Amazing Moving Pictures

Blade Runner 2049

Drama, Thriller, Mystery, Science Fiction | 2017 | 164 minutes | R | Live-Action

Written by Hampton Fancher & Michael Green

Directed by Denis Villeneuve

Sequel to Blade Runner (1982)

_______________________________________________________________________

In the year 2049, a race of bioengineered humans called “replicants” comprises an underclass of laborers, forced to work for humans while still being rejected by society. One such replicant (Ryan Gosling) is a detective with the LAPD, tasked with hunting down other replicants that go rogue. While on a case at a remote farm, he discovers a replicant corpse that bears evidence of pregnancy, despite replicants being incapable of reproduction. His boss (Robin Wright) orders him to cover up the birth, lest knowledge of it upset the status quo. The detective must now track down the child and remove all evidence of its existence… even if that means killing it.

Blade Runner 2049 faces the herculean task of acting as a sequel to the classic 80s science fiction film Blade Runner. As someone who likes the original, I think this follow-up succeeds. It’s not really a direct sequel, although characters from the original film do make appearances and play a large role in the plot. Instead of playing up nostalgia in a vain hope of recapturing the appeal of the old, Blade Runner 2049 takes the Blade Runner story in an interesting and original direction, while providing enough references to its predecessor to appease the fans. I especially appreciate how the film brings back the original’s technological aesthetics while updating them to reflect the fact that, in the real world, a lot of our everyday devices are much more advanced than what we thought we’d have in the 80s.

Blade Runner 2049 is simply gorgeous. The movie is slowly paced and intensely atmospheric, using striking colors and dense soundscapes to draw the viewers into its neo-noir future world. The atmosphere is enhanced by excellent production design that strikes a balance between the shiny chrome cities and rusty trash towns of many science fiction films. In terms of overall direction, this is a truly fantastic accomplishment. I could gush all day, but the only thing I really need to say is to get a big screen and watch the darn thing!

That is not to say that there aren’t problems with the film, and I have several, mostly relating to the script. While the story is jam-packed with interesting ideas and memorable scenes, they ultimately fail to really coalesce into a satisfying whole. The main problem comes with the central mystery plotline. It’s bogged down by confusing stakes and poorly written villains. The film starts out as a global thriller, with the fate of civilization hanging in the balance. As the story gets underway, though, the stakes start flipping between the epic and the personal, before the final act takes a dive straight into the personal and all but ignores the large-scale buildup that was going on up until that point. As for the villains, their motivations kind of make sense, but aren’t explored with nearly enough depth or care to be palatable. I don’t want to harp too much on the differences between this and the original, but look at Blade Runner. The villains were cruel, but they felt relatable and real. Here, the bad guys are these soulless monsters who kill without thought and never show any emotion outside of bizarre monologues. I thought they were totally bland, which is fine for a cheesy action flick, but does not cut the mustard in a 2 & 1/2 hour rumination on the nature on humanity. On a smaller note about plot holes, there was an important scene near the end that made very little sense to me, although I can’t discuss it without spoilers.

As I mentioned though, even though the central plot can be a bit of a mess, there are lots of cool ideas to help the film along. There’s a prominent subplot about Ryan Gosling’s detective character trying to find his own sense of self despite being a genetically programmed slave-creature. This is by far the film’s saving grace, giving the audience the emotional hook it needs to slog through the weird global conspiracy stuff. Injecting emotion into a character who is not supposed to emote is a tough task, but I think Gosling does a good job all things considered. Harrison Ford as Rick Deckard also delivers. While Deckard in the original film was, let’s be honest, more important as a plot device than as a character, Deckard here is given a much more engrossing emotional arc.

Paul Blart: Mall Cop 2

Comedy | 2015 | 94 minutes | PG | Live-Action

Written by Kevin James and Nick Bakay

Directed by Andy Fickman

_______________________________________________________________________

Taking place six years after the original film, Paul Blart: Mall Cop 2 follows our titular hero (Kevin James) as he copes both with his abrupt divorce and the death of his mother. Taking a trip to Las Vegas to attend a security convention, he is distressed to learn that he is unappreciated by his fellow security professionals and that his daughter (Raini Rodriguez) is leaving him to attend UCLA. But when a gang of armed thieves decides to rob the hotel, Blart accepts the call of duty to defeat the bad guys, and just maybe, earn the respect he so badly wants.

The biggest problem with Paul Blart: Mall Cop 2 is that it doesn’t understand its own main character: is Blart a bad cop who succeeds through sheer effort and dumb luck, or is he a great cop who is being unfairly maligned and unrecognized? The films goes back and forth between these two interpretations several times, sometimes within a single scene. There’s not even enough consistency to say that he a great investigator but socially awkward, or socially competent but physically incapable, or any other combination of strengths and weaknesses. He is both genius and fool, superman and bumbling shlub. I found it nearly impossible to root for him because I never really knew WHAT I was supposed to be rooting ABOUT.

There’s a mess of plotlines to sift through: Blart’s relationship with his daughter, his relationship with the other cops, his relationship with an attractive hotel manager (Daniella Alonso), and of course, the central armed robbery plot. The film carefully sets up about twice as many threads as it should in the first half, and then ignores most of them for the second half until each gets approximately 60 seconds of resolution. It is a toxic mix of lazy screenwriting and incompetent screenwriting.

There are plenty of plot holes to go around, especially relating to how bizarrely incompetent both the hotel security and the robbers are. Perhaps the most glaring example is how the robbers’ plans are accidentally discovered by people accidentally walking into their hideout, not once, but twice! And no, this is not played off as a joke. On top of everything else, the film has pretty sexist attitude towards single women. I kept expecting that Blart’s tone-deaf assessments of the female mind would be dramatically disproven at some point, but the story is too focused on failing to conjure sympathy for our protagonist to actually challenge his insulting views. I just wish that I wasn’t so jaded to seeing this attitude in films… I can point to plenty of worse examples off the top of my head from critically beloved movies.

All that being said, I came in expecting to utterly despise this film, but it’s honestly funny enough that I can’t. Yes, about a quarter of the jokes are cringey and awful, and another half just don’t work, but what’s left did raise more than a few chuckles out of me. Even the cringey jokes, as much as they may not be my thing, I could appreciate as kind of working within the context of the film. As a critic, I have to be honest, and I honestly think this movie delivers enough of what it promises to not be a total failure.

Don’t get me wrong, this movie is bad. I just think the volume of vitriol leveled at it is undeserved. There are far worse movies out there, and ones far more worthy of negative attention, than Paul Blart: Mall Cop 2.

Batman v Superman: Dawn of Justice

Action-Thriller | 2016 | 151 minutes | PG-13 | Live-Action

Written by Chris Terrio and David S. Goyer

Directed by Zack Snyder

Based on the characters from DC Comics

_______________________________________________________________________

In a world not unlike our own, a seemingly invincible alien who calls himself “Superman” (Henry Cavill) has taken it upon himself to police the world using his godlike abilities. Bruce Wayne (Ben Affleck), another vigilante who goes by the name “Batman”, only sees Superman as a potential threat, and is wracked with fear over what would happen if Superman chose to use his powers against Earth. The stage is set for conflict as an eccentric industrialist named Lex Luther (Jesse Eisenberg) secretly petitions the US Government to help him build a weapon capable of killing Superman. Unlike Bruce, however, Luther’s motives aren’t as altruistic…

Anyways, this movie sucked.

Don’t be fooled by the cool concept. Dawn of Justice toys with a lot of interesting ideas, but never explores them in any meaningful way, instead focusing on its convoluted, nonsensical plot. I cannot remember the last time I saw a blockbuster film with this many bizarre plot contrivances. After two-and-a-half hours of screen time, I’m still not totally clear on what Luthor’s plans or motivations were, and that’s with me really trying to fill in the gaps.

The entire last hour is a mess. Three fight scenes get strung together by the mere husk of a plot. Wonder Woman (Gal Gadot), another character from the comics, is painfully shoehorned in with no backstory and barely any personality. I get that the producers wanted to save most of her character for a presumed sequel, but come on! At least give me enough to care!

I think that’s the film’s biggest problem: it’s inhumanity. From the abrupt death of Jimmy Olsen (Michael Cassidy) less than five minutes in, to the infamous “Save Martha” scene (this particular plot point had been spoiled for me and I was STILL surprised at how stupid it was), the film never really tries to have us empathize with our characters. The closest we get is with Bruce, and he’s too unhinged and violent for his brief flashbacks and speeches to help. I may have criticized Suicide Squad a lot, but I’ll give it this: it at least tried to have a compelling, human story inside its low-rent action clothes. Dawn of Justice doesn’t even attempt that, outside of a small handful of scenes, which might as well be mosquitos clinging to this rabid grizzly of a story.

There is some good acting on display here. Ben Affleck and Jeremy Irons do a good job as Batman and Alfred, with their strong performances helping flesh out what is an otherwise clumsy arc for Bruce Wayne. Henry Cavill and Amy Adams as Superman and his girlfriend, Lois Lane, aren’t as good. I have a hard time blaming the actors; they’re supposed to be a young couple in love, but they’re given so few scenes together that I just couldn’t buy into their relationship. Jesse Eisenberg as Lex Luthor… well, I’d call it a movie killing performance if the film wasn’t already dead. To be honest, the trailers made me very excited for what I anticipated to be a fresh take on the classic comic villain. The take may have been new, but it’s about as far from fresh as you can get.

There are some good action scenes. Mind you, there are some bad ones as well - especially the titular showdown, which may be the single most nonsensical scene in this mess of a story - but the sequences of Batman beating up gun-toting minions are entertaining and well choreographed. Even a bizarre dream sequence, despite sticking out like a sore thumb, provides some much needed entertainment near the middle of the film.

Additionally, there are many visually striking moments. I’ll give credit to Zach Snyder. I usually hate his overblown, desaturated visual style, but he’s tempered his approach here and managed to create some gorgeous and powerful shots. I can only hope he continues in this direction.

Overall: This is the worst superhero blockbuster I’ve ever seen.

Rogue One: A Star Wars Story

Action-Thriller | 2016 | 133 minutes | PG-13 | Live-Action

Written by Chris Weitz, Tony Gilroy, John Knoll, Gary Whitta

Directed by Gareth Edwards

_______________________________________________________________________

After the malicious Galactic Empire kidnaps her father (Mads Mikkelsen) to work on a mysterious project, the young Jyn Erso (Felicity Jones) grows up on the run to preserve her identity. Many years later, she is abducted by the Rebel Alliance, who want her to help them find her missing dad. Rebel intelligence officer Cassian Andor (Diego Luna) is convinced he’s gone over to the empire, and Jyn becomes more and more intent on proving his innocence. The two, joined by a hulking ex-imperial droid (Alan Tudyk), journey into occupied space on a mission that will have galactic ramifications.

Like millions of people on this small blue planet, I am a big fan of Star Wars, with many of its movies, books, and video games filling my childhood. Maybe it’s because of that that I have a hard time reviewing Rogue One as a piece of stand-alone cinema when I also see it in the context of STAR WARS, both as a series and a story.

As blockbuster action film, it stands out from the crowd. Unlike modern superhero franchises, there are no attempts to set things up for potential sequels, as the whole story is an incredibly explicit prequel to A New Hope. Unlike most action-thrillers, there’s no attempts to be “edgy”, and Rogue One is as uncynical as these films tend to come. Even as the bleakest Star Wars movie next to Revenge of the Sith, it still manages an ending that looks towards a hopeful future instead of ruminating on a tragic past.

Within the Star Wars canon, the film has several gratuitous cameos. I am not a fan of this sort of fanservice, but that’s mostly a personal preference, so more power to you if it’s your thing. A larger problem is how closely it attempts to tie itself to A New Hope on a plot level. I would have preferred that they gave this story room to breathe as its own entity. The links go so far as to even contradict the opening of A New Hope, which was a short-sighted move. On the plus side, the film has some appearances by original series characters via CGI. What sounds like a terrible idea on paper is well executed, and the scenes of Grand Moff Tarkin actually work to give Rogue One a sense of importance that’s not shoehorned in.

Sadly, the film is structurally unsound. From the start, plot threads are rapid-fired at the audience in a misguided attempt to set up the large cast as quickly as possible. It wasn’t until the first quarter of the film was done that I had a clear idea of where the movie was going. Additionally, a surprisingly large amount of the plot revolves around the limitations of interstellar communication technology. As much as I hate to rag on stuff like this, it ends up leading to at least one large plot contrivance that reduces a critical scene to an entertaining but bizarre mess.

The characters are cool for the most part, but they lack the in-depth writing to bring them to the next level. The third act payoffs to their various arcs come off as a tad rushed when the audience is expected to really care about characters which have until this point mainly been comic relief or generic badasses. By far the most interesting character is imperial military officer Orson Krennic (Ben Mendelsohn), one of the more complex villains in Star Wars canon.

On the flip side, the production design achieves the high standard we’ve come to expect in a Star Wars feature, surpassing it in some ways. The locations are all varied and interesting, mixing spectacle eye-candy and thoughtful worldbuilding with ease. The costumes and sets are really well done, and small details (like the contrast between the stormtroopers at the important research base and on the backwater mining planet) give the world a sense of verisimilitude and life.

Additionally, the action is crisp and fun. While it lacks the variety of some of its predecessors, the fight sequences are well done and entertaining across the board, which is arguably the most important part of the film.

On a very minor note, I wasn’t much a fan of the soundtrack. It was too similar to the original Star Wars soundtrack to seem new, but at the same time too different to make the film seem closely linked to the rest of the series musically. It exists in an odd space, seeming like someone’s lazy attempt at a non-copyright-infringing John Williams knockoff. A rare dud from composer Micheal Giacchino.

All that being said, the movie as a whole works. The action is solidly and consistently entertaining, and the story, while far from perfect, is compelling for what it is. While the connections to the rest of the franchise don’t always work, they elevate the series more than harm it. Most importantly, Rogue One has now established that KotOR is canon again. Some may say that a small cameo of a Republic battleship doesn’t mean that the whole KotOR series is canon, but I say “nuts!” to those people! It’s canon to me!

Overall: An entertaining, if messy, action-adventure flick.

Jack and the Cuckoo-Clock Heart (aka Jack et la Méchanique du Cœur [Jack and the Mechanics of the Heart])

Drama, Romance, Musical | 2013 | 94 minutes | PG

Written by Mathias Malzieu

Directed by Stéphane Berla & Mathias Malzieu

Based on La Méchanique du Cœur by Mathias Malzieu (2007) (book)

_______________________________________________________________________

In this fantastical tale, Jack (Mathias Malzieu, Orlando Seale) is a machine age child with a literal clock for a heart. As his foster mother (Marie Vincent, Emily Loizeau, Barbara Scaff) explains to him, such a heart leaves him vulnerable to emotional extremes, and should he ever fall in love, he may very well die. Unfortunately, on his tenth birthday, he becomes infatuated with a local schoolgirl (Olivia Ruiz, Samantha Barks), and that infatuation sets him down a path filled with adventure and tragedy.

Jack and the Cuckoo-Clock Heart, far from being a traditional kids’ movie romance, has the feel of an epic 18th century melodrama. There’s a good deal of danger and jealousy in Jack’s way as he tries to woo the elusive Miss Acacia. The theatrical tone definitely separates it from other stories of its ilk, along with its darker tone. I chock this up to a French attitude that is more lenient toward what is considered appropriate for children’s fiction.

The central romance itself is tonally mixed. Initially it’s very much a fairy tale, love-at-first-sight thing. Later though, it refreshingly becomes more nuanced and realistic, though even then there are some mildly contrived moments for the plot’s sake.

The film does have a problem with focus. A couple of scenes come up that hint at subplots, but never get explored. The most aggravating is a long sequence where a serial killer (Alain Bashung, Howard Samuels) chases Jack around before abruptly disappearing and never being referenced again.

One of the films’ best and worst aspects is its visuals. On the plus side, the production design is very creative and engaging. The whimsical and the gothic mix to create a wondrous world. On the down side, though, the characters live firmly in the uncanny valley. Their unnatural, jerky movements and their weirdly proportioned features make them off-putting. It’s hardly the worst I’ve ever seen, but it’s enough to distract for a good part of the movie.

It’s also worth noting that this is a musical. I thought the music was fine. It wasn’t my thing, but it wasn’t by any means bad.

Overall: An entertaining romantic adventure held back by awkward animation.

Suicide Squad

Action-Adventure | 2016 | 123 minutes | PG-13

Written by David Ayer

Directed by David Ayer

Based on Suicide Squad by John Ostrander (1987-1992) (serialized comic)

_______________________________________________________________________

In the super-heroic universe of DC comics, the world stands on edge as incredibly powerful individuals grow greater in both number and strength. In response to this threat, intelligence community power player Amanda Waller (Viola Davis) decides to form “Suicide Squad”, a team comprised of super-powered convicts acting as a black operations unit for the United States government. Including the likes of master assassin Deadshot (Will Smith), human flamethrower Diablo (Jay Hernandez), and gang queen Harley Quinn (Margot Robbie), the team is kept in line with the threat of remote controlled bombs planted in their heads. They are tasked with taking down an ancient wizard (Cara Delevingne), but more than one of them has escape on their minds.

I never WANT to dislike a film. I especially never want to dislike a popular film. Heck, I want to be cool! I got no joy in the discovery that Suicide Squad was a mess. I had every hope that I would walk out of the theater vindicated that the critics were being pretentious jerks and the audience was right to love this thrilling action romp. The problem is, this isn’t a thrilling action romp, and the my reaction is mostly aligned with those critics I want to distance myself from.

What doesn’t work? Well…

Actually, let’s talk about what does work. Will Smith turns in a genuinely empathetic performance, and I actually cared about his character and seeing him succeed. Harley Quinn, despite having a garbage - borderline insulting - character arc, is fun to watch, delivering the vast majority of the film’s good jokes. That’s not very many good jokes, but still. Amanda Waller is a great bad guy, and probably the most interesting character in the movie. It’s just a shame the main villain isn’t interesting, and lacks a clear motivation and backstory, and…

Okay, yeah, a lot doesn’t work.

The internet has been abuzz with stories about how this film was hastily re-edited after studio executives were concerned about the dark tone, and boy, does it show. The exposition is god-awful, some of the worst I’ve ever seen, somehow both too blunt and too vague at the same time. Diablo, who had all the elements of an interesting and complex character, has said elements trotted out so blandly and lazily that what could have been a main caliber role was reduced to boring filler. Even the events that happen during the plot proper are frequently edited in confusing, nonsensical ways. For instance, in one scene the film shows two characters planning a commando operation, only to abruptly cut to the aftermath where one of the duo explains what went wrong. I assumed this was a half-assed attempt to hide some plot twist. After the blanks were finally filled in, though, I discovered that the events depicted were not only exactly what had been explained earlier, but took less time to show on screen than the verbal explanation! Little things like this pervade the film, and it can be a chore to parse the meaning of any given moment.

The film’s greatest flaw, though, is that the characters are almost universally mishandled. This is a big ensemble piece, the sort of movie where everyone should be memorable and able to shine in their own light. The problem is that most of the characters aren’t given any time to grow. Out of the eight members of Suicide Squad, three or four are given proper backstories (and I’m not counting whatever that crap with Katana (Karen Fukuhara) was. It feels like more than half of her screen time was spent explaining her motivations, and then still didn’t make any damn sense.) The characters who do have backstories aren’t much better. Harley Quinn has her entire character arc revolve around getting back together with her very explicitly abusive boyfriend (Jared Leto), and the filmmakers have the audacity to frame this as acceptable, maybe even a good thing. I suppose it speaks to the strength of Margot Robbie’s performance that she can take a character with as misogynistic an arc as that and make her beloved by the female nerd community.

On a related note, the ultra controversial Joker performance? It’s just okay. Not terribly memorable, but not really bad. The crazy and chaotic side of the “classic” Joker is downplayed in favor of making him more like a traditional action movie villain. In a weird, reverse sense, the contrast makes the performance more unique.

There is a certain visual stylishness to the film, which is wasted when the majority of the plot is set in samey dark corridors and samey dark streets. This is a movie that’s begging to be drenched in color and peppered with interesting camerawork, but is constantly holding itself back for no discernible reason. Even the action, usually something I can count on in big-budget superhero flicks, is totally unmemorable and stale. I’m not exaggerating or being a snob, there is seriously nothing of note on the action front. Please take my word for this, there are so many more deserving action movies which can give you your fix of carnage better than Suicide Squad can.

Overall: I honestly wish I could be like you people and just like this sort of stuff, but it’s a bad movie and I don’t like it.

The Martian

Adventure, Drama | 2015 | 144 minutes | PG-13

Written by Drew Goddard

Directed by Ridley Scott

Based on The Martian by Andy Weir (2011) (book)

In the near future, human scientists have finally landed on the red planet Mars. During the mission, Mark Watney (Matt Damon), the mission botanist, is caught in a massive dust storm and separated from his team. Upon regaining consciousness, he discovers that everyone else has evacuated the planet with the assumption of his death. Now, stranded 49 million miles from home with rapidly dwindling supplies and no expectation of rescue, he must use all of his ingenuity to survive for the four years until the next mission arrives.

The Martian is, in a way, more interesting for what it doesn’t do than what it does. Mostly skipping the typical psychological drama of survival movies, the film quickly resolves the emotional turmoil of Mark’s situation in favor of focusing on the complex survival problems of his day to day life. And it’s great! Once you accept that the protagonist has confidence of a freaking rhinoceros, it’s a thrill to sit back and watch him engineer his problems away. A healthy dose of comedy doesn’t hurt either. Mark’s narration, presented in the form of a video journal, can come off as heavy-handed, but it’s almost always light-hearted and witty enough to justify its existence. This is not to downplay Damon’s performance, and on the few occasions where intense emotions are called for, he definitely delivers.

The stuff on Mars is only about 60% of the story, with the rest divided between the attempts of NASA to mount some sort of rescue operation and the lives of the surviving astronauts on Mark’s team. The stuff at NASA is fine, but sadly overshadowed by the scenes of Mars. Despite plenty of interesting scenes and some nice performances, I usually found myself wishing that I was watching Mark tinker with more gadgets. It is during these scenes that we also get the more dramatic parts of the film, as the NASA officials and the astronauts debate over how much is worth risking to save Mark. These scenes are the worst, in part because the drama is fairly boring and predictable, and in part because they raise some unfortunate ethical questions over how many billions of dollars and millions of man hours one man’s life is worth, questions that are never adequately addressed.

I can’t personally vouch for the accuracy of the film, but it’s clear that a lot of effort was put into making the scientific concepts as realistic as possible. A big plus for you science junkies.

Overall: The Martian is an interesting and fun take on the classic survival story.

The Forbidden Dimensions (aka 2035 Forbidden Dimensions)

Action-Thriller | 2013 | 86 minutes | Unrated

Written by Christopher James Miller

Directed by Christopher James Miller

_______________________________________________________________________

Jack Slade is a janitor in 1980. Jack Slade is a struggling writer in 1998. Jack Slade is a manhunter in 2035.

Jack Slade (Kyle Morris) may be many things, but one thing is for sure: Jack Slade is a time traveller. He’s seen the future, a bleak wasteland where the evil Dr. Shector (Mark McGarrey) is turning humans into grotesque mutants. In order to stop that world from coming to pass, Jack has to find the star-child Khadijah (Jamie Katonic), the key to ending the mutants’ reign of terror.

I’ll start right out and just say that The Forbidden Dimensions is a huge mess. People, places, and plot points come and go like a game of whack-a-mole. I am still massively unclear about who Khadijah was and why she was important, despite her being the film’s main macguffin. The method and limitations of Jack’s time travel are never revealed. Sometimes his time-jumps leave him right where he left off but other times they don’t; sometimes he can take objects with him through the time stream but other times he can’t; etc. Even if all the ambiguities were explained, the film is edited in such a confusing and non-linear manner that it probably wouldn’t have helped (and yes, I mean non-linear even by the standards of a time-travel movie.)

The scenes taking place in 2035 are considerably better than the rest of the film (in the sense that there are merely pretty bad instead of terrible.) For one thing, released from the constraints of trying to act like normal humans, the actors give much more convincing performances as desperate end-of-the-world gunslingers. Additionally, the trashy future world is more believably shot than the modern world, the latter of which is treated like the filmmakers were constantly worried about being arrested for not having a permit. Ultimately, it may just be that the future scenes had the clearest sense of direction. Jack good, mutants bad, find Khadijah. I still don’t know why so much of the story deals with Jack the aspiring author, a sub-plot that totally vanishes by the third act.

One of the more positive aspects of the film is the fun and visually engaging art direction of the 2035 scenes. Yes, some of the aesthetics are ripped straight from the far superior Mad Max series, but they still add a much needed sense of verisimilitude and atmosphere to the post-apocalyptic adventure. Besides, there’s nothing wrong with inspiration and homage. The gore effects are also well done, if overdone. You can probably tell how much milage you’re going to get out of the action side of this action-thriller from the first scene, where poor Jack is killed as someone claws out from inside his chest. It wasn’t my thing, but I can see how this might appeal to fans of bodily destruction.

The editing ranges from passable to obnoxious. The film is overburdened with jarring cutting and flashy effects. At worst, there is a dream sequence near the midpoint which was so annoying and painful to watch that I considered stopping the movie right then. It should also be noted that a good chunk of the film is literal softcore pornography, and while I have no objection to a little eye candy, it ends up being gratuitous.

Kyle Morris as Jack does a mixed job. He’s perfectly convincing when he’s menacing mutants with a handgun, jacket blowing in the desert wind. When he has to engage with other characters in any sort of ordinary fashion, he comes off as  too intense and unhinged. On that note, the only actor who turns in a really consistent performance Mark McGarrey as the mad scientist Dr. Shector. There’s a sense he’s having fun with the role, but never so much as to break character or lose his menace.

Overall: Somewhere between the dismal script and awful editing, a decent time travel movie could have been made. But it wasn’t.

Platoon

Drama | 1986 | 120 minutes | Rated R

Written by Oliver Stone

Directed by Oliver Stone

Vietnam. 1967. To anyone raised with American mythology, such words should evoke images of a destructive war waged in the jungles of southeast Asia, which - depending on who you ask - was either slightly mishandled or entirely pointless. Platoon looks at that very conflict through the eyes of a rookie infantryman (Charlie Sheen), who joins the military and ends up in a dangerous battleground wishing he never volunteered.

Hollywood loves war films, and each war has some archetypical theme that gets burned into the great American subconscious; World War II is a heroic struggle against tyranny, the American Civil War is a tragic feud that tears families apart, and the Vietnam War is the one filled with shock and horror. In this sense, Platoon doesn’t stray far from the flock, though that doesn’t mean it’s not a stirring and dramatic film. We follow the protagonist, one PFC Chris Taylor, as he falls into the conflict of egos between the kind-hearted SGT Elias (Willem Dafoe) and the cruel but grounded SGT Barnes (Tom Berenger). The film is unfortunately emotionally top-loaded. The most powerful and disturbing events all happen in the first half of the movie, which lessens the impact of the more chaotic and violent second half. Additionally, Elias is almost too kind and flawless to believe when contrasted with the other more layered characters. He seems less like a real human being and more like a stand-in for the good side of humanity.

The film’s production design is top notch. The audience is made to feel every miserable patrol with a healthy dose of sweat crawling down Chris’s neck and bugs crawling up it. The villages and bases are constructed with a real level of verisimilitude that helps draw the audience in to the conflict at hand.

The battle scenes are confusingly shot and edited, but in the a positive way. The war does not feel like a conflict that can be solved with superior weapons and tactics, but rather, a disordered clash of rabid opponents with no clear path to victory. You aren’t rooting for Chris to win; you’re rooting for him to escape.

Overall: It can be a bit on the nose, but Platoon is still an effective military drama.

Cube

Horror | 1997 | 90 minutes | Rated R

Written by André Bijelic, Vincenzo Natali, & Graeme Manson

Directed by Vincenzo Natali

`

Cube 2: Hypercube

Horror | 2002 | 94 minutes | Rated R

Written by Sean Hood, Ernie Barbarash, & Lauren McLaughlin

Directed by Andrzej Sekula

`

Cube Zero

Horror | 2004 | 97 minutes | Rated R

Written by Ernie Barbarash

Directed by Ernie Barbarash

`

You wake up one day in large room, precisely cubic, measuring 15 feet on each side. You have no memory of how you got there. There are six doors leading out, all taking you to identical rooms. You soon discover that you – and several other abductees – have been trapped in a large maze. What’s worse, there are deadly hidden traps everywhere – and no indication that an exit even exists!

From this strange and simple premise comes the Cube franchise: Cube, Cube 2: Hypercube, and Cube Zero, three oft overlooked horror films that rely on psychological tension, sci-fi mystery, and memorable gore to get their thrills. The trilogy does not have a continuous story, and the creative team is large different in each installment; the only real connection between all three is the titular Cube(s).

The first film, Cube, is great. It wisely chooses not to dissect the odd premise too much, and instead relies on the tension between those trapped in the Cube to carry the plot. It quickly becomes clear that the real danger isn’t in the traps, but in the emotional deterioration of the characters. It works fantastically. A good deal of the plot revolves around the abductees testing methods of navigating the Cube, and sometimes these methods stretch believability, but I was mostly able to suspend my disbelief.

To the series’ credit, each film is unique enough to justify its own existence. They all build on the basic premise in different ways, so you never feel it’s just treading water. Cube 2: Hypercube has the psychological elements take a backseat to the abductees’ attempts to find out who built the Cube, and why. A fine idea, but it quickly devolves into a series of pointless plot twists and revelations that go nowhere. I ended the film confused and unsatisfied. In contrast, Cube has a surprisingly elegant non-explanation of the Cube’s owners and purpose. Cube 2: Hypercube additionally sacrifices the deliberate and suspenseful pacing of the first film in favor of weird scenes with no real payoff. Even the famous traps are not very memorable or convincing.

Cube Zero isn’t nearly as good as Cube, but it’s also much better than Cube 2: Hypercube. The story takes place from the perspective of one of the operators of the Cube, a junior technician who observes the abductees and begins to empathize with their plight. This time the purpose and origin of the Cube actually is explained, though the answers feel half-baked and don't build off the information given in the other films. The third film smartly refocuses on the sort of horror/thriller elements which made the first such a success. It’s not as strong, but it certainly maintained my interest, and the twists in the formula are welcome. I’m not sure adding a main villain was a good idea, though. Giving the shadowy controllers of the Cube a face might have worked had the face not been so distractingly flamboyant.

`

The Forbidden Room

Directed by: Guy Maddin, Evan Johnson

Written by: Guy Maddin, Evan Johnson, Robert Kotyk, Kim Morgan

Year: 2015

Running time: 130 minutes

Rating: NR

“The Forbidden Room” is a film that instructs the viewer on how to properly take a bath. Mind you, there are a few subplots, dealing with things like a crew of submariners trapped at the bottom of the ocean by an explosive cargo, a lumberjack-in-training attempting to save his beloved from a gang of forest bandits, a parachutist trying to rescue a sacrifice from a group of volcano worshippers, a woman taking a train trip with a… heck, if I tried to list every story out, this review would be at least twice as long!

“The Forbidden Room” is something of an anthology film. At first, it seems that the stories are all going to be tied together, after a few early vignettes have clear connections. However, those links get more and more tenuous as the film goes on. The stories range from engaging short fiction to strange throwaways, which isn’t helped when many of them feel half-baked. For example, the tale of the young soldiers suffering from reverse amnesia (their memories remain intact, but everyone else forgets them) is given a mere two or three minutes to play out, and even if that wasn’t the case, it would still be hard to get into because it’s a hallucination within a flashback within a dream within a scientific lecture (seriously).

That is not to say that there isn’t anything engaging; far from it. The film shines is when it lets its weird sense of humor take the center stage. Things like the lumberjack’s goofy initiation trials and a whole musical number about butts provide some much-needed fun, and show that “The Forbidden Room” is less a snobby art film and more a misguided celebration of the art of storytelling.

The movie also creates a wonderfully unique and decidedly trippy atmosphere. Oddly colored shots melt into one another as a dark and unearthly soundtrack creates a truly psychedelic tone, reminiscent of an eerie acid trip.

Fringe

Created by: J.J. Abrams, Alex Kurtzman, Roberto Orci

Years: 2008-2013

Run: 100 episodes, 5 seasons

Rating: TV-14

Olivia Dunham (Anna Torv) is a stellar FBI agent who finds herself recruited into the mysterious “Fringe Division” under agent Phillip Broyles (Lance Reddick). Her job? Investigate crimes involving strange new technologies, with everything from genetic mutations to time travel falling under her jurisdiction. To aid her, she recruits doctor Walter Bishop (John Noble), a brilliant but insane scientist with a mysterious past, and his estranged son, ex-con Peter Bishop (Joshua Jackson). Along with agent Astrid Farnsworth (Jasika Nicole), the five investigate the unknown in this X-Files-like procedural show. In the show’s overarching plot, the team runs up against the agenda of the ruthless Nina Sharp (Blair Brown), the mysterious machinations of the Observer (Michael Cerveris), and a secretive war between the denizens of two parallel universes!

Those with keen memories may recall that I earlier reviewed Fringe’s pilot episode unfavorably. I stand by that opinion, but the good news is that the show gets much better. Backed up by relatable, interesting characters, and tons of cool science fiction concepts, Fringe  manages to stand out from the pack and earns its spot as one of the best sci-fi shows of the last decade.

Season 1 is largely bad. Especially in hindsight, it’s abundantly clear that the writers didn’t know where they were going or what they wanted to do with the characters. The arcs are passable, and the stand-alone episodes are often dumb. The main characters are frequently written to be selfish, cruel, or idiotic, and it’s really hard to sympathize with them until their personalities are marjorly retooled in the last few episodes. That being said, there is a clear sense of improvement over the course of the season, and the show feels like it’s really coming together by the end. On the other hand, the initial seven or eight episodes are just painful to watch.

Season 2 is where the show really comes into its own, and is by far the best season of the bunch. It has a great balance between arc episodes and stand-alones, both of which have a markedly higher quality. To my, the turning point is the fourth episode of the season (“Momentum Deferred”), which transforms the show by giving the overarching plot a clear, understandable conflict for the first time. I’d characterize season 2 as a whole as having tightly-written and memorable episodes.

Seasons 3 and 4 are more muddled. They both have plenty of interesting plots, great episodes, and engaging characters and conflicts. Unfortunately, it’s here that the running plots go off the rails. Things get increasingly bogged down by weird new story directions and subplots that go nowhere (I’m looking at you, soul magnets.) For every fantastic episode there’s two that feel dumb or pointless. The season 4 finale is, in a way, a fitting capstone to that run of episodes: it’s awkwardly written, messily executed, full of pointless moments, and yet has enough good stuff in it to make it hard to dismiss either.

After the season 4 finale ties up a SIGNIFICANT amount of the show’s running plots, season 5 feels like another show entirely. The characters you know and love are still there, but the tone is so different and the running plot so new that it might as well be a spin-off. Here, the show becomes completely serialized, with basically no stand-alones in the whole season. This actually works to the season’s benefit, and the 14 episode run ends up being very tight and engaging, with a more straightforward finale that works much better as a end to the show than the prior season’s blowout.  I would recommend watching the 19th episode of season 4 (“Letters of Transit”) in-between seasons 4 and 5; it’s the second time that the network broadcast an episode out of logical order (the other time being with season 2’s “Unearthed”), and it really makes more sense as a premier for season 5 than a stand-alone in season 4.

Overall: Fringe can be hard to love sometimes, but for the science fiction fan who’s willing to trudge through the show’s worse episodes, the many great ones make the experience worth it.

Favorite Episodes 15) Unleashed (s01e16) 14) Worlds Apart (s04e20) 13) Do Shapeshifters Dream of Electric Sheep? (s03e04) 12) Johari Window (s02e12) 11) Grey Matters (s02e10) 10) Subject 13 (s03e15) 9) Northwest Passage (s02e21) 8) Liberty (s05e12) 7) Momentum Deferred (s02e04) 6) Of Human Action (s02e07) 5) Peter (s02e16) 4) One Night in October (s04e02) 3) Olivia (s03e01) 2) In Absentia (s05e02) 1) Over There (Parts 1 & 2) (s02e22/s02e23)

Hail, Caesar!

Directed by: Ethan Coen, Joel Coen

Written by: Ethan Coen, Joel Coen

Year: 2016

Running time: 106 minutes

Rating: PG-13

It’s the midpoint of Hollywood’s golden age. Eddie Mannix (Josh Brolin) is a producer at Capitol Pictures, in charge of keeping the studio’s many stars out of trouble - after all, that would tarnish the studio’s image! Hail, Caesar! shows a day in the life of Eddie, where he deals with things like angry directors, actor scandals, and a kidnapping.

I think I was not alone in assuming, from the film’s synopsis and much of the marketing, that the kidnapping would be the central plot thread. It is actually just one of many plot threads that run throughout this love letter to the era of the studio system. The story falls moderately outside of the Coens’ normal fare; it’s not a dark crime thriller, but it’s not really a goofy comedy either. It’s a deliberately slow movie, and it attempts to strike a balance between a more straightforward drama and a larger ensemble piece. I must admit, I was thrown by this at first, but warmed up to it quickly and ended up really enjoying it.

The film has lots of comedic moments, to mixed effect. Some, like Mannix looking for theological advice on an upcoming picture, are hilarious and memorable. Others, though, are drawn out and borderline pointless. I think the movie would have benefitted from some trimming in this regard.

I was a little put off by the message, which was blunt to the point that I thought it might be tongue-in-cheek. As I mentioned, the whole movie is a tribute to the Hollywood of the late 40s / early 50s. It certainly succeeds in that sense, with stylistic homages to the films of the era and plenty of references to the burgeoning Cold War. But is golden age Hollywood really an institution worthy of such idolization? Even within the film, several of the industry’s negative aspects are brought up only to be brushed aside as merely part of the package deal that is movie production. In one way, the whole movie comes off as terribly regressive and out of touch with the real problems of corporate filmmaking. Still, I’d be lying if I didn’t admit that there is a definite nostalgic thrill to the whole scenario. Besides - as Hail, Caesar! points out itself - there is a certain nobility to the work of making dreams.

Night of the Living Dead

Directed by: George A. Romero

Written by: John A. Russo, George A. Romero

Year: 1968

Running time: 96 minutes

Rating: Unrated

While visiting their father’s grave, siblings Barbra (Judith O’Dea) and Johnny (Russell Streiner) are attacked by a mysterious man (Bill Heinzman). Fleeing for her life, Barbra ends up in an abandoned farmhouse with Ben (Duane Jones), a stranger who informs her that a mob of vicious, seemingly hypnotized killers is after them. Alone and afraid, the pair must hold off the fiends until rescue arrives… assuming it’s even on the way.

The “twist” - that the killers are in fact reanimated corpses - is given away by the title, so I’m not going to bother with avoiding that particular spoiler. Night of the Living Dead is THE classic zombie film, and it’s clear why. Packed into this one feature film is more terror than a dozen “World War Z”s. Maybe that’s a false comparison; most modern zombie films are action-adventures, while this is horror, pure and grisly. This isn’t a movie that relies on jump scares and gore to terrify you (although I understand it was considered gory for its time). The fear comes from an oppressively dark atmosphere, enhanced by moody lighting and camerawork.

So now that I’ve made it clear that I loved this film, allow me to nitpick a bit. For starters, Barbra is simply an annoying character. She spends most of the film either in hysteria or silence, which may be plausible but certainly is not endearing, especially when it’s only her and Ben.

Additionally, scenes in other parts of the country are set during midday, despite the bulk of the film at the farmhouse clearly taking place at night. This discontinuity really makes the timeline of events confusing, and hinders the film’s later attempts to widen its scope.

Just on a political note, it’s really cool to watch an older American movie with a black lead. Ben is by far the most likable and competent character in the film, which is not something I expected to see. A tad sad then, considering how little progress has been made since 1968 in terms of diversity in casting.

The Letter

Directed by: Jay Anania

Written by: Jay Anania

Year: 2012

Running time: 92 minutes

Rating: R

Martine (Winona Ryder) is a New York playwright who directs a workshop with some of her actor friends. However, while suffering lifelike hallucinations and confused memories, she begins to suspect that some of her actors are secretly plotting against her. In response, she makes them act out her paranoid fantasies on stage. Is there a conspiracy against her, or has she just lost it?

While I was watching The Letter, I remember little else besides wishing it would end sooner. However, as I write this review a mere day later, I find myself inclined to view the film more favorably. There are certainly several positives. The acting is solid, not hammy or unbelievable like many thrillers. The core story, that of Martine losing her mind, is fairly well handled. Deliberately or not, the washed-out colors and small cast really help enhance the sense of Martine’s isolation. If nothing else, the film is appreciable for being a more subtle and understated thriller.

Still, the more I think about the film, the more I remember the things I disliked about it. The mystery is never satisfactorily resolved: we get the “what” and half of the “who”, but the “how” and “why” are only partially addressed. The movie has only one piece of background music, which is played over and over again to the point where I started cringing whenever it came on.

Most importantly, the film is a classic example of style over substance. As if that weren’t bad enough, the style in this case is dull and slow. The key characters and clues are introduced near the beginning of the film, and then not much happens until the brief third act. It’s a suspense thriller where no suspense is built and no thrills are had.

Heavenly Sword

Directed by: Gun Ho Jang

Written by: Todd Farmer

Year: 2014

Running time: 85 minutes

Rating: UR

Based on: Heavenly Sword by Tameem Antoniades (video game)

Years ago, an evil warlord was defeated by a mythic warrior and their Heavenly Sword. Legend has it that the next wielder of the sword will be able to face great evil and overcome it. A clan of nomads guards the sword, waiting one day for the chosen one to come and claim it.

Heavenly Sword focuses on Nariko (Anna Torv), a member of the clan who is facing the sexism of her father and the disrespect of her peers. However, when the belligerent King Bohan  (Alfred Molina) attacks the clan’s city, a complex series of events occurs which leads her to discover the whereabouts of the true chosen one (Thomas Jane). With the sword in tow, she and her sister Kai (Ashleigh Ball) set out to deliver the great weapon and hopefully save the land from Bohan.

For those who aren’t aware, Heavenly Sword is another in the long line of bad movies based on video games, and unlike many of its peers it actually retains many of the tropes of video game storytelling. The overall plot is engaging in broad strokes, and has some interesting-if-confusing commentary on the idea of prophecies. Unfortunately, the cutscene-like pacing, sporadic introduction and dropping of plot points, and bare-bones characterization ruin the film. On top of that, though the 2D sequences are more consistently good, the 3D animation (which is the majority of the film) ranges from “decent” to “distractingly bad.” It’s almost fascinating when one considers that this is the film version of a video game that was in its own way trying to be a film, which highlights the shortcomings of both media as a result.

The acting is hit-and-miss. Anna Torv as Nariko never seems to decide quite what accent she wants to use. On the other side of the coin, Thomas Jane as Loki phones it in so hard that he inadvertantly brings much needed levity to some of the later scenes.

If the film does have a major positive, it’s that the art direction is pretty fun and unique. There’s an interesting mashup of styles that does more to give the fictional world a sense of self than any of the characters or conflicts.

Overall: While the first third is funny-bad, the film’s shortcomings soon become more aggravating than humorous, making the last hour a slog. Avoid this one.

High Noon

Directed by: Fred Zinnemann

Written by: Carl Foreman

Year: 1952

Running time: 85 minutes

Rating: PG

Based on: The Tin Star by John W. Cunningham (short story)

Mere minutes after his retirement, old west marshal Will Kane (Gary Cooper) discovers to his horror that Frank Miller (Ian MacDonald), a violent criminal he arrested years back, is returning to town on the noon train. Not only that, but Miller’s former gang members have gathered at the train station in preparation of his arrival. Kane is faced with a dilemma: stick around and face Miller’s vengeance, or leave the town to fend for itself. What initially seems to be a simple matter of courage versus cowardice becomes increasingly complicated as the minutes tick by.

High Noon is more or less set in real time over the course of an-hour-and-a-half. The majority of the film is not shootouts or fistfights, but rather Kane’s continual exasperation over how unsupportive the townsfolk are; many simply don’t want to die fighting Miller, but others go so far as to question whether Miller is even truly a villain, or if the very act of violent confrontation will make everyone’s lives worse regardless of the outcome. The film feels something like an extended take on Niemöller’s “First they came”, and a very engaging and tasteful one at that.

The film is not without its flaws. Firstly, Miller’s crimes are never explicitly addressed. There are only vague references to how “crazy” he is, and a general feeling of foreboding. There would be a better sense of what’s at stake if the audience at least knew why he was arrested.

Additionally, the story suffers from a weak third act. Perhaps it was inevitable; after so much of the movie is buildup to an explosive climax, the straightforward and stupidly tidy confrontation just can’t live up to the hype.