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.

Quick Thoughts – July Mega-Post – ‘Mission: Impossible – Fallout’ ‘Sorry to Bother You’ ‘Skyscraper’ ‘The Equalizer 2’

Mission: Impossible – Fallout

My affinity for these movies is fairly well-documented, from the first one to the last one.

And why not?  After all, when the consensus “worst film” in your franchise is a John Woo guns-motorcycles-doves-knives spectacular, you know you’re doing something right.

A lot of that credit belongs to J.J. Abrams for resurrecting things in 2006 (and staying on as a producer ever since), which was perfect timing, because when the James Bond franchise zigged to more gritty and grounded, Mission: Impossible zagged to what classic Bond always was: a globetrotting, fun, high action, insane stunt-filled series.  The key difference is that where the Bond actors would step aside for a stuntman (or stunt driver, or stunt pilot), Tom Cruise, more often than not, gets in there and does these amazing feats himself, and Fallout is no different; so much so in fact that to me the movie played more like a Bond Greatest Hits album than a Mission: Impossible film, which is fine by me.

Hate him all you want for whatever reason you want, I choose to respect Tom Cruise for this: he was an action star at 27, and is still an action star at 57, and while this may be the last Mission: Impossible movie with him in the lead, it looks like he’ll be an action star for at least a few more years.

All that said, and it’s hard to put my finger on exactly why, the script for Fallout feels like a step back compared to the last two films (not to mention my boy Jeremy Renner feels conspicuously absent).  However, I will still give it four stars because the action and stunts are more than big-screen worthy, and because the movie does reward long-time fans (making reference all the way back to the first, and yes, second one).

Rating: ★★★★☆

 

Sorry to Bother You

Often times, when I find myself having to sit through a movie’s trailer dozens upon dozens of times (*COUGH*EighthGrade*COUGH*), I become resentful and refuse to see it on the principle of how annoyed I am, but in the case of Sorry to Bother You, I was always looking forward to it, just because it looked so refreshingly original, which it most definitely is.

In fact, not only is it an original script from writer/director Boots Riley, he also contributed a number of songs to the film’s soundtrack with his band, The Coup, so the whole project has a real homegrown vibe to it (but in a good way, not a crappy student film way).

Fair warning, the third act goes off the rails, which will divide people, but in terms of comedies with social commentary and satire, it’s the best I’ve seen since Ingrid Goes West (though the style of much of the satire is akin to the original Robocop, which, again, is a good thing).

It’s definitely not a movie for kids, and I’m sure it’ll piss some people off, but I enjoyed it and would absolutely recommend it to adults with brains.

Rating: ★★★★☆

 

Skyscraper

I know I’m not making a revelatory statement when I say that this movie is like if Die Hard and The Towering Inferno had a baby in Hong Kong.

In fact, it’s safe to say that not only do most people going to see this already know that, but the movie knows that they know that, and therefore delivers exactly that.

What I’m trying to say here is that the movie knows what it is: a fairly mindless yet relatively satisfying piece of popcorn entertainment.  Is it dumb?  Yes.  Is it as dumb as it could be?  No, and I appreciate that.

It’s nothing special, and you’re either on board or you’re not, but if you are, you’ll have a good time (and I even noticed and liked some of the music, which feels so rare these days).

Rating: ★★★½

 

The Equalizer 2

Maybe I’m wrong, but I’m starting to get the sense that Antoine Fuqua is not a great action director, because though I think these movies are okay (largely because Denzel is Denzel), I have issues with both that hold me back from enjoying them as much as I theoretically think I should.

My major problem with the first one was I felt the “badassness” was way overwrought, and I thought the movie would have been better served by underplaying it a bit; but I guess be careful what I wish for, because the sequel swings the pendulum hard the other way, but overall I didn’t find the story as interesting as its predecessor, so, I don’t know.

There are some satisfying moments and plotlines, and I really can’t hate on the slower pace (and the James Bond-esque cold open was kind of nice), but, I can’t say I’ll be all that disappointed if they never announce an Equalizer 3.

Rating: ★★★☆☆