Jesse Eisenberg – People Talking

Pumpkin Shandy – ‘Zombieland’ & ‘Zombieland: Double Tap’ – Everybody Wants Some!

Ordinarily, I might just go see Zombieland: Double Tap, enjoy myself, and not even bother writing a review, but it seems like a lot of people, even big fans of the original movie, aren’t that motivated to see the sequel, and I want to do my part to change that (’cause it’s not like Aquaman where it’ll make a billion dollars no matter what).

I’ll keep this all relatively brief, but, first of all, seeing these two films together was the most fun I’ve had at a double feature since I saw both volumes of Kill Bill on 35mm back in May (which may not seem like a great a length of time, but I go to the movies a lot).

I’m going to go ahead and say that I did not see the original Zombieland in theaters back in the day, because I simply have no memory of going, but I know for a fact that I absolutely ate it up on video (sometimes with proper accompanying snacks for a full taste-o-vision experience), and I’m happy to say that ten years later it still holds up in a big way. Is it the absolute perfection that Shaun of the Dead is? No, but, honestly, despite the fact that they’re both funny and have zombies in them, they’re very different movies, so maybe lay off that comparison, kids.

In re-watching 2009’s Zombieland, what I love most about it is that it’s not so quippy. Like, in another universe there’s a version that’s written and directed by, say, Joss Whedon, where everybody is so clever at every moment, and I would just hate it, but the dialogue in the original is just grounded enough for it to not feel ridiculous.

Secondly, the core four of Jesse Eisenberg, Woody Harrelson, Emma Stone, and Abigail Breslin (at present, all Oscar-nominated and/or winning actors) are a joy to watch in both films, but especially the first one, given that it’s almost exclusively their show for the duration. There’s a real chemistry between them and they all help sell each scene for what it needs to be.

Now, right off the bat, I’ll say that Double Tap goes a little too far in a few places, as sequels are wont to do, but it’s nothing totally unforgivable, and by-and-large the movie is more of the same in a good way (and without relying all that much on blatant callbacks and references).

One factor that immediately distinguishes it from its predecessor is the introduction of more humans (sometimes for good, sometimes not-so-much); but the standout is Zoey Deutch, whose character could easily be extremely irritating if handled just slightly differently, but her performance is so committed that you have to respect it, and, in fact, pound-for-pound she might just garner the most laughs out of anybody.

Really though, what I appreciate most about both Zombielands is that they use the apocalyptic undead to make something entertaining. I don’t care if it’s frightful or funny or both, zombies should be used for entertainment first and foremost. Not for boredom.

So yeah, if you haven’t seen Zombieland in a while (or ever), give it a re-watch, and then go see Double Tap at your local movie house.

I promise you’ll have a good time (even if you didn’t care for Ruben Fleischer’s last movie).

Ratings:
Zombieland: ★★★★½
Zombieland: Double Tap: ★★★★☆

P.S.
Bill Murray stingers. That is all.

Movie Review – ‘The Art of Self-Defense’ – Laughs and Jokes and Kicks and Chokes

Written and Directed by Riley Stearns
Cast: Jesse Eisenberg, Imogen Poots, Alessandro Nivola, Steve Terada, David Zellner
Soundtrack: Heather McIntosh

I haven’t written anything for a while (or much at all this year), let alone a review of a hot new film, and there are reasons for that. Vacation, sickness, holiday weekends, heatwaves, etc., but honestly, the biggest reason of all is that it’s been a pretty down year for movies, and I just haven’t been moved to give many films a hearty recommendation (or vice versa for something terrible); but, at last, something has come along to rustle me out of my slumber, and that is Riley Stearns’ The Art of Self-Defense.

Quite frankly, this is one of the best movies of the year (along with Apollo 11, which you should really watch if you haven’t yet).

The Art of Self-Defense is a dark comedy in the vein of Yorgos Lanthimos (though not as harsh) and Wes Anderson (though not as esoteric), but more crowd-pleasing than I expected (at least from the audience reactions I’ve been privy to), though I don’t want to pigeon-hole writer/director Riley Stearns too much as there is a unique voice here. The tone is dark enough to give the stakes serious enough weight, but comedic enough to allow for a lot of good chuckles and even a few laugh out loud moments, which is all I ever really ask of anything labeled a comedy.

Story-wise, the plot is simple enough: Jesse Eisenberg portrays a young accountant named Casey who is mugged one night, and based on this trauma decides to take up Karate under the wing of Sensei (played by
Alessandro Nivola). There are obviously twists and turns from there, but the execution and the performances from the leads are what really sells it, especially Nivola, who apparently came on board last minute, though you’d never know it from seeing the film.

In addition, I absolutely loved the production design in this movie. The world-building that comes out of it is on par with Dragged Across Concrete and Sorry to Bother You, and I’ll even throw Pete’s Dragon in there as both have an unspoken period element to the setting (Art of Self-Defense placing itself somewhere in the Nineties from what I can gather). For those of us who lived before the ubiquity of cell phones, it’s a real journey to the past.

And yes, there’s some deliciously incisive commentary on the nature of masculinity, I’d be remiss if I didn’t at least mention it, but it all feels naturally apart of the story (not unlike Nightcrawler), rather than the film taking timeout to beat you over the head with a message. Kudos.

So, yes, go see The Art of Self-Defense. I don’t know what the budget was (I’m going to guess minimal), but it’s a small movie that punches far above its weight class to deliver a surprising amount of hits. It’s a bit dark, a bit twisted, but more than humorous enough to still feel good about it in the end.

Keep going for it, Mr. Stearns. I’ve got my eye on you.

Rating: ★★★★☆

P.S.
I didn’t really expect anybody to get the reference; it’s a recent Mark Knopfler song.

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

Directed by Zack Snyder
Written by Chris Terrio & David S. Goyer, based on characters created by Bob Kane & Bill 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.