Twisters: In 1996, Bill Paxton and Helen Hunt starred in the original movie Twister, when a couple of competing groups of “storm chasers” were looking to better understand deadly tornadoes in the america midwest, and notably Oklahoma. Paxton and Hunt were former spouses, but then apart as they did the work of driving a caravan of trucks around looking for the storms. Now in 2024, a whole new cast of characters, unrelated to the original are coming to a theatre near you.
Featuring Mr Everything in film (not named Chalamet) Glen Powell, and also Daisy Edgar-Jones (previously in the forgettable Where the Crawdads Sing) and Anthony Ramos they play another grouping of individuals who is looking for how to understand and counteract the deadly effects of the storms. In present day, without addressing global warming (apparently on purpose to avoid being political) there is a record setting number of tornadoes popping up in Oklahoma and threatening the residents. But before the present day we have a flashback to Daisy (playing Kate Carter) who has a gift for anticipating where storms will go has an experience which has shaped her and those around her.
Performances for the most part are serviceable. Powell plays the handsome cad. Daisy the person with skills who has had an emotional setback looks to find a way to recover and find a new path. Then there is Ramos who also has had to deal with trauma and moving forward in his own way. The supporting cast doesn’t have a Phillip Seymour Hoffman nor an Alan Ruck or Carey Elwes.
For me, there were a number of predictable plot elements that take place, but for me it didn’t take away from the enjoyment of the film. Of course, like the original Twister, one has to check your realism somewhat at the door. For example, I don’t think for a moment that a pick up truck that has anchored itself into ashphalt would be able to stay in put within the fury of a tornado. I say this because of the force of the winds, that in the original movie was lifting up 18-wheelers and leveling buildings would have little difficulty with the pick up, but aldo add in the fact that all sorts of rocks and debris are within the high winds and swirling around like a hail of bullets. There are other times where rain or hail while in others there is none. Go figure. As for the humans, there are scenes with the impressive computer graphics with humans trying to keep themselves safe in extreme environments. It isn’t entirely believable. But notwithstanding that, I still enjoyed this. It was entertaining, despite some of the predictable twists. The twists were not entirely predictable, but in the end I cared about the people. There were some impressive scenes for the big screen and some fun music too. This was more enjoyable than most of the theatre films that I have seen, so that says something. Another good friend of mine saw this and didn’t like it at all. He felt that it was stupid and belonged on the Hallmark Channel. So not everyone will feel entertained by it. So, watch with an open mind and see how you feel if you choose to go.
6 Underground: This Michael Bay adventure-thriller is presently on Netflix. It was released back in 2019. Funny that it didn’t register with me five years ago. It seems to me that someone approached Michael Bay after seeing the success of the Mission Impossible movies (at that time there had been six released) and had made oodles of money. For this movie, the idea was to create a team of randomly skilled people and have them “dead” so that they are truly off the grid. They are not beholden to any government, but rather can choose to engage in dealing with problems as they identify them, in short they get to kill the “bad people” without worrying about treaties, ancillary world views and political fallout. They number each other for anonymity with Ryan Reynolds playing a billionaire tech guru known as One. This is how this operation is funded; never mind questions about getting cars, flights, purchasing anything or getting into any country without documents. But nevermind.
The true inspiration for me watching this was a longtime buddy of mine saying that the car chase through Florence was one of the most epic that he has ever seen. I was intrigued. I also know that Bond, Bourne and Mission Impossible had done respectively some impressive car chase sequences (quite a few in various Italian cities). The car chase in this movie was certainly on that level and one has to be impressed with the handling of the Alfa Romeo Quadrafoglio painted neon green zooming through the streets with two team members doing a medical procedure in the back seat! Yea! It is another level.
Bay knows how to “blow things up, real good” (borrowing heavily from departed Jim Flaherty and John SCTV) with many vespa riders getting the brunt of the damage. Let’s just say a crowded street in Florence during the day would have its fair share of collateral damage. But after the dust settles, some new members of the team arrive and show their skills, it becomes very reminiscent of other movies (like The Dark Knight and the extraction scene from Hong Kong). It is almost always feeling like a Call of Duty video game as the team enters into a new area. They are targeting a foul, ill tempered leader of a made up country for plot purposes. The writers try and inject heart into this team of strangers who One insists are NOT a family. They are focused on the mission at hand, and the individual takes second billing in order to meet the objective. I liked the car chase. I cannot recommend more than that. There are some typical Ryan Reynolds quips, some of which land for a laugh, but generally this $150M budget film (second highest in Netflix history) didn’t do well likely because it didn’t resonate with the audience in the same way emotionally than the other thrillers noted above. Some of the other team members have interesting stories and skills, but it once again seems forced. So for me, this is a pass.
Ashley Madison: Sex, Lies and Scandal: This three part documentary on Netflix tells the story of the earlier days of extra-marital affair Canadian company Ashley Madison and the fall out from the targeted hack that took place with them in July 2015 where they were boasting 37 million users worldwide. The exposure of the details of the customers, and later the details of personal emails of the CEO and others was a major wake up call for people generally and how much information that they wish to share with any website. The website turns out faked their cybersecurity protection system and it’s safety with sensitive data, and you learn how a person managed to get behind the firewall and put the company up for a ransom demand.
Interestingly, the demand was to shut down the site immediately and the hacker(s) will not proceed in disclosing the names and emails of the customers. The series brings forward a number of couples and those who were impacted by all of this. The insiders, who focused on the dollars and cents and wanting to go public on the stock market, to the users who had their names published. The more well known you were, like the couple pictured above who were well-known Christian Youtubers and Vloggers had their world turned upside down. Is this a call for sympathy? Many would say no. Show the cheaters for who they are. Others are more wary about those judging others and perhaps “those without sin should cast the first stone”. None of those involved on the company side are likeable. Some of the innocents caught unaware, were extremely sympathetic. The ongoing lesson is though that a business that professes to be 100% protected in this cyberworld, is just a hack away from this not being true. This was interesting.
House of the Dragon: Season 2: Episode 4 and 5: A short word to say that a week ago I was thrilled with Episode 4 entitled The Red Dragon and the Gold. For one and a half seasons I have been waiting for an episode like this to justify the use of the Game of Thrones theme song to begin each episode. To me, this isn’t Game of Thrones since it hasn’t kept the quick pacing and the unexpected twists and turns with the prominent characters. FINALLY, we have an episode worthy of its name. The second half of this episode with the ensuing battle after much build up, can live up to the hype of the show. I had been awaiting an episode where the advertisements talk about “riveting” and “best in class” would come about. So all I will say is, this episode of all of the ones before is fun to watch and satisfying to those Game of Thrones fans. Inasmuch as I was excited about this episode 4, last night we came back down to earth (literally and figuratively) with the chatter and endless discussion about “oh, what to do?”. It seems the family Targaryen is ripping itself apart limb from limb, while revealing why their sigil is a three-headed dragon.
All this to say that there are more episodes to be dropped in the coming sundays and I hope that there is more of episode 4, and less of episode 5. I do expect that there will be a bigger battle to come, and clearly the women are going to remain the key factors in any success or failure for their side, and they will need to foresake offspring, husbands, council members, military leaders to get there.
I have watched two quality documentaries on Netflix this past week and can recommend them both.
Open Heart: I am an NHL hockey fan, and always have been from my youngest days. I have carried on a passion for the game in the former job as an agent, but now still I am active with organizing and participating in hockey pools. I was told by a work colleague who knew that I was a hockey fan that I should check out this documentary. It is about goaltender Henrik Lundqvist formerly of the NY Rangers, who is an excellent Swedish goalie who was among the best at the position for many years. He has done everything he could for his beloved NY Rangers, except bring home a Stanley Cup championship. He came close, a Final series in 2014, ultimately a loss to the LA Kings. It was not his fault.
The story is not really a hockey story howver. It is a very human story about an aging superstar, who has been replaced (and not renewed for a new contract) with his former team, but he still feels in his late 30s that he has more to give the game, and of himself. I follow the game, but it didn’t click with me that Lundqvist had not signed with anyone after the Rangers. In fact, he did. He had a contract offer from the Washington Capitols, a team that needed someone of his skill. He had to take a physical before the contract and the ensuing training camp would take place. Then a routine check showed this excellent athlete, had a serious heart condition. The rest tells the story and what happens to him and his family. There are interviews with loved ones, and former teammates, and much with Henrik himself and even his therapist. He even has a twin brother who watches this handsomely dressed man go through this ordeal. The audience sees his struggles and the emotional ups and down. How does one react when the body you have relied upon all your life, turns on you, and begins to deliver a message that you aren’t interested in hearing. It unfolds, and I came away with a much deeper appreciation for the man, and a greater respect for the one that they called King Henrik. Well done King, we can all cheer you on and wish you best wishes as you turn over the hockey chapter in your life and move into something else.
Remembering Gene Wilder: This was another documentary that I watched over the past week. I liked Gene Wilder as an actor. I remembered a few of his films like Blazing Saddles, Charlie and the Chocolate Factory as Willy Wonka, some films with comedy great Richard Pryor and of course Young Frankenstein. I regarded him as engaging and funny, but never a top flight movie star! This movie talked about his life, from those who remember him best, including some great actors and even Mel Brooks, who has outlived them all it seems, now at age 98.
I had remembered that he had been married to Saturday Night Live standout from the 1970s Gilda Radner. Most sadly Gilda shortly after marrying Gene, and trying to have a baby was found to have ovarian cancer at the age of 42!! Wilder as a boy always wanted to cheer up his mother, as she went through bouts of depressing among other things. By pure happenstance he got into acting, and landed a role that would introduce him to pivotal Anne Bancroft, married to Mel Brooks. The rest became history as Brooks and Wilder became best of friends and worked on many movies together. Wilder wrote and starred in Young Frankenstein which as a parody is pure comic genius at work. He had a great emsemble cast, with Marty Feldman, Teri Garr, Madeline Khan and Peter Boyle playing the monster, with an excellent cameo from Gene Hackman! Another move of fate was later after Gilda had passed away that he was working on a movie that focused on a man that was blind (Richard Pryon played a deaf man) and Wilder went to seek assistance with understanding how a blind person interacts with the world. He meets and has dinner with a woman who eventually would become his second wife.
All this to say that I learned something about Gene Wilder that I didn’t know before. I have a greater appreciation for his art and his acting. I think that he leaves behind some very funny and memorable movies, but more than that he seeme to impact those around him in a very positive way. Not all artists can be said to be that way. Well worth your time to watch.
I was away for the Canada Day long weekend and didn’t post last weekend. That, however, doesn’t mean that I didn’t see any movies. In fact, I have seen four consecutive movies all of which were in various levels of disappointment. Two of these were Netflix, one streamed and the other in the actual theatre. So there are some bonus movie reviews for this week. Wishing everyone a Happy Canada Day and also my American friends a Happy Independence Day. On to the movies:
Kinds of Kindness: Yorgos Lanthimos is a Greek filmmaker, and has an impressive catalog of work including The Lobster, Killing of the Sacred Deer, The Favourite, and last year’s Poor Things which provided Emma Stone with her Best Actress Oscar. Emma Stone is a familiar face in Lanthimos’ films. Others include Willem Dafoe, Rachel Weisz and others. With this background, I was interested to see what this new, quietly released film was all about. How was Emma Stone going to follow up in her performance in Poor Things. Added to this compilation story we have the incredible shrinking man Jesse Plemons. Together, the core characters play in three separate chapters of this film, playing three different and distinct characters. Each of these stories is odd and difficult to describe in any detail.
However much Stone is the focus in the previews and movie poster, she has little impact on the first story. That belongs to Plemons. For his efforts he was nominated for Best Actor at the Cannes Film Festival. This first chapter has Plemons looking to impress the older man played by Willem Dafoe. Dafoe wishes for a favour to be granted and when Plemons declines and Dafoe moves on, Plemons’ life is turned upside down. It reminds me a little about Trading Places with Dan Ackroyd and Eddie Murphy where the two older gents bet that they can make a well-heeled artistocrat into a criminal. They succeed. Part Two has Plemons as a man who is an emotional mess about his wife who is missing. She has been gone for days. Stone is the missing wife. Dafoe plays her Dad. Plemons is a cop and has a partner. The police force are concerned about how he is acting. The story unfolds when it appears as though Plemons’ wishes have been granted! Odd things happen after that with surprising results. In the third act, Stone is a married woman with a young daughter but she has left the family to search for another woman. This woman apparently has amazing powers and has been very difficult to find. Stone is joined with Plemons in searching for this woman. There is a loose thread which holds these stories together, but it is a stretch. Getting there is a movie 2:45 in length and slow. It is also confusing, making little sense. I have no idea still upon reflection what kindnesses they were referring to in the title. There are dark motivations at work, with some gore in odd places. It is not uplifting in any way, and reveals certainly the darker side of the human condition. It is a stretch to call this a dark comedy. It is a drama and will not be for people who want a linear story and a straightforward message. I didn’t like this, and walked away shaking my head as confused as I have been after finishing a movie in quite some time. Other efforts by Lanthimos were for this viewer more satisfying and better all around, including the strange Poor Things. You have been warned.
Furiosa: A Mad Max Saga: In 1985, George Miller directed Mad Max Beyond Thunderdome. Miller had been well involved in the Mad Max story from the beginning in 1979 with a very young Mel Gibson. So when he returned to direct in 2015 Mad Max: Fury Road with Tom Hardy as Max it became a surprise hit. It also became a movie where Charlize Theron stole the movie with her performance of a woman named Imperator Furiosa and the memorable CGI and desert car chase scenes. Fast forward another 9 years, and Miller is putting his name as part of the credits for a new Mad Max prequel about the Charlize character Furiosa. Sadly what the made the rebooted Mad Max so fresh with new energy is missing from this prequel.
The world in which Furiosa lives in her youth and getting into her teens is this strange dystopia. Set in Australia we have a world where there are overlords who control various means of production. Max Max Fury Road focused on this Citadel, but there are others. There is of course the ongoing question through all Mad Max of where exactly does all the gas/petrol come from? It is most pronounced in this effort. So many vehicles, from trucks to cars and motorcycles. But keeping that aside, there is a story of a young girl who eventually becomes the sidekick of the powerful leader in the Citadel. She has some prior history with the weakest part of this whole story which is the Chris Hemsworth character, Dr Dementus. The acting is so over-the-top with an outrageous accent, with a strange beard, horrible prosthetic nose (not unlike Bradley Cooper in Maestro) and chariot-like motorcycle vehicle that makes little sense.
There is an odd dynamic between Hemsworth and the young Furiosa who as an older woman is played by Anya Taylor Joy who barely says anything throughout. That is another issue, because there are very few motivations or things learned about the pivotal character in Fury Road. But it falls flat.
The story is weak. The performances are odd, and it seems that the CGI is driving where the plot goes. CGI in my mind can enhance a storyline, turning a line on a script into a believable image on the screen. The hurry-up filming style is used time and again, with it all seemingly sped up, but also stunts that are unreal, with bodies and machines flying all over the place. One set piece moves into another, but it is like a comic book. I wasn’t connected with Furiosa and I didn’t care about where this all ends up, because you realize that it becomes the Charlize Theron version of the character. I think that this was an opportunity missed. Sadly Miller seems to have got caught up in it, and likely didn’t see where the end product is ending up. Of all the characters Tom Burke is close to a Max in this, and he is somewhat interesting. Overall, this is a miss, and I don’t see that it is worth the money for the theatre. This isn’t adding much to the overall Mad Max storyline.
A Family Affair: On the Canada Day weekend it was a Toronto Globe & Mail pick for the long weekend to be watching the latest Nicole Kidman and Zac Ephron romantic comedy vehicle. Joey King, unfamiliar to me, is familiar with younger viewers and is playing Nicole Kidman’s daughter, but also working for Zac Ephron who is playing a Tom Cruise-like agent, superhero.
For me I couldn’t get over all the plastic surgery on the screen, in a paper thin plot that was pretty obvious. Hollywood superstar doing one of many sequels to a formulaic series has the young personal assistant King thinking the movie needs to re-written. Her Mom, Kidman, happens to be a writer. After some tequilas the Hollywood star and Mom do what romantic comedies do, with predictable results from the daughter. All of this was forgettable, and it is surprising to see Nicole Kidman put her name to it. I am not a fan of Ms Kidman generally, and so this was not something to gain any points in my books. This is a hard pass and not worth your time.
Atlas: Like Nicole Kidman, I am left wondering why Jennifer Lopez would associate herself with this Netflix release Atlas. What do you get when you have a little bit of Avatar, a little bit of Interstellar, a little bit of Gravity, and a little bit of Alien and other parts of other movies with relationships between parents and kids and underlining guilt? The answer is that you have a movie that the sum of its parts from better movies doesn’t equate to a decent movie unto itself.
Lopez plays a woman, named Atlas, who’s Mom was instrumental in developing a new form of human-like Artificial Intelligence (“AI”). The AI takes the form of Canadian Simu Lui with blue contacts in. It seems that Atlas and AI robot were learning and growing up together.
In the end, Lopez needs to learn how to trust again, and in a situation much like TARZ in Interstellar there is this bond needed to run the Avatar-like machine/space ship that she is occupying. Things move ahead. Lopez is looking to track down the AI robot and prevent him from doing some sinister things. Time after time there are scenes taken from other better movies. I don’t feel the need to delve further into the plot because I think it is just tiresome. In short, this is a film not worthy of your time. There are other films including those listed as references from this one that you should check out instead.
Land of Bad: Netflix has just released a new film starring Russell Crowe (looking more and more well fed), Liam Hemsworth and Luke Hemsworth. The title though says it all – this is bad, make no mistake about it. It begins with a discussion about an area of the world near the Philippines, where there is active combat and a war going on that no one is aware. It is an Australian film, but about Americans. Funny that.
There is an operation that is required in this combative area and a young Liam Hemsworth is ordered by happenstance to join a veteran group of Special Ops soldiers who are going to look to find and return an intelligence CIA asset. Naturally there is chirping among the more experienced soldiers and the young inexperienced Hemsworth who is nervous about a high parachute drop and the nature of the unknown task ahead of them. This small group of soldiers is supported half a world away in a base in Las Vegas which has Air Force personnel using drones with accompanying weapons. The drones have the ability to watch over the operation and communicate the on-ground situation to the soldiers. Russell Crowe is an aging operator, who cannot even do up the uniform which he tries to wear and hides the fact with a bright yellow Hawaiian shirt.
The operation, naturally, runs into unexpected issues with the team suffering significant losses. Crowe is doing his best to explain why he sits in his chair at this age, while at the same time communicating to that strike team. I am not really clear as to why Crowe is given this role. Perhaps they wanted another Australian, like Hemsorth, to play a guy from Ohio, as Hemsworth does. My greater issue with the movie is that this makes it seem as though it is present day but rather than finding familiar real wars like Ukraine or Isreal and Palestine, there is this unknown “war”. When you look at the American resources that are used here, helicopters, F-18s, B-1 bombers, drones and personnel all over the armed forces, one wonders about this war. It creates no sympathy really for the young soldier as he stands, with all these well provisioned rebels in this massive bunker structure. Battles are undertaken, with plenty of bullets and hand to hand combat. There are clear enemies, but really? There is torture, there are other challenges for a singular solider with plenty of inexplicable actions by the rebels (like the whole issue of whether you don’t simply shoot an enemy you find in your territory). I would have expected the soldier to shoot first and and ask questions later. There are also way-too-convenient strikes being made which happen to coincide very neatly with an unpleasant consequence which seems to befall the lead character. Do I like this? Absolutely not. It is not compelling or interesting on any level. Within the first thirty minutes almost nothing takes place. The ending of course is not really in doubt, even when the ending of Platoon is virtually stolen frame for frame. This movie is a hard pass, and it is unfortunate that Russell Crowe who will associate himself with it.
House of the Dragon – Season 2: I will readily admit that I am a huge Game of Thrones fan. Despite getting to the party relatively late in the original series, I think it was around Season 5 or 6, I was able to binge the earlier series and then be all caught up for the last two series. I have read the Game of Thrones books, and eagerly await the next volume which has been delayed time and again by author and super busy guy George R. R. Martin. Then it was announced that a prequel series would be made in the Westeros world. I was intrigued, but wouldn’t allow myself to get too excited about it. House of the Dragon was begins about 100 years after the Seven Kingdoms are united by the Targaryen conquest, nearly 200 years before the events of Game of Thrones, and 172 years before the birth of Daenerys Targaryen.
For me the season was slow to get going, which was very different from Game of Thrones which started fast and just picked up speed. I think that this 13 minute refresh for Season 1 is helpful, especially given that we are almost two years since the first season was released.
I found it dealing with English-style intrigue for the Tutors and the Henry VIII questions with whether a woman could be the Queen. A similar story unfolds with this series. Starting with a clean slate, the clash becomes one of battling friends and siblings for the Iron Throne. Upon the death of the King, who had a living daughter (Rhaenyra Targaryen) and a brother (Daemon Targaryen) there is also the new Queen (Alicent Hightower) who bore sons for the King (Aegon II, Heleana and Aemond). The names can be confuing the the years pass quickly with younger Rhaenyra then engaging with the same brother Daemon. At the conclusion of the first season, the entire succession is turned upside down with words uttered by the dying King and creating Elizabeth I type of intrigue.
Enter Season 2, which aired last night. This series looks fabulous. They have smartly and generously sprinkled dragons in this series because, after all, they are cool. But still I can’t help but thinking that the world of Westeros that we were shown was so vast, and the political intrigue amongst this family of Targaryens seems small. Many of the names sound the same and so many have the long blond hair which can add to the confusion.
Ultimately the sides are being drawn, and War is Coming, in the same way that Winter is Coming in the original. It was inevitable. Game of Thrones was effective because it had great performances, terrific writing which generally followed the books pretty closely, and spent the money it needed on CGI and scenes (filmed in Northern Ireland, Croatia and other locations). There was a blend of sex and violence, characters you love to hate and plenty of surprises. So far this isn’t happening with House of the Dragon. Maybe it is a slow build. Another difference for me is that none of the characters are overly likeable, and we aren’t cheering for them like we did for Jon Snow, the Starks (some of them anyway) and Danny Targaryen (the Mother of Dragons). It is a vital piece for the audience. I will continue to watch. Episode 1 was fairly straightforward with re-engaging the characters and building on the end of Season 1. We are briefly introduced to the Starks in this first episode and The Wall, defending Westeros from death from the north. I will continue to watch and hope for more.
Hitler and the Nazis: Evil on Trial: On Netflix, this is a new 6 part series that talks about the Nuremburg trials set after WWII was finished and the surviving leaders of the Third Reich are put on trial. All the countries involved in the defeat of the Nazis were part of the prosecution and the judges.
There is some colourization of previous black and white films, with various historians speaking to events as they occurred and unfolded. Much of it is done through the eyes of reporter and writer William L. Shirer. He started in the late 1930s and carried on in various locations as a US reporter and writer as war broke out.
There are enactments of the stories along with actual archival footage with actual voices of those involved in the trials, as well as speeches and events themselves with subtitles.
I am a WWII buff, and this was interesting to watch. I liked to hear the actual voices from those who testified at the trials. My generation and later recoil from black and white footage, so the colourization helps to make it more real for me anyway. I find the actor who plays Hitler as one of the weaker links in the production. Somehow I suspect that Hitler wasn’t always yelling and screaming and appearing on the edge of sanity. But he is shown as this constantly. But despite this it is effective to have this combination of real filming and the older actual footage. For those who are interested in WWII and history, this for me is worth watching and as good as any recent documentaries on the subject.
Civil War: Alex Garland is a writer, screenwriter, director of some very interesting, cutting edge recent sci fi and technology related films. The titles include Ex Machina (2014) and Annihilation (2018), both of which I thoroughly enjoyed. His one Oscar nomination came from his writing in Ex Machina. He wrote the novel The Beach which became the the Leo DiCaprio film. His latest release is an apocalyptic take on the political situation in the United States. The Americans as we all know, have already fought a Civil War back in the 1860s (1861-1865). This movie addresses what the next civil war could look like.
The movie takes a few perspectives, but mainly focuses on the efforts of Kirsten Dunst as a veteran war correspondent photographer and her team. As part of the team, she has added, to her distaste, a young photographer who regards Dunst as her personal hero. The story is a road trip movie with the team looking to get to Washington DC. Seems the rebel countries from Florida and Texas are looking to overtake the President and his command by force. The movie opens with the President announcing publicly that there have been mistakes made by the rebel forces.
Ultimately there are number of situations which reflect this new reality, including an area where they are ignoring the war surrounding them and acting like it is back to the 1950s Leave It To Beaver. In another area, they run across Jesse Plemons as a military officer leading some rebels in a fashion that channels Robert Duvall in Apocalypse Now, as a leader who seems to relish the battle and the blood, and seems to exact his own form of justice in a lawless society. It is a sad commentary on the current situation that we can see a world where this could happen. There are images of battles taking place in Washington DC, for example an active shooting on the Lincoln Memorial, in which the irony isn’t lost on the viewer. Maybe that was one of my problems with this movie and how it didn’t really impact me. I think the idea was “let’s explore various situations in a modern civil war” all with a The Killing Fields or A Private War (type of vehicle to get us there; the war correspondent documenting the conflict). The team gets directly impacted by the conflict in ways that are predictable. It is all so very depressing that one can hope that the people come to their senses. However, as a movie it isn’t as good as the message that Garland hopes to resonate with his audience.
Challengers: Zendaya seems to be everywhere these days. From Dune and Euphoria she has taken on this almost mythical power with young women, and this movie comes at a time where I have heard from a number of people that daughters are seeing this movie multiple times in the theatre. As a result, I was interested to see what all the fuss could be about. Zendaya incidentally is also the producer for this movie. The principal actors are her, Josh O’Connor (best known to me as the teenage Prince Charles in The Crown, and Mike Faist who I don’t ever recall seeing before. The three make up competitive tennis players working their way through the ranks. The story jumps around in a timeline from early days as teens, through more formative years of playing and then to the present day where the two men are playing each other in a secondary level game outside New York City, nearing the end of their careers.
Tennis is the method by which to show how the relationships came about, but this is a movie, in some ways not so dissimilar to the 2003 film The Dreamers starring Eva Green with two male suitors. Similar in that they seek to explore themselves and each other. They are just understanding their own bodies and the connections with others. None of the tennis scenes made me believe that the actors were playing tennis at a high level. It was obvious that the ball returns with the players were not real but CGI. It didn’t matter, but it was noted.
In this instance, the two male players have played for years in tournaments and grew close. They meet Zendaya who was already a highly ranked teenager. They both take a liking to her, and she decides to take matters into her own hands, deciding which of these young men that she wishes to entertain. In truth, she decides to entertain herself really. Fate steps in, and guides some future moves for Zendaya’s character. In the current date, we see her already with Faist’s character and watching this match against the former friend. The rest is a playback as to why this individual tennis match holds more meaning than just a $7,200 prize for the winner.
In any film, or in any relationship I think you know that there is troubled waters ahead when one person says: “I love you” and the other person responds: “I know”. Same holds true in this movie. I have a hard time understanding the motivations of the Zendaya character. She has set the stage for what was to take place – in a planned fashion, although I am certain that it didn’t entirely transpire as expected at least in the middle stage. Ultimately much is made over the one game played as Zendaya watches over the proceedings. I will admit that I don’t see what all the fuss is about. I certainly would not see the reason to watch this on mutliple viewings, but then again I am absolutely not the target audience.
Apologies for last week but I was travelling on holiday and did not have a chance to write. Now I am back.
All of Us Strangers: Andrew Scott stars along with Paul Mescal in this 2023 release. Claire Foy co-stars along with Jamie Bell.
Andrew Scott is one of the most versatile actors these days. He seems to be able to pivot from various roles and be effective in each of them. From Bond, to Sherlock, recently released Ripley then also Fleabag.
He plays a screenwriter named Adam living in London. He lives alone in a condo that is sparsely populated and has a neighbour who makes an unusual proposition for him. He declines.
He begins a stroll down memory lane. The audience isn’t quite clear as to how much of his journey is real or imagined. He had dredged up some photographs in his possessions safely stored away under his bed. This is a movie about Adam’s relationships and not about his career.
He reconsiders the neighbour and they have a tryst. Turns out that he is gay but they discuss “queer” being a more elegant description.
From there Adam continues his stroll down memory lane. We learn more as he revisits this past, wwith a short train ride used to transport him into to memories. But are they just memories? There is no explanation as to these travels. Without disclosing too much, the travels allow for a discussion of attitudes of the past and then present day about various ideas but mainly about being gay (back in the 1980s until present day). Perception and memories are very interesting and they are explored. Imagine speaking to someone and having a conversation with them in real time and seeing them, and hearing them with their full selves. How different might the reality be from how you had imagined it?
Then this story goes deeper. The present and the past collide. Discussions are held that are heartfelt and real. Scott shows a range of emotion to bring this story to life for Adam. So much is revealed in his face and moments when he says very little.
I really enjoyed this. This movie asks, fundamentally, how much do we really know one another? Even those who raised us and were there for us from the day we started our journey on this planet. How much can we anticipate for our actions today that we think are seemingly meant to help us and heal us? In the end none of us is promised another day.
Kingdom of the Planet of the Apes: I am not having a great deal of luck these days with movies I am seeing in the theatre. After the debaucle that was The Fall Guy, I was anticipating seeing this movie. It had been well hyped, with plenty of commercials and trailers that I have done my best to try and avoid. I wanted to see this latest installment with fresh eyes and an open mind. I was a really big fan of the original from 1968 with Charleton Heston and Roddy McDowell. The last trilogy with Andy Serkis as the focal point with Caesar I quite liked as well. The world was decimated from a man made illness that basically resulted with apes, lead by Caesar, revolting and overtaking the humans. This movie starts with the burial of Casear through cremation by open fire. Then it fast forwards through a number of generations, and the teachings of Casear are being fractionalized. We begin in this new time with three young chimpanees underdoing a tribe ritual where they are to seek an eagle’s egg, obtained from an eagles nest nearby. One of the young apes, Noa (played by Owen Teague) is the son of the tribe’s leader in charge of the eagles and rookery.
In short order, Noa is tasked with seeking revenge for a series of events for which he feels responsible. It is debateable about whether this is the case. There is a competing tribe of apes that was causing havoc. There was also the emergence of a mysterious human who has been seen nearby Noa on occassion. Things happen. There is a situation involving the aggressive apes, seemingly lead by a gorilla, but in fact there is another leader who has taken on the name of Caesar but has twisted the words to be something that seems to reinforce his own position as leader. There is a task which I won’t dive into further, along with the appearance of another human who is helping this leader ape.
For me, despite the references cinematically in scenes that are set, like an attack on the mute human colony in a field of high vegetation by the apes, the efforts to channel the story and feelings of the original fall flat. There is no real connection to the latest Caesar movie trolgy as well. Instead, it is a weak story with very good technical capabilties with the look and feel of the faces of the apes. There is this new human aspect which builds upon the Taylor “if there’s one talking human, then there would be another and another” from back in 1968. But again, it doesn’t translate as well in this instance. Human structures are more front and centre here with the ape population, or at least the leaders, thinking that they need to obtain it to have power or retain it. In short, I didn’t like this very much. The tie in back to the eagle tribe was weak, and it became evident pretty early on that this was the beginning of a new series of films. In other words there wasn’t much resolved in this episode. But sadly the opening volley has to be stronger to make us want to see more. Instead I don’t look ahead towards this future conflict with the humans who would appear to hold a military advantage along with a (possible) intellectual one. This movie made $237M this weekend globally, but I feel that it unfairly leveraged the goodwill from the latest trilogy while not having much new to offer. This is a pass for me.
The Miracle Club: This was a movie recommendation from a colleague. I wanted to check it out when it was mentioned that it was set in Ireland. I had hoped that there would be some quality Irish scenery. Starring Maggie Smith, Kathy Bates, Laura Linney and others it tells the tale of a small group of older people in a part of Dublin with a history and unresolved conflict.
We have different generations involved, and the death of one of the older women in the community, the mother of the Linney character brings them all together to rehash the stories from the past.
Billed as a comedy, this isn’t very funny. Instead it is filled with more drama as the women’s stories unfold and are retold. Maggie Smith is in mourning for years. Her son passed away years ago. It seems he was very much in love with the Linney character. She decided to leave many years ago to America and not return. Linney had vowed not to see her Mother again. Kathy Bates was her friend at the time. So the community has decided to try and visit a town in France (Lourdes) where in the church there is a statue of Mary which from time to time allegedly performs miracles. Within the group there is a young woman with a son who doesn’t speak. That is one of the issues that they hope to resolve.
For me, movies that try too hard to pull heart strings feel more like manipulation. There are good actresses here from which to gain a quality performance. But it is lacking in strength of plot. It all seems so very artificial. Linney has unresolved issues with her Mom, and also with the other women, principally the Smith character but also with Bates of course who is more direct in her conflict with Linney and what she has done. In the end there are tears and resolution and some apologies. I wish I could say that I enjoyed it but it didn’t really work. I cannot recommend.
Baby Reindeer: This is a new series on Netflix and is based on a true life story of the writer, star and creator Richard Gadd. Told in seven short episodes which are generally around 30 minutes, it tells the story of an aspiring comic, who is paying the bills with being a bartender. At the bar, by happenstance he assists a weeping woman who is seemingly distressed. This becomes a turning point in the direction of his life. The story becomes one of a stalker and her pray, as he tries to extricate himself from what becomes very uncomfortable and awkward situation.
Martha claims to be a lawyer. The story explores the connection between the parties and their own foibles and challenges. The audience will be surprised at various stages on the actions of these two people. They are both very flawed and make decisions that are surprising and shocking in places. Gadd plays Donny Dunn but he goes by other names as well. He makes very little and lives with the mother of a former girlfriend. He is also interested in trans-women on top of that. He is currently dating a trans-woman but he is not really sure about his own sexuality. The series is in many ways a self-exploration for Donny. After a series of odd events and a gradual intensification of stalking, choices are made which would seemingly be the opposite of what you would intend, for example after you have chosen to try and get the police involved. But then you look to take things into your own hands, running at cross purposes. Things happen. The turning point is in Episode 6. The strain of the stalking has taken its toll, and his career is stalling, as one would expect. Apparently Gadd claims that his stalker sent more than 41,071 emails, 350 hours of voicemails, 744 tweets, 46 Facebook messages and 106 pages of letters. This goes to show that the stalking was off-the-charts intense. Of course I imagine that some of this was exaggerated for dramatic effect. Even if only half of this story and events are true then it’s quite surprsing. This has been a sleeper hit for Netflix. I had been forewarned that there would be a turn in this which was surpising, and I had been waited for it, and it didn’t really come. However, I had wondered where this would go and how it would resolve itself. In the end, the resolution was unexpected. It was okay. I feel as though none of the characters were likeable. They make poor choices. But it can be a case study for those who live very different lives. Richard has created a series for himself. He isn’t overly funny and this very much reveals a great deal about himself and his demons.
Bullet Train: This 2022 movie was released on Netlfix. Riddle me this, Batman, how a movie with Brad Pitt, Sandra Bullock and Michael Shannon can be a complete failure? This is utterly a mess from beginning to end. Pitt has been put on a bullet train in Japan to obtain a suitcase. Seems simple enough. He while entering the train he is glued to his phone and having an ongoing dialog with a mystery female voice on the other side.
Of course the story isn’t so simple. There are others on the train who have different motivations even after Pitt has managed to find the suitcase quicker than one would expect. There is a bad guy (played by Shannon), he has a son, among his offspring and the suitcase is filled with his money. All the time I am sensing that someone watched Snakes on a Plane, and wants to channel a smart ass Samuel L Jackson and then also be the hitman on his “last job”. It is difficult to best describe the plot as it twists and turns onto itself as characters betray each other as circumstances change. Of course there are big fights, none of which are on a level with a John Wick or Atomic Blonde or Jason Bourne. The CGI for the more intense train related scenes especially in the last act are just over the top ridiculous. Much like this movie. I cannot over-emphasize how thankful I was when it was over. I had plenty of eye rolls. The snappy smarmy Pitt quips fall flat and the humour didn’t hit the mark. At least I was saved the theatre cost, which I sadly didn’t avoid for The Fall Guy last weekend! Next…!
Mondays With Robbie 