Tag: Hans Zimmer

Quick Thoughts – October 2021 Round-Up: ‘Dune’ ‘The French Dispatch’ ‘Last Night in Soho’ ‘Antlers’

It’s been a long time since I talked about multiple contemporary movies at one time, but it feels good to be back to it; gives me a particular sense of normalcy that I haven’t felt in a while.


Honestly, I wasn’t even remotely interested in Denis Villeneuve’s Dune until I happened to see David Lynch’s Dune (which Lynch famously disowns) earlier this year (because God knows I’ll never read any of Frank Herbert’s novels, though I mean him no disrespect).

This makes it tough for me to both evaluate and recommend the Dune of 2021 (now confirmed as Part 1 of at least a duology, if not a trilogy).

I knew what was happening in the 2021 version because I knew what happened in 1984’s adaptation, but I’m not totally sure how an uninitiated general audience member would feel.

That said, one thing I can say with assurance is that Dune might just be Denis Villeneuve’s best-looking movie, which is really saying something after, you know, Blade Runner 2049, but it’s true.

Frankly, if all this movie is is a visual update on the 1984 adaptation with significantly more time to tell its story, that’s enough, especially in IMAX; however, as somebody who actually enjoys Lynch’s version, I wouldn’t call Villeneuve’s update leaps-and-bounds better, but it’s more than worthy.

I certainly haven’t heard many complaints from fans of the novels, for whatever that’s worth.

Rating: ★★★★☆


It’s Wes Anderson. What do you want?

Honestly, The French Dispatch might be his worst movie, but in the end I still liked it [just enough to revisit it again somewhere down the road].

Now, nothing about The French Dispatch is going to sway anyone who isn’t already a Wes Anderson fan. Compared to his last two live-action efforts in particular (Moonrise Kingdom and The Grand Budapest Hotel), it doesn’t even compare in charm and amusement, but his filmmaking style is still unique among his peers, which is worth seeing, and, as I would say of all his features, there is a heart to it, even if it’s noticeably slow to reveal itself this time.

If you do decide to see it, see it on the biggest screen you can, as centered as you can, because the aspect ratio and color change frequently, even if the camera itself is usually locked down.

As the saying goes, every frame is a painting, but some frames are more compelling than others.

Rating: ★★★½ (out of five)


This is going to sound strange, because they are VERY different movies, but I’d compare Edgar Wright’s Last Night in Soho to Guy Ritchie’s The Gentlemen, in that there are undeniable hallmarks of both directors’ styles in each film, but on the whole, they are far from the hypothetical versions of the movies that we would have gotten from them, say, fifteen years ago (in other words, they’re maturing).

Specifically to the style of Last Night in Soho though, I’d call it a cross between Wes Craven (e.g. Nightmare on Elm Street) and Dario Argento (e.g Suspiria).

However, I won’t say anything about the plot in particular (not that I usually do anyway), because one of my favorite things about the movie is how it just throws you in without explaining a whole lot.

In the end, it’s not my favorite from Edgar Wright, nor do I think it’s his best overall work (though it is a triumph in terms of the visual nitty-gritty: set design, costumes, etc.), but I appreciate his effort to evolve (and I think having a writing partner definitely helped this time), so I will both strongly recommend Last Night in Soho and be excited to see what he does next.

Rating: ★★★★☆


Antlers is being marketed with Guillermo Del Toro’s name (apparently he was a producer on it, as was multi-time Christopher Nolan collaborator, David S. Goyer), but I couldn’t care less.

I was always in on this movie for one name and one name only: Scott Cooper.

Not that he has a flawless filmography as a director (Black Mass in particular was more like Black Mess), but after Hostiles (one of the best Westerns of recent vintage) I was down for whatever came next, and, for the most part, I was not disappointed.

Based on the short story “The Quiet Boy” by Nick Antosca (who also worked on the screenplay), itself inspired by a particular piece of Native American folklore, Antlers feels like a slightly more contemporary version of a 1980s Stephen King adaptation (Silver Bullet, Christine, et al) with its small town, slow burn feel.

(I would also describe it as A24’s version of The Pit, but if that doesn’t sway you just forget I said it.)

My only real disappointment is, for one, the movie probably could have been trimmed down to a solid ninety minutes, but, more importantly, there’s some creature imagery that I wish would have been done 100% practically, or just straight up Hitchcockian (shadowed/obscured); the film still would have worked without the “money shots”.

Still, for where the horror genre is these days, Antlers is pretty solid.

Rating: ★★★½ (out of five)



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: ★★★★☆

Batman Triple Pack: Christopher Nolan’s Dark Knight Trilogy (in IMAX)

Seeing as how it’s nearly impossible to talk about Avengers: Endgame without spoiling anything (though I do give it a hearty recommendation if you’re the least bit interested), it seems as good an opportunity as any to talk about three films that I imagine the statute of limitations for spoilers has expired on, at least for anyone who’s old enough to drink.

I’ll speak only for myself here, but I see Christopher Nolan’s Dark Knight triptych as the defining movie trilogy of my generation. Part of that is personal taste, part of that is timing (Batman Begins came out as I was graduating high school, Dark Knight heading into my senior year of college, and Dark Knight Rises a couple years into my first 9-to-5 job), but mostly it comes down to cultural impact.

For better or worse (mostly worse, to be honest, but I don’t hold other people’s incompetent stylistic plagiarism against Nolan), these films’ version of Batman and his universe is likely the genesis and certainly the embodiment of what I refer to as Post-9/11 Realism. You can see it in other franchises (or attempted franchises): James Bond; Jaffa/Silver’s Planet of the Apes; new American Godzilla; the DCEU; FANT4STIC; and so on. Even Mission: Impossible, as outright fun as those movies have been in the new millennium, there’s definitely a tinge of seriousness that feels Dark Knight-esque.

But, hey. We’re here to talk about some Batman movies, so let’s talk about some Batman movies.



Original Release Date: June 17, 2005

Weirdly enough, I don’t remember a lot of hype for Batman Begins at the time of its release. It was almost as if it snuck up on us with great stealth (as a ninja should).

Oh, sure, I’d been following the rumor mill for years (more on that later), but deep down I think we almost didn’t believe that it was actually happening, probably because back in my day people didn’t reboot franchises every three years like certain hack studios do today, so despite the fact that eight whole years had passed, the debacle of Batman & Robin was still fresh in our minds.

And, wow; what a sea change.

To go from the candy-coated Gothic neon of the Burton and Schumacher films to the down-and-dirty grittiness of Batman Begins was nothing short of mind-blowing (to their credit, the filmmakers of Casino Royale were able to recapture this feeling a year later, and to greater profit). I think I went out and saw it three times in theaters (which would become something of a tradition with this trilogy, though not unmerited). What’s interesting now though, looking back, is that while I wouldn’t necessarily call it more fantastical, it’s certainly more dreamlike (some might say more “comic book”) than its sequels.

Still, despite the fact that it was a top ten hit both domestically and worldwide, it seems as if a number of people still sleep on this one today, but for fans of the Batman, it was the shot in the arm we desperately needed, and still very much appreciate.

Rating: ★★★★★



Original Release Date: July 18, 2008

If I may jump back for a second to about 2001, I remember when the big rumor about the yet-unproduced Batman reboot was that it would be Batman: Year One (which later turned out to be a quality DC animated feature), to be directed by Darren Aronofsky, and starring as Batman, wait for it, none other than Aaron Eckhart.

Obviously, none of that ever materialized (and may only have ever existed as rumor in the first place), but flashing forward in time, while everybody was freaking out about Heath Ledger being cast as The Joker, I was just happy that Eckhart finally got some sort of consolation prize.

But enough about rumors, as fun as they may be.

I was so excited to see the sequel to Batman Begins that I rounded up a crew to go see, of all movies, I Am Legend, opening night, in IMAX, because I’d learned there’d be a special preview of The Dark Knight. Little did we know we’d be treated to the entire bank heist scene, which, believe me when I tell you this, when that opening shot of the city in broad daylight hit the screen, I thought I was going to fall out of my seat. It was an indelible moment that I still think about today. We’d all grown up going to IMAX films at museums and such, and I’d seen a few movies blown up for the larger screen, but to see a feature film actually shot in the format itself was, again, mind-blowing.

Honestly, by the time I got around to seeing the full movie (again, opening night, in IMAX), my expectations were so ridiculously high that I probably should have been disappointed in some way, but I wasn’t. In fact, at the time, I’d say my expectations were exceeded. Pretty close to miraculous if you ask me.

And I know I wasn’t alone on that.

Rating: ★★★★½



Original Release Date: July 20, 2012

My memories of this one aren’t as clear as they are for its predecessor, but it was a similar overall experience (though I do remember one of my workmates at the time living in Newark and waking up one morning to the sight of Gotham City Police vehicles parked outside his front door). My friend and I went to see Mission Impossible: Ghost Protocol opening night in IMAX to see the special preview, which again was the amazing opening scene of the movie (and featuring a different audio mix for Bane than the final version of the film).

Suffice it to say though, I think we were all a little less hyped for this one in the wake of Heath Ledger’s untimely death. There’d been rumors that the reason for Joseph Gordon-Levitt’s casting was to replace him as The Joker (which, in retrospect, I think could have worked, especially if his screen time was limited), but ultimately The Dark Knight Rises proceeded forth on its own terms, forging a new and different direction while ambitiously merging the previously unrelated stories of Batman Begins and The Dark Knight to an all-out conclusion.

I remember many people being highly critical of this one at the time, but I’ve always enjoyed it. It may stretch the bounds of realism in a more pronounced way than the two films before it, but all-in-all it draws out a fitting end to the character of Batman according to Nolan’s vision.

As they say, go big or go home.

Rating: ★★★★☆


So, what did I actually learn from seeing all three of these films in IMAX in one day (to celebrate Batman’s 80th Birthday)?

Well, I learned that while each movie is decidedly worth the price of admission on its own (which I already knew, but still), when you line all three of them up in such a direct comparison, it becomes obvious that Batman Begins is the best of the bunch (despite having no actual IMAX footage), which I honestly did not believe up until a few weeks ago when this event happened. The thing about Begins is that the layering of the story and the pacing is just so good, and as big and as grand as its sequels are, they just as obviously have third act pacing issues, which isn’t the worst thing, but it’s noticeable, and forces me to nick some points off.

Another thing I learned is that despite the great performance from Health Ledger (and it is Great), and despite The Dark Knight’s snub being the reason for The Academy opening up the Best Picture Oscar to more than five films per year, the gulf in quality between The Dark Knight and The Dark Knight Rises is not nearly as wide as the consensus would have you believe. In fact, at this point, if you said you liked the latter better than the former, I wouldn’t hold it against you.

Mostly though, I got a great refresher in knowing that these movies would not be what they are without Christopher Nolan. His passion for shooting on real film, for doing effects in camera as much as humanly possible, his knack for great (and I mean truly seamless) miniature work, his blissful ignorance that allows him to cast roles based on merit rather than reputation, all of these things flow out of who he is, what he cares about, and his artistic vision. He’s a great storyteller, to be sure, but the way you tell stories has an impact on the stories you tell, and I couldn’t be happier that this trilogy came from his heart, mind, body, and soul.

At least in the world of live-action, this version of Batman may never be topped. I’m not saying it’s completely flawless, but I’ll tell you this, I don’t think anyone will ever put such care into it ever again. In this world of digital 4-D cleanliness, having these gritty, tactile, analog films is like a warm blanket I wouldn’t trade for anything.

God save the king.


P.S.
I don’t think I’ve ever mentioned it here before, but if you’ve never seen Disney’s 20,000 Leagues Under the Sea, you should definitely check it out. There are some amazing parallels between James Mason’s version of Captain Nemo and Liam Neeson’s character in Batman Begins.

P.P.S.
We all got Batarangs.

Movie Review – ‘Widows’ – Windy City Heat

Directed by Steve McQueen
Written by Gillian Flynn & Steve McQueen, based on the television series created by Lynda La Plante
Cast: Viola Davis, Michelle Rodriguez, Elizabeth Debicki, Cynthia Erivo, Colin Farrell, Brian Tyree Henry, Daniel Kaluuya, Jacki Weaver, Carrie Coon, Robert Duvall, Liam Neeson, Manuel Garcia-Rulfo, Jon Bernthal, Garret Dillahunt, Michael Harney, Lukas Haas, Matt Walsh, Adepero Oduye, Ann Mitchell, Kevin J. O’Connor
Soundtrack: Hans Zimmer

Dear Lord, is anyone (other than Kevin J. O’Connor) in this movie actually from Chicago?

It’s a very specific accent.  It’s not like New York where anybody can just throw it on and be passable, you pretty much need to grab real Chicagoans to do it.  I mean, if the movie took place in Chicago and everybody just had a neutral accent, I’d be fine with it, but the fact that some people do and some people (none of whom are portrayed by Americans) have incredibly hackneyed (borderline comedic, to be honest) Chi-Town accents (like why does Robert Duvall sound like Robert Duvall but his son played by Colin Farrell sounds like a cartoon villain?), and then Garret Dillahunt is doing his West Texas thing, what are we doing?

So, that’s one problem I have.

Shocking as it may be, I did not see 12 Years a Slave, or any other of his films, so I’m unfamiliar with Steve McQueen (the director, not the actor), but I did see Gone Girl (one of the best films of 2014), so I am familiar with the screenwriter Gillian Flynn.  Suffice it to say, Widows is no Gone Girl (although it is better than The Girl on The Train, which is something), which is fine, but it falls in the long line of movies based on BBC miniseries that feel like truncated versions of miniseries (e.g. Edge of Darkness and Tinker, Tailor, Soldier, Spy).

Make no mistake, I’m not saying Widows is a “bad movie”.  There’s a lot to like (Daniel Kaluuya in particular steals every scene he’s in and I’m a little upset he’s not in the movie more), but there’s also a lot that feels lazy or not quite entirely thought out.  Perhaps most emblematic of this (other than the questionable accents) is the music.  I like Hans Zimmer fine, but much of the score for Widows just feels like B-sides from The Dark Knight and Dunkirk.  Also, there’s an effort to make some political and social commentary, some of which works in a matter-of-fact way, but most of it just feels clunky.

In the end, it’s entertainment, and it’s okay, but it’s nothing life-changing.  You can wait til it’s at the Redbox or on Netflix.

Rating: ★★★☆☆