Quick Thoughts – March Mega-Post – ‘Isle of Dogs’ ‘The Death of Stalin’ ‘Unsane’ ‘Red Sparrow’ ‘Thoroughbreds’

Isle of Dogs (2018)

Some people will probably call me crazy (in addition to “rich, white, and bored”) for giving this movie a perfect score, but, what can I say?  I enjoyed it from end to end and will probably go see it again to pick out things I missed the first time (and maybe again after that).

I was a bit skeptical that Isle of Dogs would be worth the wait (the four years since The Grand Budapest Hotel is the longest gap between Wes Anderson features), but that notion was quickly put to bed.  Every frame of the film is a rich feast for the eyes (which is logical given the time intensity of stop-motion animation), and every performance is a joy to listen to (regardless of your ability to understand all of them at all times).

It’s a simple enough story about a boy and his dog, and whatever influences it has are certainly worn on its sleeve, but somehow the movie still manages to feel original.

I’m on record as saying that I don’t get hyped up for the Oscars anymore, which is still true, but, I will say that if Isle of Dogs doesn’t win Best Animated Feature next year, it’ll be a travesty (although, if I’m being really honest, I’d like to see it as a Best Picture nominee, but then again I don’t really care about the Oscars).

It’s heartfelt, it’s funny, but, mostly, it’s pure movie magic if I’ve ever seen it.

Rating: ★★★★★

 

The Death of Stalin (2017)

As you might guess by its title, The Death of Stalin (based on the French graphic novel of the same name) is about…the death of Stalin, and the power struggle in the immediate aftermath.  What you might not guess is that it’s not some hoity toity political drama, but rather every major player is portrayed to be petty and foolish, if not downright stupid.

This is all thanks to writer/director Armando Iannucci (don’t be fooled by the name, kids; he’s Scottish, like Peter Capaldi), whose work I’m vaguely familiar with.  I’ve seen In the Loop and an episode or two of Veep, so I know his political-satire-as-dark-comedy style.  You might not think it would work for Soviet Russia, but I thought it was fantastic.

One of the greater purposes of humor is that it allows us to process the unpalatable in a way that leaves us with our sanity intact, which is precisely what this film does.  It uses satire and farcical comedy to demonstrate the extreme absurdity of the totalitarian regime of Stalin and his cohorts.  Certain critics have found this clash to be in poor taste, or simply unfunny, but I think this film makes its point rather eloquently, and the performances from Steve Buscemi and Simon Russell Beale in particular help bolster it even more so.

Honestly, the only element I’m really taking points off for is some digital night shooting that took me out of the movie, and a few bits of humor didn’t quite work for me (that’ll happen in a comedy), but other than that, it’s hard to ask for more than what The Death of Stalin delivered.

Rating: ★★★★½

 

Unsane (2018)

Right off the bat, I’ll say this is a great example of a 21st Century Hitchcockian Thriller.

The story is horrifyingly plausible (credit to screenwriters Jonathan Bernstein and James Greer), the performances are believable (kudos to Claire Foy and Jay Pharaoh), and the movie fills you with an utter sense of dread that would make Brian De Palma proud.

There’s really just one problem.  The film was shot on an iPhone.

I don’t know if this was done purely as an experiment, or strictly to keep production costs down, or what, but I can tell you that it doesn’t appear to be a thematic choice.

Don’t get me wrong, it’s not like the whole movie is ruined because of this, I just think it would be to the movie’s benefit to look (and sound) like a movie, and there are moments when you are painfully aware that this was done on a phone and not something more substantial.

It’s a fine film, I’ll be happy to watch it again in the future, but it’s difficult for me to say it’s a must-see on the big screen, and I wish that wasn’t the case.

Rating: ★★★½

 

Red Sparrow (2018)

There’s a fairly popular notion regarding espionage these days that we don’t even need spies anymore because everything can be done by computer, and the response to this in media has largely been to equip fictional spies (both regular and super) with more and more technology, regardless of how cartoonish it seems.

The major reason why I enjoyed Red Sparrow so much is that it completely ignores this erroneous line of thinking, and brings spycraft back to the same old game it’s always been: psychology.

In short, Red Sparrow feels like a throwback in the best way, without feeling obsolete (definitely le Carré-esque, if you were wondering).  Apparently some people have found some of the more “adult” elements to be rather shocking (which is kind of shocking to me because I didn’t think people were shocked by anything anymore, at least when it comes to movies), but I didn’t feel that it was exploitative relative to the story being told.

This film is a slow burner with some action, but no action for action’s sake, which may not be enough for some people, but I appreciated how grounded it was.

Not for everyone, but it’s not the trash you may have heard it is.

Rating: ★★★★☆

 

Thoroughbreds (2017)

Of all the movies in this post, this was probably the one I was the most let down by, and that’s not even saying it’s bad.

Thoroughbreds is a fine film on every level, but it’s tough for me to say there’s anything particularly special about it (which is kind of sad given that it’s Anton Yelchin’s final film performance, but what are you going to do?).

Of the two leads, I give the edge to Olivia Cooke in terms of her performance, and the story at least feels somewhat original, but in the end I’m left feeling like the movie is in the shallows rather than the deep end where it should be.

Worth seeing once, but far from a must-see.

Rating: ★★★☆☆

Movie Review – ‘Justice League’ – Avert Your Eyes

Directed by Zack Snyder
Written by Chris Terrio (story and screenplay), Joss Whedon (screenplay), and Zack Snyder (story)
Cast: Ben Affleck, Henry Cavill, Amy Adams, Gal Gadot, Ezra Miller, Jason Momoa, Ray Fisher, Jeremy Irons, Diane Lane, Connie Nielsen, J.K. Simmons, Ciarán Hinds (voice), Amber Heard, Joe Morton, Lisa Loven Kongsli, Kobna Holdbrook-Smith, Doutzen Kroes, Brooke Ence, Ann Ogbomo, Samantha Jo, Holt McCallany, Marc McClure
Soundtrack: Danny Elfman

Alternate title for this piece (or the movie): Why Can’t We Be [Super]friends?

I really shouldn’t even dignify this movie with anything resembling a full-length review, so I’ll try not to.

At no point in time did I ever have high hopes for this film, and in its wake I definitely don’t have high hopes for the DCEU as a whole.

Justice League is as big of a mess as Rogue One (if not more so).  The only difference for me personally is that I don’t have nearly as much emotional attachment to the property, so I’m not nearly as angry or disappointed, but I still have to call a turd a turd.

The biggest problem with Justice League is that it is approximately 4,657 movies in one (hyperbole intended).

It’s almost as if these characters should have starred in their own films before appearing all together.

You know?  Maybe build it up a little bit?

Why DC didn’t bite the bullet on this and instead attempted to microwave everything in order to “catch up” to Marvel is entirely beyond me.  I mean, despite being pilloried by the critics at nearly every turn, these movies are still somehow doing good business, couldn’t they have put in the effort to make them good, too?

Back to the subject at hand (though this is a franchise-wide issue), Justice League, in addition to having a myriad of elements (especially tones) that don’t quite fit together, has so many visuals that are just plain ugly to look at that I could hardly believe my eyes.  I may not be a film-making expert, but I do know that this was a two-hour movie that cost $300 million.  It should not look as bad as it does, and yet it does.

Now, I’ll admit, there were a few tiny bits and pieces here and there that I did find enjoyable about Justice League, but mostly I was either bored, or trying not to be sick.  Even if you’re somehow a DCEU completionist, this movie still isn’t worth your money to see theatrically.

It’s a mess.  An ugly, boring mess.

What more do I need to say?

Rating: ★★☆☆☆

P.S.
There are multiple stingers, because D.C. is now in full Marvel mode (they wish).

P.P.S.
Naturally, and as usual, thanks to Alamo Drafthouse for the cool glassware (which is better than the movie).


Twofer Movie Review: ‘The Lobster’ and ‘High-Rise’ – Independents’ Day

Not everything that gets talked about here is action schlock.  Some of it is more artsy.

The Lobster

Directed by Yorgos Lanthimos
Written
by Yorgos Lanthimos and Efthymis Filippou
Cast: Colin Farrell, Rachel Weisz, Jessica Barden, Olivia Colman, Ashley Jensen, Ariane Labed, Angeliki Papoulia, John C. Reilly, Léa Seydoux, Michael Smiley, Ben Whishaw, Roger Ashton-Griffiths, Ewen MacIntosh

I do my best not to spoil things here, and that’s particularly true of a movie like The Lobster, because so much of the enjoyment comes from discovering how its world operates as the story progresses.  There are no title cards at the beginning like Red Dawn to explain how we got here, you just figure it out on the fly.

What I can tell you, because it’s in the trailer, is that The Lobster is the story of a man who goes to a special resort to find a mate, and if he’s unsuccessful in that he will be turned into an animal he has previously chosen.  In the case of our protagonist, he has chosen to be a lobster should it come to that.

I will also tell you that the world of The Lobster is one of rigidity and harsh consequences, and it is this area in particular where the movie so deftly commentates on our own society in terms of the nature of relationships.

Tonally, the movie is a dark comedy, and a rather funny one at that.  Colin Farrell turns in a delightfully awkward performance, John C. Reilly is his naturally humorous self, and Rachel Weisz delivers some absolutely absurd voice-overs completely straight, which is hilarious.

It’s a bit of a long, strange trip, and it may not end the way you like, but it’s one worth taking.  Check out The Lobster if you’re up for something off the beaten path.

Rating: ★★★½ (out of five)

 

High-Rise

Directed by Ben Wheatley
Written by Amy Jump, based on the novel by J.G. Ballard
Cast: Tom Hiddleston, Jeremy Irons, Sienna Miller, Luke Evans, Elisabeth Moss, James Purefoy, Keeley Hawes, Reece Shearsmith, Enzo Cilenti, Sara Dee
(voice)
Soundtrack: Clint Mansell

“We are all in the gutter, but some of us are looking at the stars.” – Oscar Wilde

No doubt, High-Rise aspires to be great, but it’s no Brazil.  Heck, it’s not even Snowpiercer.

Based on the novel by J.G. Ballard (which was, perhaps correctly, considered “unfilmable” for nearly four decades), High-Rise is chock-full of British classism, Seventies excess, and tons of actual garbage.  Not having read the source material, I can’t tell you if the adaptation is too faithful, not faithful enough, or somewhere in between, but it does feel like it’s in a no-man’s-land of sort.

It’s hard to pin down exactly what High-Rise is missing, but it’s not thought-provoking enough, shocking enough, funny enough, or horrifying enough to make the impact it desires.  At a certain point it becomes a bit meandering, but the core story is so simple that you never really lose track of who’s doing what and why.  Perhaps it’s the fact that we’re not given anyone to truly invest in that makes High-Rise so muddled.

However, one thing I’ll give a lot of credit for is the production design.  Rather than taking place in an uber-futuristic dystopia, High-Rise is set in a dystopian vision of the 1970s, which means lots and lots of period cars, costumes, hair, and carpeting. in addition to more fantastical elements like an 18th century costume party.

If you’re a hardcore fan of Ben Whealey’s films or J.G. Ballard’s books, then you’ll probably see it anyway, but, save for that, High-Rise is probably not worth your time.

Rating: ★★½ (out of five)

Movie Review – ‘Batman v Superman: Dawn of Justice’ – Who’s in charge here?

Directed by Zack Snyder
Written by Chris TerrioDavid S. Goyer, based on characters created by Bob KaneBill Finger (Batman) and Jerry Siegel & Joe Shuster (Superman)
Cast: Ben Affleck, Henry Cavill, Amy Adams, Jesse Eisenberg, Diane Lane, Laurence Fishburne, Jeremy Irons, Holly Hunter, Gal Gadot, Scoot McNairy
Soundtrack: Junkie XL and Hans Zimmer

Look, I get it.  Comic book movies are a tough business.

You have to adapt an infinite medium into a finite medium; you have to make a movie that will stand on its own even if people haven’t read the source material while also making something that fans of the source material will appreciate; and, on top of all that, you need to make a movie that will make enough money to triple the tremendous costs so that it’s not considered a failure, but you don’t want to make it too simple-minded so that it’s also considered a failure.

Whoa.

All that said, I’ve feared, especially when compared to its Marvel counterpart, that the DC Extended Universe has been doomed from the start, having been largely placed in the hands of Zack Snyder.  That’s not to say ol’ Zack is incapable of making good movies; 300 and Watchmen stand as evidence in his favor.  Man of Steel, however, is good for about 70 minutes of its runtime, while the other hour is just too much for my senses.

Dawn of Justice is, in many ways, more of the same, except it’s not a tale of two halves like Man of Steel (or Captain America: The First Avenger, for that matter).  Here, the schizophrenia has a bit of a ping pong feel, bouncing back and forth between questionable decisions and sequences that actually work pretty well.  From a plot standpoint, the movie takes a while to get where it’s really going, but once it gets there, it’s pretty good, so, overall, it balances out to some solid entertainment.

Per my guiding principles, I’ll do my best not to spoil anything (although the trailers have basically given everything away at this point) while getting into what worked and what didn’t.

Remember when everybody freaked out over Ben Affleck playing Batman, and how he was going to ruin the movie?  I maintained from Day One that he’d be fine, and if the movie had problems, he wouldn’t be one.

And I was right.

I have to hand it to him, given what he was asked to do, I thought he handled the essentially dual roles of Bruce Wayne and Batman with aplomb.  He might not go down as the best of either, but given the history of the character on screen, he acquitted himself well.

Regrettably, I was also right about the most grating aspect of the movie: Jesse Eisenberg as Lex Luthor.

Now, do I have a certain bias against Jesse Eisenberg?  Yes.  He generally gets on my nerves, but that doesn’t mean I hate everything he’s ever done,  Surely some of my agita has to do with the way the Luthor character was written, but, man, him in that role was a tough pill to swallow, and I do mean to the bitter end.

What else did I hate?  For one thing, there’s this thread of Bruce Wayne having crazy dreams that is baffling to watch and doesn’t really add anything.  There are references to the future that I felt were way too explicit; a little subtlety would have been nice in that regard.  And, did we really need to see Thomas and Martha Wayne get gunned down again?  (Mercifully, this happens during the opening credits, so at least they get it out of the way as quickly as possible.)

What else worked?  I’m not entirely sure, but I think there was a creative decision to make Gotham and Metropolis very geographically close, almost like Manhattan and Jersey City; I think I’m on board with that.  Also, Jeremy Irons as Alfred was great; the character had a certain sassiness that I really enjoyed.

Ultimately, the movie is an excuse for one particular centerpiece, and that centerpiece is satisfying, even if the reason for it is a bit hackneyed.

Unfortunately, I’m not so sure the movie works entirely as a movie, which every movie should, no matter the source material, or if it’s the third sequel; every movie should work as its own experience.  I’m afraid that if people don’t know much about Batman or Superman, they’ll be a bit lost watching Dawn of Justice, and they’ll have the same experience I had when I saw X-Men: Days of Future Past (tl;dr, I didn’t give a crap).  Perhaps it coalesces just enough to avoid this problem, but I don’t know; I’ve always been kind of a DC Comics guy, so it’s hard for me to tell.

As I said before though, Dawn of Justice averages out to some solid entertainment, and it did throw in some surprises I wasn’t expecting, which is more that I can say about some other movies.

Rating: ★★★☆☆

P.S.
Naturally, and as usual, Alamo outdid themselves with the specials.  Between my friend and I, we sampled everything but the pizza.
BvS Specials