May 15th, 2017

The one blessing about being away from work is that there is much more time to be viewing films and revisiting some old friends. I had been promised at the end of March that a job was forthcoming, and yet I have not seen the confirmed start date. It is frustrating. But there is always a silver lining and here they are:

Silence: The Martin Scorsese film about the Jesuit priests in the 1600s in Japan trying to spread the word of God, or at least their version of it. There is Liam Neeson being shown priests with him tortured unmercifully. Then there is word back to Portgual that Neeson who is a priest himself renouncing his faith. Two young Jesuits hear this and want to seek him out. They are Adam Driver and Andrew Garfield. This is a dark story, with some interesting philosophical perspectives, like the Jesuits who believe that they are spreading “the Truth”. And the Truth does not have a perspective, it just is. The Japanese and Buddhists would disagree with this. There are then put forth interesting questions about faith and what is the underlying purpose, and who does it serve. Beliefs are challenged and decisions are made. Garfield had a very productive year with this and Hacksaw Ridge. He is showing his acting chops beyond just Spiderman. Driver has less screen time but is effective too. This is not Raging Bull or Good Fellas but a good film.

Knight of Cups: another Terrence Malick film in the same look and feel of previous films like Tree of Life and To The Wonder. There is little structure and much of the film moves with the voiceover. Then there are the images. Malick engulfs his viewers with sights and sounds and images that are still-picture worthy in all of his films. The young are not the audience here again, and they would get frustrated and annoyed by it. I don’t wish to be a pretentious film goer who professes a deep understanding of his films, but I will say that I like them. I take something from each of them. His films require the viewer to bring their own filter and take their own interpretation of the images. For this trilogy I like Tree of Life and then this one before lastly To The Wonder. Here an impressive cast includes Christian Bale as the man looking back upon his life through his past relationships and piecing together what it means and what he has done. Past loves include Natalie Portman, Cate Blanchett, Freida Pinto and Teresa Palmer. The extras are good to watch as well as you learn there is no script to a Malick film. Actors are given rough ideas about what the director seeks and then they are free to improvise. This one was not critically acclaimed but nevertheless a film that I sought out from the cast and the director.

Insurgent and Divergent: I picked these up from the library, as I hadn’t ever recalled seeing the follow ups to the original (which I saw and just as quickly forgot). I did not read the books. But this was a follow up to The Hunger Games and it’s cash grab. Shailene Woodley was the attraction here initially from her performance in The Descendants. For me this and Maze Runner and Hunger Games are the same formula where the dystopian world is to be saved by a bunch of teenagers who have a special gifts (of various sorts) just doesn’t hold my attention. The adults are almost all uniformly evil or stupid. They have wrecked the existing world and the teens will set it straight. Go ahead. The good news is that practically this can never happen as the teenage generation won’t be able to stay away from their phones long enough to do any of this. Having finished the third installment I shuddered at the thought of yet another movie. This was to be released in June 2017. It was cancelled. Sounds like they are looking to make a TV movie out of it, and start a TV series. Can’t imagine Woodley will be interested in that. But we will see. Quite honestly I don’t need to see another one of these again.

Some old friends I re-watched over the weekend were A Fish Called Wanda (written by John Cleese) which I thoroughly enjoy on each viewing and also My Left Foot with a tour de force from Daniel Day-Lewis. The internet helped with finishing off the Christie Brown story where the film stopped. His post-movie life, and married life to Mary was not so grand. She brought him to England away from his family and then apparently slept around, abused drugs and neglected him. He died at the age of 49 choking at dinner. So not a Hollywood ending from a man who overcame so much to live a full life. Brenda Fricker’s performance was also outstanding here and she won an Oscar for it. In 1989, it didn’t win Best Picture, Driving Miss Daisy did.

Well I re-watched Tree of Life yesterday just to refresh my memory and yet again I thoroughly enjoyed it. Moreso than both To The Wonder and Knight of Cups. In thinking about why, I think it’s because there is that Malick style, but there is a little bit more structure about it. There is a thread that runs through it, all the way through it about the Texas family and the boy who becomes the man reflecting back. Man (played by Sean Penn) looks back at his life with Dad, Mom and brothers. The young Jack is played very well, and you see different moments in time with him, especially with the one brother (crucial scenes where the younger brother says “I trust you” while having his body put in perilous positions). Life has moments, life has regrets, every one has done stupid things especially when they were younger where they wish they had a “do over”. And there are the moments with the family and the coming of age scenes too. All of it paints a picture of this man and his time. So there is a wide chasm of just how much better Tree of Life is than the others. I searched again for Roger Ebert’s Top 10 lists of all time and found (apparently) his last list before his death and Tree of Life was on it. He raved about this film and it’s genius and ambition. You added it to your list, and it is in mine. Sadly the other two films did not get there, or were they made as well.

Jessica Chastain in it, too was masterful as the hand of forgiveness and strength with her three boys.

I have booked my seats and tickets for Alien Covenant on Thursday. Looking forward to it.

The other film that I had forgotten to pass along was Elle, with Oscar nominated and Golden Globe winning Isabelle Hubert. This film was summed up in the advertisements about a woman who is raped and then seeks revenge. This just scratches the surface on this film.
Here is an accomplished actress playing a very complex character masterfully. There is much said with her eyes and actions and body language. Her personal circumstance evolves as you see her interact with various others. Hubert finds a way to personalize this person who has her own agenda and reasons for doing everything, where not all are readily apparent. So if you can find this check it out.

May 8th, 2017

So what to write about Guardians of the Galaxy Vol 2?

I could go on and on about this film, but in the end, the real question is and remains “did it suck”? And the answer to that would be No. I saw this on Friday, at the 3D AVTM Cineplex showing in a mostly full theatre. I went with girlfriend and two young teen boys (12yo and 14yo). They all liked it. For me it was okay. This is mind candy. It’s pleasing to the eye, you have a few laughs (hopefully) and then you leave and forget it. Youngest son asked before we went as he had not seen the first “give me a synopsis of the first film” and after fumbling through trying to remember about stealing this orb thing, I gave up. He watched the first 45 mins on Netflix. See, he had an introduction and got the gist of it, while preventing me from hurting my brain in recall.

What did I really think? I think that the movie, as they all do, pushes the limits on your level of disbelief. For example (like Force Awakens) where there is a battle on a moon-sized planetoid, you are expected to believe that two people coming in different directions and from different actions land next to one another (or very close). It just makes your head shake. Hell I could fall from the sky above Toronto, and totally miss someone two blocks away, let alone a MOON, but never mind. There are the Disney-fied family relations. Every one (mostly anyway) can have this kum-bay-ya moment with a family member and then hatchets can be buried. Ho hum. There is the uber-cute Baby Groot who has a couple really good scenes, including the opening sequence. Now THERE is a character just screaming for Disney to put him on PJs.

In the end, if you take it for what it is and is meant to be, it is fine. As a second installment in a film that took everyone by surprise last year, it is competent. Just don’t expect any performances from actors in our previous Best Of lists.

May 1, 2017

This past week on Netflix I watched Queen of Katwe the Disney film about a young chess prodigy from Uganda. The film is not shy about addressing the living conditions and opportunities for young people in these rural African areas. The young girl, played by a very good newcomer is supported by a teacher who takes upon himself improving the lives of these kids. He is played well by David Oyelowo. Again he is supportive and shows his dedication to these children. They go to chess competitions and he sees her ability to be a Chess Master. Lupita N’Yong plays her Mother and she is not as enthusiastic. We have seen this story before but it is a feel good story with good acting and message to be delivered in difficult times. I was glad that I saw it. I will share with my step-father who is a Chess Champion himself. This weekend upcoming will be Guardians of the Galaxy Vol 2.

Another couple actors to bring forward as those I seek out to watch: Adding in Kevin Spacey (who has become more of a TV and miniseries guy) as well as Andrew Garfield who was in 99 Homes, Hacksaw Ridge and Silence (oh and Spider-Man).

April 24, 2017 – Bonus Top Actors List

I was remarking just a week ago after watching Five Came Back and the documentary on the Nazi Prison Camps (used at Nurenberg) how could anyone not believe the holocaust. Well, then there is this week’s review called Denial. This is a true story, about an American Professor, who was sued for libel by a UK character who has professed that the holocaust was a hoax and specifically that Auschwitz was never the site of a death camp. The US professor played by Rachel Weisz wrote in her book about the growth in naysayers and deniers of the holocaust that he was a guy who used misinformation and was a quack. He sued in the UK, where the presumption is that there is guilt, by a wrongsayer, until you can prove otherwise (this is opposite to the US and Canada) where you are presumed innocent. There is some compelling by-play between Weisz and her UK lawyers who explain their strategy, although their bedside manner is a little gruff and dismissive to the professor. She wants to trumpet the “truth” from the rooftop and bring in eyewitnesses to the killings but that is not what the strategy is. Her legal team is played by Tom Wilkinson (very effectively) and the guy who plays Moriarty in the Cumberbatch Sherlock TV series. Anyway, it all very satisfying especially for the lawyer in me. I thought the performances were very good (Timothy Spall plays Denier). Well worth a viewing if there is a slow night.

As an aside I caught the Director’s Cut of Das Boot. Yes, it is old school models in bath tubs and small sets, but it’s a well told tale of the life of a U Boat crew, and what all had to endure during WWII. 30,000 German soldiers were in U Boats over the course of the war, and 20,000 never came home. This tale shows the environment and feeling of these cramped quarters and the terror as destroyers circle above trying to blow them out of the water.

On to the Top Lists for living actors, as requested by girlfriend to me. And I put it to you both. For me, these are actors that I seek out and if they are in movies I want to see them. I said living because we can talk about the merits of Lawrence Olivier, or Vivien Leigh or Elizabeth Taylor but that doesn’t serve us for now.

Actors:

Edward Norton: I wish he would work more. His recent efforts were less interesting than his earlier efforts. There is an impressive body of work here, even with the Hulk as a miss (and others).

Daniel Day Lewis: three-time Oscar winner, and seemingly nominated for almost everything that he does, he chooses his projects carefully and works sporadically. He should work more. He becomes the characters that he portrays and he is uniformly great.

Michael Fassbender: the third of a listing of impressive actors that I seek out, even though he can do some stinkers and make questionable choices (like Assassin’s Creed – has there ever been a decent video game movie?) he has tremendous range in roles like Steve Jobs, Prometheus, and 12 Years a Slave. I really enjoyed his Macbeth and sought it out last Christmas time, and I am glad that I did.

Other notables: Robert Deniro, Al Pacino – if this list was 30 years ago, YES! But as they age these greats are more acting as caricatures of themselves – more Deniro than Pacino as he does more comedies. Morgan Freeman (I am reminded of this as I re-watched Shawshank last weekend), Tom Hanks and Denzel Washington.

Actresses:

Meryl Streep: the greatest living actor in my humble opinion. Her earlier work and body of work is just stunning. From Sophie’s Choice, to Out of Africa, to Deer Hunter and Bridges of Madison County this 20-time Oscar nominated actress (yes 20!!) can just do it all. Sing (Mamma Mia, and badly too in Florence Jenkins) and be a bitch (Devil Wears Prada and Doubt) and lead actress. Do I seek her out? Not really, but I do still manage to watch what she does.

Cate Blanchett: since she was robbed of the Oscar for Elizabeth where she stole that film, I think she quietly has become a force as an actress. An impressive body of work, she is doing more theatre work lately and she could work more in films. She has been nominated 7 times and won twice.

Dame Judi Dench: this third choice is the hardest because so many can be here for so many reasons. I will mention Jessica Chastain of course as I do seek her out, but as a great actress, it’s hard to put her above Dame Judi. Philomena from her most recent films was excellent. Add to this roles in Bond films, and Shakespeare in Love, she has longevity on her side.

Oher notables: Kate Winslet, Charlize Theron, Dame Maggie Smith and then Sally Field. Each of these has Oscar on their mantle, and each can play a range of roles. All rarely disappoint and deliver. I will note that acting ability is at the premium here, and not necessarily sex appeal which is a different list altogether.

Add Marion Cotillard – simply excellent, and I do seek her out. She came to my attention in Ridley Scott’s A Good Year. She and Fassbender in Macbeth were excellent.

So there it is for what it is worth. It required plenty of thought and reflection. Like Best Movies lists, I expect that other names will pop up that I would say “of course!!”. I stand to be corrected or supplemented.

I had asked girlfriend earlier about what other actors that we had talked about for this list. I have now remembered: Christoph Walz who has won 2 Supporting Acting Oscars is a tremendous villain. Bursting onto the scene with the movie stealing Inglorious Bastards, he follows up with Django Unchained. Although a disappointment with Tarzan as well as being typecast a bit – he still can steal a scene. I wish he would work more. This also can be said for another character actor who burst onto the scene in Rob Roy; Tim Roth is another excellent evil doer. As he seems to relish it. He plays similar roles (recently as Arkansas Governor Wallace in Selma) and acted in tv and film. He works plenty as over 100 roles according to IMDB yet he disappears into those roles. So two more actors that I would add as notable.

April 10th, 2017

I did see a couple of films in the past few days, along with a few more documentaries on Netflix.

Buck is a documentary on a horse whisperer, who does not whip and break horses. He was a consultant on the Robert Redford movie, and there is a good story about it too. He had a hard life himself, and he has become a person who trains others on how to handle and ride their horses. Worth a watch, especially for those who like horses.

Joe Cocker: Mad Dogs and Englishmen is a documentary about the singer and his times. From exploding on the scene at Woodstock in 1969 to disappearing to a resurgence. It is interesting as have been all the other music documentaries I have watched lately. He died too young, as cancer took him, even though he abused his body with all sorts of alcohol and drugs.

In the theatre I saw Kong: Skull Island. This is NOT another re-make of the classic King Kong. No Faye Wray, no Empire State Building, no Beauty killing the beast. Rather this is another take to build on the recent Godzilla film which takes WWII nuclear testing and it’s long term impact into account, all the while becoming a franchise for future Creature Feature Week films. In the 70s I remember Godzilla and Mothra and Kong, and all manner of guys wrestling with costumes on, on top of railway sets. They were cheesey and badly dubbed. Expect more of these to come. Here a decent cast (Samuel L Jackson, John Goodman, Brie Larson and Tom Hiddleston) are using newly launched satellites to find a hidden island before the Russians do. They find Kong – larger and badder than previous versions, who reigns over this island where he protects the human population from these underworldly creatures (don’t ask). They are lizard-like and very bad. The good cast for the most part is wasted, Larson especially who just wanders around in a tank top. The CGI at times is very impressive. The battle scenes are frequent and quality. This is mind candy and no redeeming value. But it was still fun.

Finally after a long time, I found Departures at a local library on DVD. This is on Alison’s Top 10 of All Time, so it had to be good. As I have discussed before, movies are about expectations and hype. They are also about what you bring to the film in your own personal experience. Many great films like Tree of Life has you watch and experience and then fill in for yourself what it all MEANS. Films you can watch time and again, let you interpret and you can see different things at different times. This is a Japanese film about a young man seeking out a job after he loses his job as part of an orchestra. He finds an ad in the paper and replies. In Japan, unlike much of North America I think, there is a ritual performed where one hires a person to ‘prepare the body’ for the next life. This involves washing, clothing the body and preparing it to look its best. That’s what this young man begins to do. He then has a journey of his own and he finds more meaning in this life and reconciles his past. Hey, we all have pasts and we all have aspects of our lives we figure out. As I watched I found myself spending my time wondering where this spoke to Alison, why the impact, and what did she take away from it? Her life was different than mine. For me, I come from a place where funerals and death are dealt with quietly and without fanfare. We are cremated and don’t take up any more space. Quietly. To me, a body is an empty vessel, a carcass where the light has left. The ceremony performed was for the living and not the dead. At the same time I did not understand the Japanese stigma surrounding this work. Someone must do it. Yet those who do are told to find more honourable work. The young man faces such pushback. I do not understand. Much like the Indian culture that didn’t want to talk acknowledge nor talk about sex (yet seek out on video personality and porn star Sunny Leone online), here the Japanese who are so very proper and cultured don’t want to address this very personal and valued service. So while I enjoyed it, I would not have this as part of a Top 10 of All Time. Tree of Life? Yes! One I need to put there. But I appreciate having seen this finally.

April 18, 2017

This past week I rented a couple films.

First was Inferno with Tom Hanks as Robert Langdon. This also stars the very busy Felicity Jones (of Rogue One fame, as well as Theory of Everything). The story here is Langdon, minus the bad mullet from Davinci Code, awaking battered and bruised in a hospital bed. He knows very little and is groggy. He eventually notes he is not in Boston near Harvard but rather Florence. Then he tries to help solve and prevent a viral epidemic from another radical who sees people as a virus on the planet. There are some expected twists and turns. It is decently done. Still I can see why this didn’t get a tremendous following during the summer. I like the scenery, with Florence and Venice it makes for a nice travel log. I like seeing these places.

The second film is so memorable that I can’t even recall it. I racked my brain over this. So I will need to re-visit the video store to jog my memory.

On Netflix I did watch the WWII documentary Five Came Back about acclaimed directors (Ford, Huston, Capra etc) who enlisted and were part of the propaganda effort. Some of their films are there, like the Battle at Midway with live colour footage. The even more powerful film was the Nazi Concentration Camp film which was another documentary used at the Nuremburg Trials. Anyone who claims that the holocaust was not real should watch this film. It is heartbreaking what humans are capable of doing to one another. The War changed all of these directors and they came back and made some of their most memorable films. I also caught another BBC documentary about Hiroshima and it was interesting; interesting in the US being blamed and accused of using the weapon, but then it is revealed that the Japanese military and government kept their people away from real information. There was no surrender after the first bomb, and even when the second bomber was seen going to Nagasaki, no warnings were even issued to their own people (5 hours notice could have been given). The premise of the coverage is the US wanted to drop the bombs anyway and have guinea pigs on its effects. The reality is many thousands of US lives were saved avoiding a land invasion of a people who fought to the bitter end. Again, another good film to catch.

Painfully little in the theatres to catch these days.

[Time passes] Oh!! I remembered.

Legend of Tarzan.

I even watched the extras in this film as well. Now I know why it didn’t make that great an impression on me. In the Extras they talk about how they were taking a different tack on this classic story of the ripped man in the loin cloth. Here, they work in reverse, starting with a civilized Tarzan (Lord Greystoke) after he has been back from Africa for 8 years and already with Jane as a civilian. There is then a request for him to see about “progress” being made in the Congo, which requires his expertise. So he and Jane reluctantly go. What they find is Christoph Walz acting as a bad man, and looking for diamonds for his Belgian leader while facilitating revenge for Tarzan’s enemy in the jungle. You see, Tarzan killed this tribe leader’s brother long ago. And there you have it.

In the Extras they further explain how they didn’t fly the cast into Africa and no filming was done there. It was all done in soundstages in Britain. There are also no animals in the film that are real. They are CGI. And here is where the picture falls down. Some of the animals are very realistic (think Life of Pi’s Tiger – only as a lion) but then others, like the gorillas, are challenged. Some look somewhat real. Others less. CGI is coming a long way, but there is still more for complete realism.

Alexander Skarsgard (looking more like his father in each film, although more ripped here) plays Tarzan and the ripped muscles. No loin cloth but rather various stages of undress – fully clothes to Hulk like chinos. Then Samuel l Jackson taking on evidence of using slaves, Margot Robbie trying to be tough and independent and yet you wonder about her boldness with bad guy Walz at times (where he would be unlikely to stand for the impudence). Never mind. It was okay. CGI less so. And a movie that really didn’t need to be re-made, much like last week’s Ben Hur.

March 27, 2017

In the plane I watched the TIFF movie Mostly Sunny, which is a Canadian film about Canadian Sarnia-born porn film actress who has become an Indian Bollywood sensation. Appears the Indians are over 1 billion people but don’t believe that people have sex or talk about it. But the male population seems to like the fact that a Bollywood actress can be seen at youporn for your fantasies doing all sorts of nasty things! The film talks about her life, moving to California and her relationship with parents, brother and community. It can be a difficult transition to move from adult film to “normal” society and relationships. This film explores this, and how this “living in the moment” person can look ahead to handling interesting and troubling questions about the choices that she has made.

(There is a Netflix documentary called After Porn and it also addresses these issues and the broken people that can be left, as well as those who who are already broken headed into the adult film business). In short one can never run away from their past.

Also on Netflix I watched the animated Spirit, a horse based story with Maaaaatt Damon (voicing the horse, well overdubbing really) and Bryan Adams doing the music. This is a female childhood favourite, with the horses and scenery of the Wild West, but beyond that it is is a flimsy story. Horse was free. Horse is curious about humans. Horse then fights to be free, Done. I do not need to this again.

Also on Netflix I did catch For the Love of Spock, which was directed by his son Adam. It held my attention for the icon and a little bit more about his life. There are some good things to know and if you are a Trekkie, it is likely mandatory viewing, whatever I might say. Not sure what the tie in for Big Bang Theory is, but they made it along with other celebrity cameos to talk about Leonard Nimoy. (The Bilbo Baggins song would have made The Hobbit more watchable!)

Finally I rented Ben Hur with the idea that I wanted to see what they had changed to the original (to me) Charleton Heston classic film that also had won Best Picture previously. This one did not. Now I know why. I even sat through the Extras to see about the making of this film. There is a lot of “this is why we did this….and here is the book which was the source material, and not the previous film”. Fair enough. The book had actually been made into a film and production before to much success BEFORE Chuck ever rode a chariot. Still, his is a Jesus story and moreso than the Heston film. Jesus in the original was a pair of hands and a mystery, helping out Judah every now and then. This film goes further, and further than I would have liked which becomes its fatal flaw, and why I suspect the people didn’t come to the theatre. The secondary reason was the chariot race, which was more CGI and had horses doing what I just didn’t believe. No horses of course were injured in the film, but of course since much of their footage resided in pixels only. That primary reason for people to stay away is that, like the playgrounds of old, the former film had good vs evil. The bad guy treating the Ben Hur family (Masala) poorly and Judah finding an improbable way to get his revenge. The ultimate revenge was on the chariot race field. This movie doesn’t leave you as satisfied. Everyone gets a medal for participation, and no one is left out. Jesus ultimately has the final say in the last feel good moments of this film. It’s a let down. It’s disappointing to me. What next? Khan in Star Trek being brought back into the rhelm of just a “misunderstood guy who just needed a hug and compassion”? If this is a Ben Hur for the times, then I will gladly jump into a Delorean and find my way back to 1959 with Chuck at the reins.

March 20, 2017

On to the reviews, on Netflix I watched Fifty Shades of Grey, which I simply couldn’t spend a nickel on in a theatre and I am glad that I didn’t. The source material really is the problem here. I did read the book (on the insistence of a buddy whose wife found it a great marital aid!). The book was a struggle for me as I questioned so much about our male model. Why did he have to be a billionaire? Why did he have to run a large company and have a fleet of Audi cars? Why did he have to also be a pilot (helicopters and gliders) and a expert yachtsman etc.? All this bling! He has issues but he really plays Dominant-Light as it were. His convictions however much he wants to memorialize them in a contract, are flexible and change as his mood does. From elevators to the insistence to of having never slept in the same bed as a Sub/lover. Why, too, does Anastasia have to be a virgin? Why so put off by the whole BDSM scene while at the same time demanding to be shown many aspects of it? Anyway, the story is flimsy and there isn’t a lot of chemistry between the protagonists. You can’t see the lust. You can’t sense the uncontrollable pull for each other. The book seemed to suggest more of that – although I am thankful for less ripping into condoms time and again. Safe sex. We get it. I can’t recommend this, but no one really has. Number 2 is in theatres now and number 3 to come after that. Are we really standing on pins and needles wondering if they “get back together again”? Kim Basinger playing a Mrs Robinson character for young Christian could be interesting, but I won’t spend $13 to find out!

The best of anything that ever came from Fifty Shades of Grey is right here:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VJI5h5AbmQE

Saw a favourable review for Beauty and the Beast. Still not sure if I need to see a live version of this – but we will see.

March 6, 2017

Hacksaw Ridge – a best picture nominated story directed by Mel Gibson bringing him back into the spotlight. Andrew Garfield stars as the true story of Desmond Doss. He was a “conscientious objector” who refused to hold a gun while desiring to act and serve his country as a medic. He was deeply religious and that likely was the source of interest for deeply Catholic Mel. God says “Thou shalt not kill” and even in war he takes it to heart. There is a good story to be told and Mel uses all his tools. I think he is overly graphic, with some over the top injuries shown. Is it realistic? Likely. Does it add much to the tale? No. The actions of our hero are worthy of the tale and telling. I am skeptical about a couple of the incidents portrayed. This was worth the time and the viewing.

Mike and Dave Need Wedding Dates – no. Just no. What on earth possessed Anna Kendrick to do this crap? And the guy who plays Zac Ephron’s brother is simply awful.

Independence Day – Resurrection. This sequel to the original cheesey original was just not good. And I had no expectations for it. Original cast members Bill Pullman, Jeff Goldblum, and Judd Hirsh (Will Smith wisely stayed away). Computer dude from Star Trek should have too. I actually thought he died in the original. Anyway. Aliens come back. Bigger and badder than before. The same group of misfits have to try and overcome overwhelming odds. I won’t spoil the ending. But I will say that the mysterious orb is ridiculous. Not worth the viewing either.

Family Day 2017, February 20th

So I ventured forth this past weekend to catch the unanimously panned Passengers. Did it live down to its reputation and were the ratings legit. Oh my, yes, they definitely were. Here is a story that takes place in space, but really could take place almost anywhere. Space (and a long term, incubated space journey) provides a backdrop for the ultimate imprisonment, and lack of choices – but for the most part it adds very little. There is a space ship carrying future humans to new natural and pristine world. It is about a 100 year journey, so the people are in suspended animation. Something happens and one guy is awoken prematurely. He soon gets bored with the flying Hilton hotel and wrestles with whether or not to awaken another passenger. The trailers tell you what he decides. Then the melo-drama inter play between the two people takes place. A third comes and goes and ultimately there is something that happens which requires action quickly. Girlfriend can attest that my reaction to the ultimate resolution was “Oh My GOD!!” The bullshit meter went haywire and my willingness to suspend my disbelief was irretrievably damaged for good. It is silly. There is dialog here that I have a hard time believing that between takes the actors didn’t look at each other and laugh. After the ship is damaged these two enter the engineering area (like Star Trek Enterprise area) and look for something “broken”. This concept is later re-inforced and repeated by JLaw. It was a jaw dropping moment. In the end, it makes no sense. This I cannot recommend on any level.