Ana de Armas – People Talking

Movie Review – ‘No Time to Die’ – Craig’s Last Waltz

Directed by Cary Joji Fukunaga
Written by Neal Purvis & Robert Wade, Cary Joji Fukunaga (screenplay and story), Phoebe Waller-Bridge (screenplay), based on characters created by Ian Fleming
Cast: Daniel Craig, Léa Seydoux, Rami Malek, Lashana Lynch, Ralph Fiennes, Ben Whishaw, Naomie Harris, Rory Kinnear, Jeffrey Wright, Billy Magnussen, Christoph Waltz, David Dencik, Ana de Armas, Dali Benssalah, Lisa-Dorah Sonnet, Coline Defaud, Mathilde Bourbin, Hugh Dennis, Priyanga Burford, Brigitte Millar
Soundtrack: Hans Zimmer

16 years ago today, Daniel Craig was announced as the sixth actor to play James Bond in EON Productions’ long-running franchise.

There was controversy.

He had blonde hair! He had blue eyes! He wore a life-jacket on a boat!

(As if Roger Moore was tall, dark, and handsome?)

Personally, I wasn’t bothered. Much like Batman Begins following Batman & Robin, after Die Another Day, I was ready for anything new, but I’ve talked about that at length already.

More to the present (and to borrow a joke from Mike Stoklasa): it’s been so long since the last Bond film, it’s almost time for my pon farr!

To be fair, it wasn’t quite the 2313 days between Licence to Kill and Goldeneye, but is the 2163 days between SPECTRE and No Time to Die that far off?

Not really, but what’s important is that the movie is here at last, which means Daniel Craig can finally start to get on with his life (and I don’t mean that disparagingly).

Unlike the previous go around, I didn’t do much to get myself hyped up for this installment, because there’s no way any Bond movie could be worse following SPECTRE (though I would recommend a re-watch before seeing the new one, or at least a read through the plot on Wikipedia).

The reaction so far seems somewhat divided, which makes sense, but like so many things these days, the minority is far noisier than the majority of people who have been reasonably satisfied with the product.

But enough about all that.

To me, No Time to Die feels like the first time in the Craig era where everyone involved (including Hans Zimmer!) said, “Hey, let’s go out and make a James Bond movie; because that’s what we do, right?”

Not that I haven’t liked what they’ve done overall to this point, and not that they haven’t previously pulled inspiration from the original source (Casino Royale especially) and past films, but, in many ways, No Time to Die feels like a movie made by somebody who’s a fan the way I’m a fan. Someone who’s seen every movie more than once and can find something they like in each one (or almost, in my case).

In fact, it’s fitting that the MacGuffin of this movie revolves around DNA, because this feels like the only film in the franchise thus far that truly pulls something from every iteration of Bond: Connery, Lazenby, Moore, Dalton, Brosnan, Craig himself, and, yes, Ian Fleming’s novels. On top of that, it does an admirable job of picking up the tatters of some poor serialization in the previous entry and finding a thread to carry forward into this film.

And, of course, it’s a farewell to Daniel Craig in the role.

Of all the Bond actors who have had at least four cracks at the character, Craig certainly gets the strongest exit of any of them; which isn’t exactly difficult given that the competition is Diamonds Are Forever, A View to A Kill (which I do enjoy), and Die Another Day, but the point still stands.

Exactly how much of this we can lay at the feet of writer/director Cary Fukunaga, I can’t say for certain, but I wouldn’t be upset if he came back for another one down the line.

If I have one particular criticism of No Time to Die, it’s that there’s some dodgy CGI sprinkled in that I can’t help thinking would have been better handled in the Brosnan era. And I don’t mean that they would have done it 100% in-camera, I just think more effort would have gone into perhaps shooting things in miniature and compositing in other elements.

And yes, the movie felt a bit long the first time I saw it, but upon seeing it a second time, it really didn’t bother be at all.

In the end, I’m hedging myself on a rating a little bit, but perhaps the best compliment I can give is that having seen the movie twice, I do feel a desire to see it at least a third time, and that doesn’t come around too often.

And if you can see it in IMAX, all the better.

Rating: ★★★★☆

Movie Review – ‘Knives Out’ – Delivered On-Time

Written and Directed by Rian Johnson
Cast: Daniel Craig, Chris Evans, Ana de Armas, Jamie Lee Curtis, Michael Shannon, Don Johnson, Toni Collette, LaKeith Stanfield, Christopher Plummer, Katherine Langford, Jaeden Martell, Riki Lindhome, Edi Patterson, Frank Oz, K Callan, Noah Segan, M. Emmet Walsh, Marlene Forte
Soundtrack: Nathan Johnson

It wasn’t that long ago (you know, like two years) that my relationship with Rian Johnson (as a movie fan) was rather uncomplicated. I thought he was a fine writer/director who had vision; someone who made quality, interesting films.

Then, The Last Jedi happened, and, well, let’s just say that was hard for me to reconcile as both a fan of Johnson’s previous work and classic Star Wars.

As painful as that may have been, however, I always believed, nay, knew, that whatever Rian Johnson’s next movie was would be a good one (and I expect a similar rebound effort from Sam Mendes after the SPECTRE debacle).

Despite some trailer fatigue going in (I think Lionsgate was just excited to have a legitimately good general audience movie for the first time in a while), I have to say, Knives Out delivers as a modern take on the classic murder mystery genre.

Similar to Parasite, I wouldn’t say the story is totally mind-blowing, but it does go in ways I didn’t expect, which is satisfying unto itself.

The ensemble cast of top-flight actors is a joy to behold, and in particular it’s wonderful to see Christopher Plummer still having fun at the age of 89 (and still able to play a slightly younger man, I might add).

It’s also interesting that while Knives Out isn’t a Thanksgiving story (like Blood Rage), the family dynamics certainly seem appropriate to the holiday (may your own Thanksgivings never be as stressful).

Also, I have to give credit to the production for actually shooting a Massachusetts-set movie in Massachusetts, and not somewhere down south or, Heaven forbid, California. As someone who’s spent a fair share of time up there, it’s nice to see that authenticity.

Really though, whether you’re an average movie-goer, or someone like me who’s seen every episode of Agatha Christie’s Poirot (or A&E’s classic, A Nero Wolfe Mystery), Knives Out is a quality piece of entertainment for almost any audience.

So, when you get tired of seeing your family this holiday season, go sneak away and see this one. You won’t regret it.

Rating: ★★★★☆

P.S.
Rian, I know you’re still bitter, I probably would be to, but not all of us who didn’t love The Last Jedi are childish alt-right trolls, okay?

Movie Review – ‘Blade Runner 2049’ – The Special One

Directed by Denis Villeneuve
Written by Hampton Fancher (story and screenplay) and Michael Green (screenplay), based on characters from the novel Do Androids Dream of Electric Sheep? by Philip K. Dick
Cast: Ryan Gosling, Harrison Ford, Jared Leto, Robin Wright, Ana de Armas, Mackenzie Davis, Dave Bautista, Mark Arnold, Wood Harris, David Dastmalchian, Tómas Lemarquis, Lennie James, Carla Juri, Barkhad Abdi, Edward James Olmos
Soundtrack: Benjamin Wallfisch & Hans Zimmer

1982’s Blade Runner still stands as one of the great technical achievements in the history of film as a whole, let alone the science-fiction genre, though its original theatrical release was unfortunately sandbagged by poor creative decisions imposed by the studio, namely Harrison Ford’s intentionally awful narration.

If you’ve never seen Blade Runner before, and wish to get caught up in anticipation of the sequel (which is not absolutely necessary but definitely helpful), I recommend The Final Cut. Not only is it widely regarded as the superior version, it will also be the most useful in preparing yourself to see the new film (setting the tone, if you will).

Personally, I wouldn’t say I love either film, but both Blade Runner 2049 and its predecessor are more-than-deserving of theatrical experiences, and if you can find the new film in IMAX, I’d say it’s worth it.

In terms of the sequel relative to the original, some may call me a blasphemer, but I have no problem saying I enjoy 2049 more. Both feature relatively simple stories, but 2049 has a bit more going on (sometimes too much, which I’ll get to), and as such I was much more on the hook. Regardless of my own feelings, however, I have little doubt that Blade Runner fans will consider this a worthy successor, because it is, and it’s highly refreshing to see this kind of quality amid the vast sea of pointless remakes, sequels, and prequels we all swim in nowadays.

Much of this, of course, rests on the shoulders of director Denis Villeneuve, who has proven to be both versatile and efficient since his Engligh-language debut of Prisoners in 2013; which was followed in rather rapid succession by Enemy in 2014, Sicario in 2015, and Arrival in 2016. Spoiler alert: none of these have been bad, and they’re all different, though he does have a particular style (and, much like Blade Runner 2049, I don’t know that I love any of them, but they’re all definitely worth seeing).

The strength of Blade Runner 2049 lies largely in the atmosphere it creates though stark visuals, consistent tone, and the electronic score from Benjamin Wallfisch and Hans Zimmer. This is not to say that the story doesn’t matter, the story is quite a journey unto itself, but in this case, much like the original film, the style makes the substance, rather than the other way around.

If I have one criticism, however, it’s that the movie takes one or two turns too many, consequently increasing the already inflated runtime with elements that don’t feel all that consequential in relation to everything we’ve already seen.

Beyond that though, I don’t really have too much to complain about. As I said before, Blade Runner 2049 is more-than-worthy of a theatrical viewing on the biggest screen you can find. It looks great, it sounds great, and it’s anchored by many quality performances (I particularly enjoyed Dave Bautista, for what little he has).

Not much else I can say without getting into spoilers.

If you’re not a fan of the original, maybe this one isn’t for you, but if you are, or if you’re just mildly curious, or just a fan of Denis Villeneuve, I do fully recommend it.

Just make sure you get nice and comfortable.

Rating: ★★★★☆

P.S.
No stingers, which is welcome after a nearly three hour runtime.

P.P.S.
Naturally, and as usual, thanks to Alamo Drafthouse for the incredible glassware.

Movie Review – ‘War Dogs’ – Nothing is Coincidence

Directed by Todd Phillips
Written by Stephen Chin & Todd Phillips & Jason Smilovic (screenplay), based on the Rolling Stone article “Arms and the Dudes” by Guy Lawson
Cast: Miles Teller, Jonah Hill, Ana de Armas, Kevin Pollak, Bradley Cooper, Shaun Toub, JB Blanc, Gabriel Spahiu, Patrick St. Esprit, Wallace Langham, Eddie Jemison, Julian Sergi, Barry Livingston, David Packouz (cameo)
Soundtrack: Cliff Martinez

After a solid decade-and-a-half making generally successful funny-type movies (including Old School and The Hangover Trilogy), it seems that writer/director Todd Phillips is finally branching out the way he wants to.

It’s only fair, given that his comedic contemporary Adam McKay (Anchorman, Step Brothers) won an Oscar for last year’s The Big Short, but compared to that film, War Dogs is less comedic, less concise, and less explicit about what it’s commenting on, though that’s not to say it isn’t a good movie in its own right.

Based on the crazy true story, as outlined in a Rolling Stone article, War Dogs is about David Packouz and Efraim Diveroli (Miles Teller and Jonah Hill), a couple of twenty-something stoners who go from comparatively small-time arms dealers to being on the business end of a $300 million Department of Defense contract.

The premise alone is enough to keep you going for the runtime, but there are problems with the story structure and pacing. The whole movie is essentially told in two extended acts and then a quick wrap up. In other words, what should have been a full third act is breezed over in about five to ten minutes, which is frustrating. Also, given that the movie is very much a going-into-business story, it might have been nice to see the machinations of our boys closing on more than just a couple of significant deals.

However, War Dogs does absolutely shine in the performance department, because everyone is believable. Maybe Miles Teller doesn’t do anything special, but he puts in a good shift, and definitely works well as an audience surrogate type of protagonist.

As for Jonah Hill, I’m not afraid to say that this is the finest performance of his career so far (at least as far as I know). The evolution of how you feel about his character as the movie progresses is rather incredible, and leads me to believe that he could pull off a dramatic lead role in the future if he so desires. Perhaps if the movie was released a bit closer to awards season, he’d pick up a nomination or two, but I have a feeling he’ll be overshadowed by the time we get there.

I’d also be remiss if I didn’t mention Bradley Cooper, who, despite only appearing in a few scenes, makes quite an impression.

On the whole, I’d say that War Dogs is worth seeing, just don’t expect another Wolf of Wall Street or Big Short; it’s a step down from either of those, but the story is interesting enough and the acting is strong enough to help get your money’s worth, not to mention some pretty solid laughs along the way.

Rating: ★★★½