Twofer Review – ‘Doctor Sleep’ and ‘Midway’ – One Sings, the Other Doesn’t


*Note: The title is just a metaphor; neither of these films are musicals.

Written, Directed, and Edited by Mike Flanagan, based on the novel by Stephen King
Cast: Ewan McGregor, Rebecca Ferguson, Kyliegh Curran, Carl Lumbly, Zahn McClarnon, Emily Alyn Lind, Bruce Greenwood, Jocelin Donahue, Alex Essoe, Roger Dale Floyd, Cliff Curtis, Zackary Momoh, Jacob Tremblay, Henry Thomas, Carel Struycken, Robert Longstreet, Catherine Parker, Met Clark, Selena Anduze, Danny Lloyd
Soundtrack: The Newton Brothers

I’ve said it before, and hopefully this is the last time I’ll feel compelled to mention it, but I’m not a big fan of Stanley Kubrick’s The Shining.

Maybe that sounds crazy to you, but Stephen King isn’t a big fan either (to say the least), so I suppose I’m in decent company (not saying I’m right; it’s just my opinion, man).

Now we have Mike Flanagan’s Doctor Sleep, which is based on the
2013 Stephen King novel of the same name, which itself is a sequel to King’s 1977 novel The Shining, but 2019’s film of Doctor Sleep is also a sequel to Stanley Kubrick’s 1980 film of The Shining.

So now that no one’s confused, let’s continue.

Doctor Sleep is one of the best films of 2019. Am I saying it’s an all-time great? No, but it’s plenty captivating, truly horrifying when called for, and overall it admirably juggles its multiple source materials.

The story is rather sprawling, and by that I mean it’s a movie that very much feels like it’s based on a novel; and if you’re totally unfamiliar with The Shining (which is hard to fathom given its cultural permeation) you may struggle to climb aboard, but, other than a touch of third act squiffiness, Doctor Sleep is a solid piece of intelligent entertainment from tape-to-tape.

If I have one substantial criticism (if you can even call it that), it’s that, I wouldn’t say anybody does a bad job in their performance, everybody is fine if not above average, but I didn’t feel like anyone in the cast was indispensable in their part. Perhaps it’s a huge credit to writer/director/editor Mike Flanagan, but I think he could have made this movie with a near-infinite combination of actors and we’d still have the same quality result.

If you’re a huge fan of Kubrick’s Shining, perhaps you won’t find Doctor Sleep to be up to the same standard that I do, but for me it’s very much a Blade Runner 2049 situation, where I respect the original but find the sequel more compelling.

Your mileage may vary, but I recommend it highly.

Rating: ★★★★☆



Directed by Roland Emmerich
Written by Wes Tooke
Cast: Ed Skrein, Patrick Wilson, Woody Harrelson, Luke Evans, Mandy Moore, Luke Kleintank, Dennis Quaid, Aaron Eckhart, Keean Johnson, Nick Jonas, Etsushi Toyokawa, Tadanobu Asano, Darren Criss, Brandon Sklenar, Jun Kunimura, Brennan Brown, Jake Weber, David Hewlett, Mark Rolston, Eric Davis, Peter Shinkoda, James Carpinello, Hiromoto Ida, Hiroaki Shintani, Russell Dennis Lewis, Geoffrey Blake
Soundtrack: Harald Kloser & Thomas Wanker

I probably should hate this movie.

Given that I was a history major, you might think that I should hate it, too.

For some reason though, I just can’t get that riled up about it. I think it’s because:

A. I had extremely low expectations going in (after all, it is a Roland Emmerich joint)
and
B. It might actually be more factually accurate than its 1976 predecessor (which is a fine film with a great cast, but I’m not going to pretend it’s some ultimate triumph of cinema, given how much footage it cribs from other sources), so, while I could quibble with the history of it, I always expect a certain amount of Hollywood exaggeration, so that’s not really what I take issue with.

The biggest problem is that I think the movie means to be taken seriously, but so much information is fed to my eyes and ears that is to the contrary that I can’t help but conclude that Midway is a $100 million cartoon.

Now, you read that and probably think I’m referring to the visual effects, which I am, but only partially. This movie could have been successful with the effects it has. What truly makes it cartoonish is a script with severely lacking dialogue, and a number of sub-par performances (Not to go full ‘Murica here, but can we get some Americans to play our American heroes!? Hugh Laurie playing Dr. House is the exception, not the rule).

Anyway, it’s not all terrible. Patrick Wilson in particular is extremely likable (as usual), and there are some sequences that are actually effective (there’s a submarine scene that might be the best set-piece in the film).

In the end though, Midway is essentially a big-budget Redbox movie. Not the worst thing ever made, but largely a waste.

Rating: ★★½ (out of five)

P.S.
I noticed as the film was starting that there were a couple of Chinese production companies with their names on Midway, and I wondered what impact that would have on the story told. Let’s just say they make sure the audience knows that 250,000 Chinese civilians were killed in Japanese reprisals for the Doolittle Raid. Sad? Yes. True? Yes. Did it need to be included in this film? Probably not.

Movie Review – ‘The Dark Tower’ – Ignorance is Bliss

Directed by Nikolaj Arcel
Written
by Akiva GoldsmanJeff Pinkner and Anders Thomas JensenNikolaj Arcel, based on the novels by Stephen King
Cast: Idris Elba, Matthew McConaughey, Tom Taylor, Claudia Kim, Fran Kranz, Abbey Lee, Jackie Earle Haley, Dennis Haysbert, Katheryn Winnick, Nicholas Hamilton, José Zúñiga
Soundtrack: Junkie XL

Good versus Evil.

Or something.

Look, I’m going to level with you.  I don’t know anything about Stephen King’s Dark Tower books, or anything else about where the story of this film comes from.  All I really know is that it’s a movie, so that’s all I can judge it as.

Actually, one thing I do know is that The Dark Tower is writer/director Nikolaj Arcel’s Hollywood debut, after a quartet of features in his home country of Denmark, culminating with his breakout movie, A Royal Affair (solid period drama; worth watching), which was nominated for a Best Foreign Language Film Oscar in 2013.

The Dark Tower, however, I have concerns about, if only because it’s a wide release film that’s not a comedy that clocks in around only ninety minutes.  Maybe I’m overreacting, but the first thing that comes to my mind is 1998’s The Avengers, which was drastically edited down after poor test screenings, leading to an incomprehensible final cut that absolutely tanked at the box office.

I’m also concerned it could be like The Forbidden Kingdom, which was shamelessly marketed as a Jackie Chan vs. Jet Li marshal arts film, but in reality was essentially a children’s movie.  Lies!

So, what is The Dark Tower?

Well, I can say with certainty that it’s not the worst movie ever made.  It’s not even the worst movie of the summer (I also wouldn’t call it a children’s movie, despite a child protagonist).

In fact, I’d call it solid entertainment; roughly a mix of The Matrix, Thor, and Guardians of the Galaxy.  Not that The Dark Tower is nearly as good as any of those, but it’s passable.  If not for the recent run of quality summer pictures, I might give it a higher recommendation, but it’s low priority compared to Baby Driver, Spider-Man, War for the Planet of the Apes, and Dunkirk (not to mention Detroit, although that’s a different kind of movie).

It’s not perfect.  It feels like a reverse Hobbit situation where they’re trying to pack too much into too little (ninety-five minutes for a story like this just isn’t enough time), but it’s far from a total train-wreck.  I was never horribly confused as to what was happening or who each character was.  Sometimes bits of dialogue here and there felt a little silly (in a John Carter sort of way), but I wouldn’t say there are any outright bad performances.  I thought Matthew McConaughey was an interesting villain (in his cool, laid back fashion), and Idris Elba worked great as a disillusioned white knight out for revenge.

Also, based on the fact that there were a few Stephen King Easter eggs that I as a casual observer noticed, I’m going to guess this movie is chock-full of them; which, assuming you’re not horribly offended by this adaptation of his work, should be fun for fans of the author.

Other than that, the action (what little there is) is fairly well executed, there are some nice NYC bits (like, real, actual New York City), and a little bit of fish-out-of-water humor for levity’s sake.

So, yeah, I liked it.  I can’t promise that you’ll like it, and if you’re a fan of the books you’ll probably have reason to hate it, but for me, going in totally blind, I thought it was fine.

It’s not worth full price, and it’s not worth seeing before a lot of other movies this summer, but it’s a fine matinee choice.

Rating: ★★★½ (out of five)

P.S.
No stingers.

Classic Movie Quinella – ‘HEY, ARNOLD!’: A Schwarzenegger Marathon – See You At The Party

Since the doors first opened in August of 2013, Alamo Drafthouse Yonkers has hosted four fantastic actor-centric marathons: Caged, Stallone Zone, Van Dammage, and Burt Day (aka Cristina Cacioppo‘s Westchester curtain call).

Enter 2017.  New Year.  New programmer.  New marathon.

Lovingly curated by Justin LaLiberty, “Hey, Arnold!” was an epic half-day celebration consisting of five mystery Schwarzenegger films, all on 35mm prints, spanning ten years of the prime of his career (and sparking such debates as “Which Arnold is better: beard or no beard?”  …Actually, that’s not a debate at all.  Bearded Arnold is clearly superior).

And if that weren’t enough, there was, in fact, a giant cake (which was delicious, by the way) to celebrate his upcoming 70th birthday, among other surprises.

At this point, the man himself needs little introduction, so let’s jump in.

 

Movie #1: ‘True Lies’ (1994)

It sounds weird to say because he’s been so influential (for better or worse), but, since his directorial debut in 1981 (which he’d rather you forget), James Cameron has put only eight feature films under his belt, which makes the fact that Arnold has starred in three of them even more significant.  Frankly, I’d say True Lies is the last Cameron movie worth watching, but that’s a different discussion.

This was the longest film of the day (and second longest of Arnold’s career, behind T2), which was good, because when you’re stuck to your seat for ten hours, you’d rather get the biggest chunk out of the way first.

Anyway, True Lies is a movie I’ve seen the third act of perhaps dozens of times, as it was a cable staple of the 2000s, so it was definitely worth seeing in it’s entirety, as there was much I either didn’t remember or straight up hadn’t seen (like the fact that a good chunk of the move is in Washington D.C.).

A remake of the 1991 French hit La totale ! (which I totally did not learn just now), True Lies is a top notch 90s action thriller that’s also unafraid of laying the comedy on thick.  I particularly enjoy the long, slow push-ins on Arnold’s steely eyes when he knows something the person he’s talking to does not.  It’s also a surprisingly grounded film given its over the top nature.  Honestly, the only element that took me out of the movie was the fact that Charlton Heston’s character had a patch over his obviously scarred eye, as if he walked in from the set of a different movie.

Really though, the magic of True Lies, other than the action set-pieces and ‘splosions, is that just about everyone in the cast is used appropriately, from Schwarzenegger and Jamie Lee Curtis, to Tia Carrere and Art Malik, to Tom Arnold (fantastic in this) and the now late (sadly) Bill Paxton, everyone’s playing a part they can easily dive into.

It may not be the biggest and baddest Arnold movie in terms of a testosterone-fueled thrill ride, but it’s a very good action/comedy that a lot of people can appreciate (and that doesn’t even include the one-liners [Spoiler]).

Rating: ★★★★☆

 

Movie #2: ‘The Running Man’ (1987)

Ah, the far, distant, post-apocalyptic future of 2017!

You won’t hear me say The Running Man is bad, because it’s not.  It’s got a solid backbone of a Steven E. de Souza script (just look up his resume; it’s ridiculous), and a cast that’s chock-full of great character actors and action men.  I just can’t help but wonder if the movie could have been something more with a more visionary director at the helm.  Not that I blame Paul Michael Glaser.  Reportedly, producer Rob Cohen went through four other directors (including Andrew Davis, who got production off the ground but quickly went over budget and behind schedule; and who later would direct Arnold in Collateral Damage) before hiring Glaser to basically just get the movie done.

The final product of The Running Man is still eminently entertaining and audience-pleasing, even if not every visual concept works perfectly (it also receives bonus points for giving us some bearded Arnold, if only briefly).  Arnold is great, the rogues gallery is great, and the casting of Richard Dawson as an evil version of himself is a move that feels years ahead of its time (you could argue the movie stands on his shoulders more than anyone else; not to mention it leads to one of my favorite incidental lines from Aqua Teen Hunger Force).

The Running Man may not be an all-time great piece of science fiction (like another movie we’ll get to), but it’s no less influential (Hunger Games, anyone?), and, above all, it’s fun, especially with an audience.

Rating: ★★★★☆

Just before The Running Man started we all received one of these glasses, which was a generous and welcome surprise:

 

Movie #3: ‘Kindergarten Cop’ (1990)

This movie’s something of a miracle.

I mean, I don’t know about you, but if you pitched me Kindergarten Cop, a comedy/action film starring Arnold as an undercover police officer posing as a substitute kindergarten teacher (who has no experience) in order to track down the estranged family of a fugitive criminal, I’d tell you straight up that this concept has failure written all over it.

And yet, somehow, it works.

How much credit should go to whom, I don’t know, but given Ivan Reitman’s track record with Ghost Busters, wrangling that film together from three or four disparate creative visions, I’m going to bet he gets the lion’s share.

Anyway, Kindergarten Cop isn’t perfect.  It’s a bit uneven and a bit clunky at times (understandable given the elements it’s trying to hammer together), but, what little action there is is well executed, the comedy mostly works, and, again, it gets bonus points for some bearded Arnold action.

Frankly, the film’s biggest strength is that it never goes completely over the top (except maybe when Pamela Reed suddenly puts on an Austrian accent to maintain cover, but that’s not unforgivable).  There’s enough subtlety and realism in the plot, the characters, and, especially, the children, to hold everything together when a different movie would just come unglued.

It wasn’t my favorite of the day, but I’ll be less inclined to flip the channel on it in the future.

Rating: ★★★½

 

Movie #4: ‘Eraser’ (1996)

The world of film is not without its binary planets that eventually spin off onto different trajectories.  For example, the Coen Brothers collaborated with Sam Raimi earlier in their careers, but it was they, not Raimi, who went on to near-constant critical acclaim in the proceeding decades.

Similarly, Frank Darabont began his career writing with Chuck Russell, but it was he, not Russell, who went onto direct such films as The Shawshank Redemption and The Green Mile, whereas Chuck went on to direct The Mask.  Not that we have anything against Chuck Russell, because he also went on to direct a little movie called Eraser.

Every Alamo Drafthouse actor-centric marathon features at least one movie that throws people for a loop, and I’m going to say Eraser is the left field pick in this case, if for no other reason than one of my friends and I had completely discounted it as a possibility (mostly on account of the CGI reptiles).

However, I have to say, Eraser earned its keep.

It may not have been the best movie of the day, nor the best movie of Arnold’s career, but Eraser has a lot going for it.  Good villains, solid supporting characters, and enough mid-Nineties action to keep you going for a couple of hours.  Whatever elements that haven’t aged well are smoothed over by a rather impressive top-to-bottom cast (including James Caan, James Coburn, and James Cromwell, just to name a few) all putting in solid shifts.

It’ll hurt your brain if you think about it too hard, but, like most of Arnold’s movies, if you’re down for a fun ride, Eraser delivers.

Rating: ★★★½

 

Movie #5: ‘Total Recall’ (1990)

This film was the pièce de résistance, both for the day itself and for me personally, as I’d never seen it before.

Paul Verhoeven as a filmmaker (and perhaps in his life in general) is nothing if not provocative (I mean, if you haven’t seen Elle…it’s provocative), though, by his own standards, Total Recall may be his least provocative movie (you know, outside of all the horrific gore).

What Total Recall is, however, is an extremely successful sci-fi/action film; an all-time great, in my frank opinion.  I won’t claim to be an expert, but it’s generally accepted that Philip K. Dick is a difficult writer to translate from page to screen (e.g. Blade Runner‘s 10,000 different versions), but I’m going to take an educated guess that Total Recall is the best filmed adaptation of his work (or at the very least in the running for such an honor).

In all seriousness though, this is a big, bad, beautiful movie, full of amazing visuals (shot in Mexico, which worked well for Arnold before), bloody violence, and a wry sense of humor, while also featuring a good hard sci-fi story with plenty of twists and turns.  Total Recall is also a touch philosophical, asking the question of what makes us who we are, which I appreciate.

Naturally, of course, there’s more than a few familiar faces from Verhoeven’s other work (most notably Ronny Cox, Sharon Stone, and Michael Ironside).

On the one hand, I don’t know why it took me so long to see this one, but, on the other, I’m glad I got to see it for the first time in the same way everybody else did nearly three decades ago.

It’s a real treasure.

Rating: ★★★★½

 

So, that’s it; that’s all.  A great day all around.

Thanks again to Alamo Drafthouse Yonkers for hosting and Justin LaLiberty for curating, and to all the servers, runners, cooks, and bartenders who took care of all of us in the audience.  My “Mind Eraser” cocktail (whatever was in it) was quite enjoyable.

Unlike in the past, we know what next year’s marathon will be, and I couldn’t be more excited: Russellmania, here we come!

Quick Thoughts – November Round-Up, Part 1

Planes, Trains & Automobiles (1987)

It seems like every major holiday gets plenty of love from the motion picture industry, except Thanksgiving.

I mean, other than Blood Rage (aka Nightmare at Shadow Woods), that fake [TOTALLY NSFW] trailer from Grindhouse, and Prisoners, I can’t think of a single other movie that takes place around the true American holiday.  And that’s not to say that this movie even is a Thanksgiving movie, because it’s really more about one man’s quest to get home for the holiday (and the traveling partner he happens to get stuck with).

I’m going to guess that Planes, Trains & Automobiles doesn’t hold up for everyone, but it still works for me, and if you’ve ever had a nightmare travelling experience, I’m guessing it’ll work for you, too.  Somewhere, perhaps rotting away in a vault, is a two hour cut of this film that I’d love to see (you can tell because the trailer has a ton of stuff that’s not in the final cut), but the version we have available is a nice, tight ninety-minute comedy that never overstays its welcome, no matter how much our two leads get on each others’ nerves.

I know it’s cliche because I overuse it myself, but they don’t make movies like this much anymore.  The comedy genre, not unlike horror, has been largely relegated to the discount bin, only being made if the studio can do it on the cheap.  In contrast, this movie has scope, and a budget to back it up.  After all, no airline, railroad, or rental car company would lend their likeness only to be depicted as incompetent, so the production had to essentially create their own.

But, hey, comedy comes down to comedy, right?  Fortunately, John Candy and Steve Martin are at peak performance with their respective shticks (an over-talker for Candy and a curmudgeon for Martin), but they’re also both adept at keeping things real when the moment calls for it.

This is a very good comedy film (particularly one that doesn’t involve science fiction or supernatural elements) from a decade that’s chock full of good to great ones.  It may leave you with more questions than answers (like, who is Del Griffith, really?), but I suppose it’s more about the journey than the destination.

Rating: ★★★★☆

Assault on Precinct 13 (1976)

I remember watching this on Netflix a while back and thinking it was just okay, but upon further review (perhaps having my expectations more properly calibrated), Assault on Precinct 13 is a pretty good little movie.

Taking huge inspiration from the Howard Hawks-directed, John Wayne-starring siege westerns (Rio Bravo, El Dorado, and Rio Lobo) and upgrading the setting to modern day (as of 1976) Los Angeles, 13 is the tale of a ragtag group consisting of a CHP lieutenant, a pair of secretaries, and a few prisoners, trapped inside a nearly-closed police station and fighting for survival against a seemingly endless storm of gang members bent on revenge.

It’s not a perfect movie, but I give it ample credit for squeezing as much out of its low budget as it possibly could have (especially that wonderful synth score), and there’s one scene in particular, love it or hate it, that few would dare to even try these days.

The action might be a bit clunky (although there is That One wonderful shot), but the tension is expertly built, and the characters are interesting enough to get you through.  Even without much star power at work, I give Assault on Precinct 13 a solid recommendation (you know, just don’t expect Commando).

Rating: ★★★½

All the President’s Men (1976)

People will probably try to discredit me for saying this, but All the President’s Men doesn’t hold up that well.

Yes, it’s an important story in American history, and, yes, it demonstrates the value of a free and unfettered press, but, if you weren’t alive and conscious at the time of Watergate, there’s a lot you might miss.

I’m going to compare this movie to a similar one made nearly four decades later, that being Spotlight.  Now, I admit, I may be generationally biased here, but, the way I see it, Spotlight assumes you don’t know anything about the story, so, as it plays out, things that are significant feel significant because the movie has explained why they are significant.  All the President’s Men doesn’t necessarily play out like this, so, if you don’t know certain names, places, or abbreviations, things could fly right over your head without you even knowing.

However, the film does boast an impressive cast, Robert Redford in particular is wonderfully subtle, and, like Spotlight, the cinematography is probably underrated (lots of split diopter shots, which I’m always a fan of).

Rating: ★★★☆☆

Misery (1990)

Like All the President’s Men, Misery is a William Goldman screenplay adapted from an existing book.

Unlike All the President’s Men, nothing in Misery ever happened (that we know of).

I’ve said this before in relation to Coming to America, but everybody involved with Misery was firing on all cylinders.  Rob Reiner was coming off of directing When Harry Met Sally, William Goldman’s previous screenplay was The Princess Bride (also directed by Reiner), James Caan gives a magnificent performance in something of a comeback role, and Kathy Bates skyrocketed into the public eye with her Oscar-winning portrayal of Annie Wilkes; not to mention Richard Farnsworth and Frances Sternhagen doing top-notch character work.  Also, this was cinematographer Barry Sonnenfeld’s last movie as a director of photography before moving to the big director’s chair, and it’s some of his finest work; mostly claustrophobic (it’s of little surprise that Misery was recently adapted for the stage, given the mostly limited setting), but also panoramic when called for.

Many great thrillers are dark comedies at heart (Hitchcock knew this well, and the Coens are still doing it), and this one is no exception.  As horrifying as things become, there’s usually a spoonful of sugar mixed in to keep things from veering into complete, well, misery territory.

Given the hit-or-miss nature of Stephen King film adaptations, Misery is clearly among the best (and Reiner hit paydirt twice, also directing Stand By Me).

It’s a work of art, plain and simple.

Rating: ★★★★½

The Paper (1994)

Ron Howard has made so many movies and worked with so many people that you probably don’t even know (or realize) half the stuff he’s directed.

The Paper likely falls into that category.

Howard’s filmography is largely dominated by Tom Hanks, but before they made their big Splash together (Oh, no.  Am I turning into Gene Shalit?), there was another comedic actor who helped put “Ron Howard: Director” on the map, that being Michael Keaton (in another little movie you might not know called Night Shift).

I’m going to call The Paper a “Kitchen Sink Dramedy” because, while the movie clearly has a sense of humor, there are so many dramatic elements thrown in that I couldn’t possibly list them all here (just to name a few: job interview, cancer, wrongful arrest).  And, if all that wasn’t enough, everything takes place in a 24-hour period (like After Hours but with an actual point, I think).

And it’s not just the script that’s fully loaded, as the cast list is long and distinguished (including Jason Robards as a newspaper executive…sounds familiar), with a heavy mix of established stars, “that guy” actors, and now notable people in before-they-were famous roles (not to mention one shot that’s literally just a wall of cameos).  An ensemble if there ever was one.

The Paper is far from a perfect film, and I imagine it would be a bit too cornball for some to handle (frankly, the movie is achingly Nineties), but I recommend it, especially for those curious about the business of newspapers (it has a reputation among journalists of being true to life despite its over-the-top nature).

Rating: ★★★½