Laurence Fishburne – People Talking

Movie Review – ‘Ant-Man and the Wasp’ – All The Small Things

Directed by Peyton Reed
Written by Chris McKenna & Erik Sommers and Paul Rudd, Andrew Barrer, & Gabriel Ferrari
Cast: Paul Rudd, Evangeline Lilly, Michael Peña, Walton Goggins, Bobby Cannavale, Judy Greer, Tip “T.I.” Harris, David Dastmalchian, Hannah John-Kamen, Abby Ryder Fortson, Randall Park, Michelle Pfeiffer, Laurence Fishburne, Michael Douglas, Michael Cerveris, Riann Steele, Tim Heidecker, Tom Scharpling, Jon Wurster, Divian Ladwa
Soundtrack: Christophe Beck

Another week, another sequel.

Such is life.

(And I won’t even mention how this is the fourth Marvel movie in eight months.)

Let’s keep this short and sweet though.

2015’s Ant-Man was a film I thoroughly enjoyed except for one nagging thought, and that is, “How much better would it have been had Edgar Wright and Joe Cornish been able to see it all the way through?” The answer is it likely would have earned another half (if not full) star in my rating, but still, I think Peyton Reed and company did a fine job making a mostly stand-alone movie with a fun, underdog, Eighties vibe.

Similarly, I enjoyed Ant-Man and the Wasp, though not as much as its predecessor. The tone is largely the same, and the action is still very much to my liking (aka you can actually see what’s happening and who’s punching who, not to mention the miniaturization is unique and interesting), but the comedic execution isn’t as sharp and I found myself visualizing the ending long before we actually got there.

Even so, it’s an entertaining movie, and in a rare occurrence for Marvel, I actually noticed and enjoyed some of the score.

Quite simply though, Ant-Man and the Wasp isn’t as strong as the first one, but I’d still recommend it without any qualms.

Rating: ★★★½ (out of five)

Thanksgiving Smörgåsbord: ‘Three Billboards Outside Ebbing, Missouri’ – ‘Roman J. Israel, Esq.’ – ‘Last Flag Flying’ – ‘Lady Bird’

Four auteured films.

No superheroes.
No space battles.
No remakes.

Let’s get it on.

Written and Directed by Martin McDonagh
Cast: Frances McDormand, Woody Harrelson, Sam Rockwell, John Hawkes, Peter Dinklage, Caleb Landry Jones, Kerry Condon, Darrell Britt-Gibson, Abbie Cornish, Lucas Hedges, Zeljko Ivanek, Amanda Warren, Malaya Rivera Drew, Sandy Martin, Christopher Berry, Jerry Winsett, Kathryn Newton, Samara Weaving, Clarke Peters, Nick Searcy
Soundtrack: Carter Burwell

Whether it was ever his intention or not, it’s completely fair to refer to Martin McDonagh as the British Isles’ answer to the Coen Brothers.

I mean, all three of his films (In Bruges, Seven Psycopaths, and now Three Billboards) have been crime-related dark comedies, all scored by Carter Burwell, and now he’s finally recruited Frances McDormand as his leading lady.

Not that I’m at all complaining, or throwing shade, or saying he’s ripping anyone off. He’s not. His stories are original, his characters are unique, and his films ultimately stick with you, Three Billboards most especially.

I rarely delve into plot, but I’m not spoiling anything by saying that the movie in a nutshell is about a mother’s search for justice for her slain daughter, in a rather messy and definitely confrontational way, weaving a tangled web involving everyone around her.

Three Billboards is fiery, brash, foul-mouthed, and not afraid to go to some dark places, yet somehow, in a very twisted, Martin McDonagh way, it has genuine heart and humanity, which is maybe the most surprising thing about it.

Of course, the movie would not be nearly as noteworthy without quality performances, which you get from almost everybody you need to get them from (I wouldn’t be surprised to see McDormand get some awards season buzz). The only one who threw me was Abbie Cornish, because I thought she had an American accent early on, but then at one point she slipped into an English accent and kept it for the rest of the movie; I’m still confused as to why.

All-in-all though, Three Billboards, not unexpectedly, is one of the best of the year.

Rating: ★★★★½ (out of five)

Written and Directed by Dan Gilroy
Cast: Denzel Washington, Colin Farrell, Carmen Ejogo, Lynda Gravatt, Amanda Warren, Hugo Armstrong, Sam Gilroy, Tony Plana, DeRon Horton, Amari Cheatom, Vince Cefalu, Nazneen Contractor, Robert Prescott, Shelley Hennig, Annie Sertich, Esperanza Spalding, Jessica Camacho, Ajgie Kirkland, Ludwig Manukian, Joseph David-Jones, Pej Vahdat, Henry G. Sanders, Miles Heizer
Soundtrack: James Newton Howard

Dan Gilroy’s directorial debut was Nightcrawler, which was one of the best films of 2014, and is still one of the best L.A. movies of recent vintage.

It’s a harsh standard to live up to, but Roman J. Israel, Esq. is no Nightcrawler.

Not that I’m going to compare and contrast them to death, because they are ultimately different, but they do both revolve around eccentric characters who come out of their shells a bit and take massive risks for the sake of sizable financial gain.

In the case of Nightcrawler, you’re glued to the screen from start to finish, and the third act in particular is unrelentingly thrilling.

Israel, on the other hand, is very muddled.

Denzel Washington’s performance in the titular role is compelling to watch, and is generally on par with any of the great performances of his career. The problem is that there’s not much else around him (Colin Farrell in particular feels a little directionless), and in the end I’m left wondering if the movie is trying to be profound and failing, or attempting to be meaningless as a statement, but it’s not clear to me either way, leaving me feeling just a bit empty.

If you’re a huge Denzel fan, Roman J. Israel, Esq. is maybe worth a rental down the road, but that’s about it.

Rating: ★★½ (out of five)

Directed by Richard Linklater
Written by Richard Linklater & Darryl Ponicsan, based on his novel of the same name
Cast: Steve Carell, Bryan Cranston, Laurence Fishburne, J. Quinton Johnson, Deanna Reed-Foster, Yul Vazquez, Cicely Tyson
Soundtrack: Graham Reynolds

To be perfectly honest, I don’t have a particularly high opinion of Richard Linklater as a filmmaker, but I was willing to put that aside for a movie that appears to have a great cast, and a story that serves as a spiritual sequel to 1973’s The Last Detail (which is also based on a Darryl Ponicsan novel and is a movie I would recommend).

Linklater admittedly specializes in films where not a whole lot actually happens, and sometimes such movies can work really well, but Last Flag Flying is not one of them.

In terms of the core (Corps?) performances, Steve Carell is great, Laurence Fishburne is fine, and Bryan Cranston is sub-par.

I know that’s a heretical statement, because he’s everyone’s favorite actor because Breaking Bad is the greatest (he’s one of mine, too), but Bryan Cranston is not beyond a turkey of a performance from time to time; I’ve seen it happen before. And I don’t necessarily blame him, because if this is the performance he brought or the performance he was directed to, and nobody told him it wasn’t great, that’s not his fault.

Anyway, it’s not like he’s the only problem.

The movie overall (especially in the dialogue) feels like a college film (not to mention its an early 2000s period piece that sometimes cares about the details and sometimes doesn’t care at all). Whether Linklater or Ponicsan is more at fault for the lackluster script, I don’t know, but since this was Linklater’s baby, I’m going to leave the blame on his doorstep.

To put it the most simply, this is a movie that needs to feel real and just doesn’t. The most egregious example is the mildly antagonistic Marine colonel, who is made-up and lit to look like a pale vampire, as if it’s not already painfully obvious that we are supposed to dislike him.

Maybe I’m wrong. Maybe Last Flag Flying perfectly portrays the dynamic of three old military buddies getting together after forty years, but it mostly just strikes me as off-base.

Definitely check out The Last Detail though, if you’ve not already seen it.

Rating: ★★☆☆☆

Written and Directed by Greta Gerwig
Cast: Saoirse Ronan, Laurie Metcalf, Tracy Letts, Lucas Hedges, Timothée Chalamet, Beanie Feldstein, Stephen Henderson, Lois Smith, Odeya Rush, Kathryn Newton, Jake McDorman, Bayne Gibby, Laura Marano, Andy Buckley, Jordan Rodrigues, Kristen Cloke, Daniel Zovatto, Bob Stephenson, Marielle Scott, Myra Turley, Richard Jin, Ithamar Enriquez, Carla Valentine
Soundtrack: Jon Brion

Talk about a surprise.

I really only saw this movie because I needed to kill time before something else, so perhaps it benefits from my complete lack of expectation, but I am honestly at a loss to find much fault with Lady Bird.

I don’t know too much about Greta Gerwig, other than she appears in movies I don’t see because I have no interest in them, but she really knocked it out of the park with this one. If the “teen girl coming-of-age” sub-genre hasn’t been done to death by now, it’s definitely in a stale place, and yet everything about Lady Bird feels fresh (and it’s an early 2000s period piece that actually cares the whole time, unlike certain other movies).

One of the major reasons why the film works so well is that it’s short, sweet, and to the point, because it covers pretty much a whole year in our main character’s life in ninety minutes, paradoxically using the whole cow and trimming all the fat at the same time.

It’s a fairly familiar story: Senior-itis, young love, teen rebellion, trying to be cool, applying to colleges, etc., but everything feels pretty spot on and earnest, unlike other similar movies where characters often feel like caricatures more so than real people.

Much like Three Billboards (if not to a larger extent), everyone who needs to turn in a quality performance in Lady Bird does so (Tracy Letts in particular stuck out to me in his supporting role as the dad). Saoirse Ronan is the star, to be sure, but this is ensemble casting at its finest.

It might not be quite appropriate for actual teenagers (and, given that it takes place in a time before they were born, I don’t know that they’d get out of it what a thirty-something audience would), but it definitely belongs in the pantheon of the genre, and it’s for sure one of the best movies I’ve seen this year.

Surprisingly.

Rating: ★★★★½ (out of five)

Valentine’s Day Shandy – ‘John Wick’ & ‘John Wick: Chapter 2’ – Back and Backer

Why see just one when you can see both?

Hollywood’s always trying to figure out how to maximize box office returns, including figuring out what movie to release when. For example, James Cameron’s Titanic was originally slated for a summer release, but got pushed back to the weekend before Christmas, thus making wintertime the new summertime for big budget blockbusters (the Star Wars franchise has been dominating this slot for the past two Decembers and likely will continue to do so indefinitely).

On a much smaller scale from a money standpoint, but equally as revelatory, 20th Century Fox discovered a couple years ago that there’s a market for fresh, fun, violent, R-rated action on Valentine’s Day weekend with a little movie called Kingsman (which itself was originally slated for October, as is its coming sequel). A year later they followed that up with the even more successful Deadpool. Frankly, how Logan is NOT in the same slot this year is utterly baffling. Maybe Lionsgate/Summit just beat Fox to the punch this time around, but, in any case, this year’s contestant in the R-rated Valentine’s Day massacre is the somewhat anticipated John Wick: Chapter 2.

I feel a little guilty that I was as excited for John Wick 2 as I was, because the studio was obviously pandering to my generation with the promised on-screen reunion of Keanu Reeves and Laurence Fishburne (in reference to some other movie), but, what can I say? The marketing got me in the door.

Of course, the natural question is, “Is John Wick: Chapter 2 better than the first one?”

Swarms upon swarms of people are answering, “YAS!” because it has “MOAR ACTION!” but I don’t agree. Chapter 2 might have more (and more stylized) action, but the 2014 original is the superior film because of story and characters.

The first time I saw John Wick was in a real IMAX theater, completely alone. Seriously, I was literally the only person in the theater (I don’t think there were even any staff), so it was LOUD. At the time, I thought it was an okay action movie, but I realized after seeing it again ahead of Chapter 2 that I was missing something: an audience.

I have a rule that I don’t write any reviews here unless I’ve seen a movie theatrically, because movies are meant to be seen theatrically, but there’s something else you don’t get while watching a movie on your couch, and that’s the collective experience of other people in the theater; the oohs and aahs, the audible laughter, the heightened sense of awareness that adds to the enjoyment of the film. I missed that the first time I saw John Wick, and seeing it again under more proper circumstances made me realize I had been underrating it.

Action movies in general aren’t quite what they used to be, largely because of bad CGI, but John Wick is very good for its time, and its biggest strength is its clarity. We know what’s happening, we know why, we connect with why, and John Wick himself is uncomplicated in his quest. Throw in some more-than-competent action, a dash of good humor here and there, and a nice gallery of supporting characters (good and bad), and you’ve got a real crowd-pleaser of a film.

On the other hand, where John Wick is clear, Chapter 2 is muddled. His motivation is less interesting (the first one he did it because he wanted to; now he’s doing it out of obligation), the villains aren’t as strong, there are no supporting characters who can compete with Willem Dafoe from the first one, the plot is more convoluted, and there’s some backtracking with John Wick’s character (trying to soften his edge) that I did not appreciate. Not to mention the third act is a disappointment from a story perspective.

This is not to say that Chapter 2 is utterly useless. I enjoyed how it expanded the secret hitman universe established in the first movie, and the build-up is a lot of fun, but, on the whole, it’s more than a full step down from John Wick. There’s just too much we don’t know or care about, and too much sequelitis (aka “Remember this!?).

They make a fine pairing back-to-back, but the difference is clear.

(Also, as someone familiar with public transportation in and around New York City, I was annoyed with the “geography” of the PATH train in Chapter 2. Like, either use real locations or don’t. I know this is a bit of a nitpick on my part, but it just got to me.)

Ratings:
John Wick: ★★★★☆
Chapter 2: ★★½

P.S.
Shout out to Alamo Drafthouse (as usual) for their John Wick-themed specials this month. The “Carbonara Pizza: Chapter 2” and “Hotel Continental Special” are worth killing for.

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.