black and white with an aspect ratio of 1.19:1,
the film resembles something out of German expressionism resembling films like The
Cabinet of Dr. Caligari and Nosferatu (coincidentally Dafoe played
Max Schreck, the actor who portrayed Nosferatu, in the 2001 film Shadow of the Vampire). This places us
as viewers in bizarre territory as madness and insanity are tropes often associated
with films that look like this, and The Lighthouse, it seems, is no
exception. Eggers uses Expressionist qualities to tell a fable-like story full
of mystery and mythology that takes some serious unpacking upon its conclusion.
I certainly cannot say I got every bit of this film, but I
can say that I enjoyed the ride from start to finish, and I look forward to reunitin’ with this salty cinematic saga
again one day if the sea-god Triton grants it be so. B+
The Lighthouse is
Rated Arrrrr as has a running time of 1 hour and 5 minutes.
Phoenix, Robert De Niro, Frances Conroy, and Zazie Beetz
Todd Phillips’s dark origin story of the nefarious, titular
Clown Prince of Crime is a moody film that feels much closer to the Christopher
Nolan vision of Gotham City’s milieu
than any of the most recent efforts in the DC universe. And by universe, I mean
adaptations of material from Detective Comics because the makers of Joker have made it quite clear that this
film is not part of what has been called the DC Extended Universe, which
includes films like Batman v. Superman,
Wonder Woman, and Aquaman.
Joker is drawing comparisons to Martin Scorsese’s 1976 thriller, Taxi Driver as well as to his 1983 dark comedy, The King of Comedy. These comparisons are quite justified as all three films explore celebrity, sub-cultural unrest, and showcase the talents of Robert De Niro. These comparisons come ironically on the heels of Scorsese’s own recent public comments in Empire magazine that other comic book movies are “not cinema.” Whether or not Scorsese has seen Joker remains to be seen, but there’s no doubt the film is heavily stylized and inspired by his early works. But this film is much more than a Scorsese tribute; it is actually quite an astute commentary on some very difficult issues to discuss, making it one of the most necessary films produced this year.
At its core, Joker
is a character-driven story about Arthur Fleck (Joaquin Phoenix), a meager,
struggling performer hoping to someday be a stand-up comedian. Fleck also has a
“condition” which manifests as uncontrollable laughter at inappropriate times.
The film quickly establishes that this is a film about man vs. society where
Fleck’s numerous mental illnesses result in a rejection from society regardless
of his desire to be part of it. Fleck is literally beaten at one point by some
kids simply because he stands out. This significant but minor violent
experience results in a series of events that eventually see Fleck unemployed,
unsupported, and friendless.
To make matters worse, Fleck, who lives at home with his
mother Penny (Frances Conroy) discovers that he may be the illegitimate son of
billionaire Thomas Wayne (Brett Cullen) who ultimately abandons both Penny and
Arthur. The film is quite ambiguous on this point, and so I leave it up to your
interpretation on exactly what is going on here, but suffice it to say, just
the idea of it would certainly contribute to Arthur’s coming unhinged. Phoenix
is excellent in this film allowing Fleck’s struggles to feel very real and
human. His decisions, as radical as they are, all come from a raw and authentic
place within the character that Phoenix is able to capture and put on display
in a very captivating way.
Joker as a film
also does an excellent job of pitting this dynamic individual against a society
that is crumbling into chaos and compartmentalizing into a vastly unsettling
class struggle. There is no need to underscore the parallels director Todd
Phillips is attempting to draw between Gotham and say New York City. The rich
are getting richer, the poor are being underserved and beaten down. Fleck
simply wants his chance at the American dream, but the more he looks around,
the more he notices that the dream is not attained, it’s taken by whoever wants
it most by whatever means – which in itself distorts the “American Dream” into
something entirely different. You can be rich and famous in America if you’re
lucky enough to have it already or if you’re bold enough to destroy others to
get it. Jesus Christ – that’s a scary thought! Fleck’s one dream is to be a
stand-up comedian and perform for his favorite late-night talk show host Murray
Franklin (Robert De Niro). The film wisely frames the film’s climax on this
notion, and what transpires is compelling and profoundly unsettling. Not
because it is necessarily “shocking” but because of what it does to us as
viewers who will no doubt be feeling a variety of conflicting emotions by the
end – all worth examining.
The film does wind up in some familiar territory at the end that on its surface feels a bit unnecessary; however, when reflecting on the film as a whole, and depending on where you sit on certain interpretations of events, the significance of the film’s final scene is quite subjective. Joker is at its worst, a conversation piece, and at its best the most socially significant American film released this year. A-
Joker is Rated R and
has a running time of 2 hours and 2 minutes.
Glover, Beyoncé, Chiwetel Ejiofor, James Earl Jones, John Oliver,
Keegan-Michael Key, Billy Eichner, Seth Rogan, and Alfre Woodard
Like with most good things, there comes a point where the end must eventually come. The Lion King live action remake is officially that moment in terms of these cinematic cover versions of classic Disney animated films, where the wheels have finally come off. And this is coming from a guy whose power went out on the hottest day of the year, so he took his family to the movies for some sweet air conditioned relief. In other words, I was an easy audience to impress.
But impress it did not. Jon Favreau returns to direct his second of these live-action remakes after the 2016 hit The Jungle Book, a film that kind of jump started this whole remake-craze at Disney. I guess it’s also fitting that he also helms the one that starts its descent.
The Lion King
opens with a live-action rendering of the opening scene from the 1994 animated
film. It is starkly identical to the original, where animals all gather around
Pride Rock to view the presentation of the newly-born king to be, Simba set to
the excellent song, “Circle of Life.” This opening does succeed at programming
the audience for nostalgia, and it is quite impressive how exact the animators
were able to recreate this scene with life-like CGI creatures. Bringing back
James Earl Jones to voice Mustafa serves a comparable purpose, setting the
table for what could be a nice mix of old and new. Unfortunately, this
similarity to the original does not end here, to the point where I’m not sure
exactly what screenwriter Jeff Nathanson is really responsible for beyond that
of the original screenplay from 1994. The
Lion King sticks to the script more than any of these remakes have to date.
The plot of The Lion
King remains Hamlet,Disneyfied. The brother of the king,
Scar (Chiwetel Ejiofor), desires the throne to the pridelands for himself
leading him to hatch a plan to murder the king and his son, steal the queen, and
usurp the throne. Simba (voiced first by JD McCrary and later by Donald Glover)
escapes Scar’s minions; however, he blames himself for the death of his father
and leaves the pridelands. In exile, Simba embarks on a journey of self-discovery
eventually discovering the true meaning of duty and courage.
Ultimately, this film sounded like a slam dunk. Beloved story, cutting edge special effects, creative director, and some of the greatest talents of their generation. Ultimately, all of these talents are wasted including the two hugest entertainers on the planet, Donald Glover and Beyoncé (who voices the adult Nala, Simba’s childhood friend). Arguably the most impressive piece of entertainment to come from this movie is actually off-screen: The companion soundtrack The Lion King: The Gift, curated by Beyoncé. The music of the original film written and performed by Tim Rice and Elton John was always the keystone to that film, so arranging for the musical giants of Glover and Beyoncé made a lot of sense. That being said, their efforts on screen do not really deliver, while as a soundtrack off-screen they actually do. Aladdin, released earlier this year, did a far better job of creating a more sonorous experience even with arguably lesser musical content.
All in all, The Lion King is very rote, stale, and unimpressive (aside from the visual effects, which are stunning). The decision to play it so safe with this film is a real disappointment and the result is a clunky film with no personality. The only highlight comes in the form of Billy Eichner and Seth Rogan’s portrayal of Timon and Pumba, Simba’s meerkat and warthog companions. They represent the only segment of the film that attempts to find some fresh territory by playfully riffing on the nostalgia of their characters (and some other Disney favorites) while also truly entertaining the full audience from young to old.
This is also one of Disney’s more frightening and violent films in terms of younger viewers, and the decision to make it live-action only emphasizes the violence and danger. The hyenas are also more disturbing, which is a head scratcher because they are laughing hyenas. The hyenas do not even laugh; this is low-hanging fruit. While an attempt was made to add a layer of humor to their characters, one of which is voiced by comedian Keegan-Michael Key, that decision felt like an afterthought. An afterthought that should have been obvious when Cheech Marin and Whoopi Goldberg did such a good job voicing two of them in the original animated film.
The Lion King is a
forgettable rehash that could have been a wonderful update on a classic. When
these films do not bring something new to the table, it is hard to see them as
anything but a shallow attempt to take our money with familiar branding. And
that may have been their goal all along with these films, but if you want me to
have a Hakuna Matata attitude about these things, at least make me feel the
The Lion King is rated
PG and has a running time of 1 hour and 58 minutes.
Holland, Samuel L. Jackson, Jake Gyllenhaal, Marisa Tomei, Jon Favreau,
Zendaya, and Cobie Smulders
Spider-Man: Far From Home is the follow up to 2017’s Sony/Marvel Spider-Man reboot, Spider-Man: Homecoming. However, this time around it is also the first glimpse at “life-after-Endgame” in the Marvel universe, which gives it a little more gravitas.
We rejoin Peter Parker (Tom Holland) post-second-snap as the
world [*Spoiler Alert for those Spider-Man fans who somehow have not seen Endgame yet] mourns the loss of
lead-Avenger, Tony Stark (Robert Downey, Jr.). We learn that the five-year
period between Thanos’s vaporization of half of the world’s population and then
the fateful reversal of that action where vaporized humans were restored has
been lovingly coined as “The Blip.”
We also learn that those returning from the Blip
have not aged while those who did not vanish are five years older. This is very
bizarre to the youth at Mid-Town High School as the vanished are forced to
start the grade over that they vanished from, while the younger students they
knew in middle school are now a grade above them. It’s a psychological field
Peter is ready to return to life as a kid and take a break
from saving the world (and the neighborhood). His class is embarking on a class
trip to Europe, and he sees this as the perfect time to make his feelings clear
to MJ (Zendaya). The only thing standing in his way is that dorky little Brad
Davis (Remy Hii), who did not blip,
is now hunky, handsome, older Brad Davis, and he’s into MJ as well.
But it all can’t be wine and roses because this is a Marvel
movie! We discover that S.H.I.E.L.D. agents Maria Hill (Cobie Smulders) and
Nick Fury (Samuel L. Jackson) have been investigating strange seismic activity in
remote parts of the world only to witness a mysterious new character, known as
Mysterio (Jake Gyllenhaal) battle and slay a vicious otherworldly beast. Fury
instantly takes a liking to Mysterio who is from an alternative dimension of
Earth where these creatures (known on his Earth as Elementals) exploit the
elements of earth, water, wind, and fire until they ultimately deplete the
planet (cue Captain Planet!) They destroyed his Earth and he is determined to
not let them destroy ours. As you can guess, the next seismic disturbance is in
Italy, exactly the place where Peter and his class are first visiting on their
class trip leading Fury via Happy Hogan (Jon Favreau) to enlist Spider-Man in
plans with Mysterio to save the planet from destruction. Can’t a kid get a
Spider-Man: Far From
Home is a lot of fun, and for my money is the finest Spider-Man movie of
them all. This could be recency bias, but this film is neck and neck with Sam Raimi’s
celebrated 2004 film Spider-Man 2. The
first hour gets to breathe as a teen comedy, joyously following Peter’s
conflicted path of pursuing MJ and thwarting Brad all the while avoiding Happy
and Nick’s attempt to draw him into the fight against the Elementals.
The second hour meets the superhero quota of action and
spectacular visuals. Director, Jon Watts is developing a visual style with
these films, emulating the John Hughes teen comedies with Homecoming, but now seeming more comfortable building his own brand
with Far From Home. One particular
scene of purposeful disorientation for the characters and the audience is
handled quite masterfully.
Now, I’ve been purposefully vague regarding several of the main events of this film because like the best of the Marvel films, Spider-Man: Far From Home has some tricks up its sleeves. Tricks that I would compare to those in one of my other favorite Marvel sequels, which will remain nameless so not to spoil anything (curious folks can click this link). I will say that Mysterio is a welcomed agent in the MCU; a mostly forgotten character who was completely ignored by all of the other film iterations of Spider-Man, but is damn near brilliant to include in today’s era of technology. Gyllenhaal is also excellent as Mysterio’s alter ego Quentin Beck, and the treatment of Mysterio/Beck, while different from the comics in many respects, is actually quite faithful to his character; they even nailed the costume. I still have my Mysterio trading card from the 1991 Marvel Universe Series 2 set.
I sat grinning like an idiot through the first hour of this
film because I was just so pleased that after all Spider-Man has been through
cinematically, it’s culminated in something that just hits the mark so well.
The second hour manages to do the business of big summer blockbusters without
losing too much of the steam it builds in its first act. It also succeeds at
carrying the franchise to the next phase, whatever that might be, by shifting
some things around that will no doubt become vital to the ongoing saga of the
Marvel films. One of these things is of course buried after the credits, so be
sure to A) See Captain Marvel before
you see this film, B) Be up on your Spider-Man film history, and C) stay
through the credits of Spider-Man: Far
Spider-Man: Far From Home gives off a sense of things being in flux, which is precisely the right tone this film needs to have moving into Phase 4 of the MCU. More importantly, this movie is just a pleasure to watch, especially if you’re a Spidy fan, so calm your ‘Peter Tingles,” and get out there and see it! A-
Spider-Man: Far From Home is rated PG-13 with a running time of 2 hours and 9 minutes.
Cast: Tom Hanks,
Tim Allen, Annie Potts, Tony Hale, Keegan-Michael Key, Jordan Peele, Keanu
Reeves, and Christina Hendricks
When Toy Story 4 was announced, I was one of the first voices to express that this will be the sequel that nobody needed. I will now eat those words, as Toy Story 4 is as creative, delightful, and enjoyable as its predecessors, perhaps even a top 3 Toy Story film.
Toy Story 4 starts out in full awareness of its arrival nine years after the previous installment. Clearly, there is no expectation that a children’s film will have deep complex call backs to its previous franchise entries, but a series is a series. The film opens with a flashback from nine years ago that answers the burning question from Toy Story 3, “What happened to Bo Peep (Annie Potts)?” This flashback serves as both a frame of reference for where this story is going as well as assurance that this is really the only thing you need to know about any of the previous films in order to move forward. That being said, we are then treated to a beautiful montage of events from the three previous films set to Randy Newman’s classic song “You Got a Friend in Me,” which is a nice touch.
We then move to modern day where Woody (Tom Hanks) and the gang are now the property of soon-to-be-Kindergartner, Molly. Woody has fond memories of his days with Andy, but he is now in full Molly-mode working with Dolly (Bonnie Hunt) to run playtime with all the toys. Things get a little weird when Molly brings home a toy she made at school out of glue, googly eyes, a pipe cleaner, and a spork, whom she has named Forky (Tony Hale). This is the first time the Toy Story films have really ever delved into the mythology of what makes a toy anthropomorphic, but the movie does more to confuse that question than answer it. Anyway, Forky, assembled from trash more or less, believes he is just that, trash, and while Molly loves him, Forky wants nothing more than to find the nearest garbage can and jump in. These scenes are hilarious by the way, and casting Tony Hale was ideal! During a road trip with Molly’s family, Forky escapes prompting Woody to chase him down and bring him back to Molly.
What follows is an adventure much different from any of the previous films. For the first time, the toys are out in the world away from the familiarity of toy stores, playgrounds, and childhood bedrooms. This change of scenery is refreshing and revitalizing for the characters and the story in general. The Toy Story films are far from stale, but opening up the environment to the world at large offers a breath of fresh air that could keep this franchise going for years to come.
In their exploits we visit carnivals, antique stores,
campgrounds, and the open road, all of which offer their own flavor of fun,
humor, and heart.
Toy Story 4 does fall into this curious trend Disney and Pixar have perpetuated involving adding really creepy stuff in the midst of otherwise very palatable family fare. This time in the form of super creepy ventriloquist dummies. These things look like Edgar Bergen’s Charlie McCarthy doll mixed with Jimmy Nelson’s Danny O’Day and with a dash of the killer dummy from the 2007 film Dead Silence. Bottom line, to quote Forky, “They are terrifying.” I mentioned in my review of Aladdinfrom earlier this year that there’s a strange fixation by Disney for including brief unnecessary moments of nightmare quality imagery. WTF?
Anyway, thankfully, the creep-factor is easily mitigated by
highly effective comedic relief. The best of which comes from the reunion of
Keegan-Michael Key and Jordan Peele as two sewn together carnival prizes with less
than delicate plans of action.
Speaking of new characters, there are quite a few, which
does impact the screen time given to old favorites dramatically. Most of the
familiar characters including Buzz Lightyear (Tim Allen) to an extent take a backseat
to Woody and the new crew. Fortunately the newbies are a blast, but that doesn’t
take the sting out of seeing so many other characters on screen for such a
All in all, Toy Story 4 is a surprisingly solid entry in the series. The change of atmosphere along with the addition of some really fun new characters gives it some edge. And while you won’t be a blubbering, bawling, wailing mess like so many of us were at the end of Toy Story 3, you will still want to grab a tissue or two for the inevitably sentimental final act that pulls hard at the voice box and heart strings. B+
Toy Story 4 is rated G and
has a running time of 1 hour and 40 minutes.