Initial Reaction to The Last Jedi

I watched The Last Jedi on Tuesday, and since then I’ve been looking closely at what the fans have been saying about this film. I’m surprised to hear about all the criticism this film is taking. It only seems fair then to start this review off by looking at what the general criticisms have been and my take on them, and then we’ll move on to the rest of the review. And for anyone who hasn’t seen the film, most of what I’ll talk about can be gathered from the trailers, and I’ll save any spoilers for the end and mark them off clearly, so you can read on without a nervous eye. With that said, although the trailers don’t ruin the film, I was glad I avoided them before watching the film (and the first thing I did after watching was go back and watch the trailers to see if I did in fact make the right decision).

Fan Criticisms:

·         Rian Johnson ruined the character of Luke Skywalker!!!

What’s been getting publicized is Mark Hamill’s comments about his character, the director’s vision, and the film itself. And it’s interesting because his comments actually kind of relate to how I felt while watching the movie. Hamill reportedly told Johnson (the writer and director) that he fundamentally disagreed with him on his character, but he would go along with his vision to the best of his abilities because that’s his job. Under speculation is how a jedi master from The Return of the Jedi became a cynical hermit that was on the breach of murder. Now then, everything from that previous statement is blown out of proportion and not well thought out. After 2 years of waiting what Luke will do when Rey extends her arm out to offer his lightsaber, his reply I find to be both awesome for the film, and a great way to almost undermine J. J. Abrams. Before anyone gets too upset, I’ll be coming back to the transition of Jonhson from Abrams’ The Force Awakens. But after this quick exchange, Luke exclaims that the jedi must end. If you leave it at that, well, that does sound kinda cynical and cranky; and at that point, all we still know is that Ben Solo turned evil sometime while training under Luke. I feel like fans became toddlers once their beacon of light hero suddenly has a conflicting outlook, and the toddlers tuned out the rest of the movie afterward. If you actually watch the film, I think the character motivations are explained and work well, and it presents interesting themes that result in new territory for this historic saga.

Mark Hamill later regretted his public disagreements because his goal was to make a great movie, and he believes Johnson achieved that and more. And I think he might have said that he was wrong. I was hesitant at the beginning of the movie, but this new Luke Skywalker is a deep, unique character that is played wonderfully by Hamill’s talents. We could have taken The Force Awakens approach and just ripped off like Ben Kenobi from A New Hope and have Luke be that, but this film shows that even he in his wiser years still has stuff to learn. I mean, Luke is the best part about this film. He’s awesome, Hamill’s awesome, and I’m about to start fanboying so let’s move on.

·         We still didn’t get the background stories we wanted from the big characters.

Most of the question marks apply to Supreme Leader Snoke. Who the old bloke is, where he was during the first 6 movies, the scar on his forehead, how he turned and trained Solo into Kylo Ren, yada yada. Everyone knows The Force Awakens is a copy of A New Hope, so it seemed reasonable enough to receive an Empire Strikes Back treatment from The Last Jedi. To me what we receive instead is a combination of elements from episodes 5 and 6, and even parts from the prequels, and it’s blended together and poured over a new dish entirely. This film does a great job of limiting the times it hearkens back to the previous films, and it builds on what exists so nicely. Snoke was such a boring character in 7, and with the help of the magical Andy Serkis, I think the character is worked into the story in a surprising way. It won’t answer fans’ questions about him, but who cares because I think it worked well from a narrative standpoint.

Other questions are how Maz got Luke’s lightsaber in the first place and who Rey’s parents are. For the former Maz only has a limited role in this film, and I find that to be the better. She doesn’t fit into the story all that much, so I’m fine with it. Plus, there’s like a visual novelization that explains how she got the lightsaber. Remember, The Last Jedi is 2 and a half hours long. I’m fine if we don’t get scenes of pure exposition regarding the new characters brought in from 7. Staying true to my word, all I’ll say is I’m happy with Rey’s background. I don’t want to say I knew it, but I think my primary guess is what she ends up figuring out, and it again unveils strong themes for the characters to work with.

·         Not enough Captain Phasma again!

Phasma has little more to do than have a short but relatively cool fight with Finn. It gives both of them something cool to do, but that’s basically it. I do understand how after the promise to give her a larger role went sorta unfulfilled, but I’m under more of the impression of eh, who cares. My issue with Phasma is how she managed to escape a planet that was about to explode when she was thrown into a trash compactor. She had a cool costume, but what else in the film would you want from her?

·         The humor just didn’t feel right.

I wasn’t bawling out from cracking up during this film, but there were some good jokes. Maybe it was a different kind of humor, almost to a lesser degree the kind found in the later Harry Potter films, but I wouldn’t call it an issue. Not all jokes hit their mark, and I can agree that some were placed in a couple strange moments, but I feel the ones that did work stand out more than the ones that didn’t.

And now that we’ve addressed most of what is already being talked about, time for more of my own take. I wrote my final persuasive essay for my ENGL 336 class on some themes and and issues I had with The Force Awakens, and I received an A on the paper. Just like his Star Trek films, The Force Awakens looks nice from the onset, but it doesn’t hold up under scrutiny. And Abrams loves those light flares on the camera too much. That boy really does love his flares… Anyways, there are 2 points to this. One that people will probably like, and one that they won’t. I felt that Rian Johnson took all the right measures in disregarding some of the ideas Abrams presented in the new trilogy. From the opening with Luke to the character arcs to the story progression in general, it’s a much different take. Johnson took the existing world and expanded both in scope and in technology in a great way in my view. And the second point is that since The Last Jedi is the first sequel to take place immediately after the events of its predecessor, I still would recommend watching The Force Awakens before seeing The Last Jedi in theaters (where it’s meant to be watched).

With the possible exception of Finn, I enjoy the direction all the characters took. I can’t praise Luke enough because he’s awesome in this film, and Kylo Ren exemplifies the ways Johnson takes this universe to surprising grounds, and I think it works. For as long as the film is, we don’t get that many scenes of Rey training and honing her abilities. It’s one of my criticisms, but she’s still an enjoyable character besides that. I think they went too much of a “princess power” image for Leia (I’m talking about the scene near the beginning that just looks weird), but it’s still nice to see Carrie Fisher’s final role. And to my knowledge she is getting the Heath Ledger treatment for episode 9; her family gave the studio the rights to use her likeness, but I think they’ll just avoid it altogether.

As for the new characters, they come with some of the highs and lows. I enjoyed the porgs, and those that didn’t are just part of the toddler group of fans. I loved Benicio del Toro, and he’s a godsend for this franchise. But my least favorite part of the entire film is Rose. She’s annoying, boring, and I was hoping for her death in the climax.

Unlike Maz’s cantina hideout temple whatever, the casino in this film is awesome. It highlights the great ways the universe expanded, John Williams has fun with it, and I believe Mark Hamill even does some CGI work for one of the creatures in it. I was hoping for some pod-racing, and even if those fathier horse creature things look pretty fake, they’re still fun. And the casino works well for both the cinematography that is some of the best, and the costumes that are also some of the best. Like what stuck out in my mind were the updated palace guards that surround Snoke. Those guys are cool. And I haven’t talked about Luke enough, so I need to mention that his costumes are awesome as well. The subtle switches made to Rey work well too.

Much of the tension of the film is supposed to be created by the necessity of Poe, Finn, and Rose to work out their own plan without Laura Dern and her purple hair finding out, and they must accomplish it under I believe 16 hours. I actually liked Laura’s character, but she did make things unnecessarily difficult. And people give Finn and Rose’s mission flak, but I think it serves well in both expansion and in tying in with the central themes. I must say, however, that I find the 16 hours pretty arbitrary with how long I feel the mission would actually take. I guess a time under a day creates more tension, but with many of the personal complaints I have, it’s whatever and not all that big a deal.

I had some small editing qualms with the opening sequence, and the film also suffered slightly with tonal issues in the first third of the film, but all things considered, I personally only have small gripes with the film. It’s 150 minutes long, and it will have you engaged the entire time. The climax is just awesome, and that’s where John Williams shines the most. Finn didn’t really have too much a place in this film, but I liked all the existing characters more this time around; they finally felt like their own characters with their own motivations instead of just copies of characters from A New Hope. This might be best seen by the new force connection stuff with Ren and Rey. I’m really shocked with all the backlash the film is dealing with, but I highly recommend anyone that hasn’t seen it to go watch in theaters. I’m saying it’s worth it, so obviously that’s all that matters. May the Force be with you and all that jazz, and to close out, here’s a great spoiler free clip of Kylo Ren: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KyzUG2nyf5k

And now I have thoughts on super major spoilers! Please don’t read on if you haven’t seen it and plan to, but if you have, feel free to comment if you have a different take on something or flat out disagree with me

To get it off my chest, I wish so badly that Rose had died when she “saved” Finn. I was first fine with Finn sacrificing himself, and then I was even fine with Rose stopping him because it meant her death; alas, we come to realize that she only majorly injured herself. Which, if you’re a major character not named Snoke (who got Darth Mauled—although Darth Maul technically lived but anyways), then you’ll probably have a death scare, but don’t fret! We know there’s an episode 9 and we’re still marketing to kids, so no major characters are allowed to die. Leia almost died at the beginning, but then she Supermanned her way to safety. Finn and Rose were about to be executed before BB-8 even stepped in. It was a nice save, I guess, but there something justttt a bit off seeing BB-8 drive that. Heck, for a brief moment, we think Luke is going to go full-out Obi-Wan in the climax only to have great illusion reveal only to actually die like peacefully at the end. But his whole Matrix dodges were cool, and you gotta love Hamill when he shrugs off the AT-AT blasts. Still not sure how I feel about Luke becoming one with the Force at the end, but as long as he comes back as a ghost in 9, I guess it’s fine.

The first shot of Yoda looked really ugly, but I’m not sure if it was just the angle or what, but he looked fine afterward. And boy was it great to see him. One of my favorite things that really convinced me about Johnson writing the right Luke was showing that he still had stuff he could learn from Master Yoda. The whole build something new mentality—which flows nicely through Ren as well—was a cool idea to see especially when Yoda brings the lightning down on the temple. But I did in fact notice when Finn grabs a blanket for Rose that it appears the ancient texts made their way onto the Falcon.

The 16-hour conflict deadline didn’t help Rey’s character in seeing her training pay off. That’s just not enough time from her on Jakku to save the resistance by lifting the rocks out of the way. Remember, 8 takes place immediately after 7, so she literally didn’t have any time in between movies to train. But I guess she can be the most powerful jedi we’ve ever seen or something.

If Abrams remains on as director for 9, I’m betting he brings Captain Phasma back. I’m really happy with where Johnson took all of the characters initially handed to Abrams, so hopefully they’ll remain more in the vision that Johnson took them when Abrams does 9. But at least for now Johnson still gets his own trilogy to handle. All this stupid fan backlash worries that future for me, but we’ll see. I didn’t want to say in the review above, but I felt it was so perfect the way Johnson told audiences that this would be a different Star Wars from Abrams when Luke tosses the lightsaber behind him at the beginning. I guess fans did not appreciate that “cynical” move, but I loved it.

I don’t want to say I predicted it, but I had a feeling Rey wasn’t related to any previous character. And the whole comes from nothing background works well too. So I’m happy with the parents reveal; I guess it is worth mentioning that Ren could be lying, but he seemed pretty believable to me. And Rey traveling down into the cave was a nice throwback to 5 when Luke strikes down Vader to reveal Luke underneath the mask.

Phew, well, this is easily the longest review I’ve done, but I felt there was just so much too talk about. I still have plenty more reviews coming, so here’s to hoping that returning to school soon won’t slow me down.

Wind River Indian Reservation

“We have to drive 50 miles to go 5. Welcome to Wyoming.”

            Not only is this a cool line of dialogue, but I believe it perfectly captures how much the land and the environment affect the story, pacing, and tone of Wind River. The movie starts with a girl running panicked through the wintery woods before collapsing in the night. She is then discovered frozen by Jeremy Renner, a trained tracker who knows his ways around these parts and with these people—even if he is a white outsider. It’s obvious he has some sort of troubled past that hunches on his back despite his efforts to push forward. This mysterious past motivates him to help the young FBI agent Elizabeth Olsen with the case; and coming straight from Las Vegas, it’s obvious that she needs the help of a local.

            The movie has ominous undertones of the dark side of humanity sprinkled within the glistening snow of the beautiful landscape. The serious, almost straight-forward approach to the simplistic story kept reminding me of Sicario, and I didn’t realize until afterward that it’s the same writer. This writer Taylor Sheridan, who previously was lauded for both Sicario and Hell or High Water, both writes and directs for this film. He’s definitely imitating aspects from Denis Villeneuve, and if there’s a director to imitate, he’s one of the best choices. With that said, I think the production, editing, score, and cinematography are all ultimately better than the decent directing.

            On the surface the film is about a murder investigation on an Indian reservation with an FBI agent receiving help from a skilled tracker/hunter. And except a nice turn from Jon Bernthal, there’s nothing really surprising here. Some shocking moments, but nothing surprising. But that’s rightfully not the focus of the film. And neither are the decently developed characters. Wyoming takes the starring role here. There’s enough snow in sight to freeze a polar bear, and despite how little that analogy may make sense, it’s true. And it’s used to full effect with blistering wide shots mixed with shivering closeups of the characters. The setting is an obstacle, a visual splendor, a kickstarter for the right moments in the plot, and an underlying motivation. Without Wyoming, this movie is nowhere near the same.

            As much as I praise the setting for this film, you do still have to knock the film a bit for the story. The unflinching storytelling—almost reminiscent of Prisoners—will work for some, and may be a slight turnoff for others looking for a more upbeat movie. That’s not really the issue. Olsen and Renner run into new characters, potential suspects even, and it’s pretty easy to tell from the get-go how all these encounters are going to go. To keep with the Prisoners comparison, there’s no Jake Gyllenhaal to do detective work here. And to Taylor Sheridan’s credit, he plays up the mood, setting, and characters to focus on them because he can’t rely on a plot twist filled story to keep the audience engaged.

            This film really does try to replicate a lot of the successful tension built in Sicario. It works to some degree, and the filmmakers do an admirable job trying to coverup any other shortcomings this film has. It’s not the best film, and it certainly isn’t a joyous film, but if you’re trying to think of something to watch, this is a better choice than plenty of other movies. Heck, it definitely won’t put you in a merry spirit, but it’s got plenty of snow to be a movie to watch over the break. And I’ve been watching movies left and right lately, so keep expecting reviews to come in. And as soon as I see The Last Jedi in just a couple days, I’ll be sure to put my thoughts down immediately. Until next time, yippee-kai-yay, motherf**kers.

A Colossal Disappointment

Okay, Colossal starring Anne Hathaway isn’t all that bad, but besides making a good movie review title, it was also certainly underwhelming. Written and directed by some guy named Nacho, this indie flick knows it’s a weird one. But that’s not the issue.

            Starring Anne Hathaway as the lazy, drunk Gloria, she quickly gets kicked out by her boyfriend in order to change her lifestyle around. So, she returns to her small hometown that she left all those years ago. Needing any kind of job, she ends up going to work for her old childhood friend Jason Sudeikis at his bar. The movie starts embracing its weirdness once Gloria figures out that at a certain time at a certain place at a park, she controls the movements of a giant monster thing that suddenly appears in Seoul, South Korea. As a quick side note, the homage to Godzilla of shots of little Asian kids screaming at the monster is probably my favorite thing about the movie.

            Again, when the film is full out strange with Gloria and the monster simultaneously dancing, everybody’s having a grand ol’ time. But the downfall comes with Nacho. The dialogue is nothing to write home to your sweetheart about, and the directing hinders the actors’ abilities instead of letting them go to work. But Mr. Nacho’s worst crime is the story itself. Strange, promising premise, sure, but once you realize that’s all it is, it starts to unravel.

            Gloria is a flawed character to start out with, but she basically redeems herself within the first 30 minutes. So at this point it’s like well shoot, we need some kind of conflict! And lo and behold a manufactured conflict is created. It’s not even worthy of being called a plot twist. The conflict is so forced and deprived of any motivation or intensity that you wish it went back to Gloria and the monster doing their stuff. Alas, the audience has to sit through an hour of the conflict just to wait to see how it’s resolved.

            Quite honestly, this film could have been a made as a long short film and been much better. Nacho came up with an interesting idea, but he didn’t know what to do with it. The actors are enjoyable, but even they feel lazy when they have Nacho directing them. Seeing Colossal wouldn’t be any huge mistake or anything, but just don’t expect it to have all the charms and quirks that one would to get out of an indie flick like this. All in all, this film is more like a colossal meh.

Arrival

I went and saw Blade Runner: 2049 in theaters a couple weeks back, and I’ve seen director Denis Villeneuve’s intense Sicario, strange metaphorical Enemy, and one of my personal favorites in Prisoners; however, none of these are what I decided to focus on. Although it would have easily been better to see in theaters, I just now watched last year’s alien invasion thinker Arrival.

I mention Villeneuve’s previous (and what he did right after Arrival which was Blade Runner) works because there’s something about these foreign directors and their almost technically perfect filmmaking style. I would honestly compare Villeneuve’s visceral punching, yet subtle vision-driven storytelling to that of Alejandro Inarritu (The Revenant, Babel, Birdman). If you want simply solid films built with tension and sometimes delivering thought-provoking plots, Villeneuve is a good choice.

So what is Arrival? 12 alien spacecraft vessels with strange, black, oval-like shapes touch down (well, they hover above the ground) around the globe. And one of my favorite things about the film is that it knows people don’t want 30 minutes of exposition explaining the backgrounds of the charcaters and why they’ve been chosen; Amy Adams is a skilled linguist professor, and she’s headed toward the spacecraft in under 20 minutes with an established background already setup. She is taken there by Colonel Weber (Forest Whitaker) and accompanied by theoretical something physicist with toned muscles Jeremy Renner.

One of the strongest aspects of this film—just like the visually stunning 2049—is the logical flow of events in the film. It makes sense why Adams and Renner are needed for communication, and the way they go about everything is just smart and practical. I’d prefer not describing how they interact with the aliens—even if that comprises a large bulk of the movie—but just know that the plot structure is much more sophisticated than a typical Hollywood summer flick.

For a film centering around alien contact, it is incredible to see how rooted in humanity the story is. Much of the conflict arises from trust issues from around the globe and especially China’s thinning belief that the aliens are here for peaceful reasons. Their turn towards more aggressive tactics and other countries following suit is where the pickup in pacing comes from. And it’s also where the film deviates even more from the norm. If you’re watching this film in a personalized setting like on your laptop, put some headphones in and crank that volume up. There’s a big reason why this film won an Oscar in sound editing; the effects have to be so precise when so much of the plot relies on a linguist trying to figure out how to properly communicate with mysterious aliens that are humorously named Abbott and Costello (Who’s on First reference) by Renner. And instead of having a huge, Hans Zimmer score punctuating the action, there’s a much more surreal feel from the lack of Johann Johannsson’s score (who works with Villeneuve on practically everything). For example, Adams needs to take a breath of fresh air from the stressful work environment, and as she is outside in the beautiful Montana landscape and she reflects on past exposition regarding her family, the touching flashback only has the sound of wind blowing on the tall grass that Adams is sitting in. The minimalist approach brings the audience in closer to this intimate scene, and we hang on every frame.

So this is like a masterpiece? Well, not exactly. Again, technically speaking, it’s near perfect like how Inarritu is. But that doesn’t necessarily translate to simple entertainment value on screen. These are wonderful kinds of films that can be discussed for hours, but that’s not the point of this review. To keep it relatively simple, Arrival is a good film that will keep you intrigued for its duration. But you won’t really walk out after the credits and be like, “Wow, that was great!” Actually, the effect it will have is probably closer to a desire to go get a mocha, sit by a rainy window of a wooden table with comfy, contemporary furniture at that hip coffeeshop that will have a name like The West Side Coffeeshop or Hot Coffee with Cool Friends, and you’ll just want to think about life. I will say with about 20 minutes left, the movie had me worried about what strange, complicated direction it was going to take, but then it fooled me and went somewhere else. It’s a clever, cool looking film that is logical at every turn (unlike all teenagers in horror movies)—but I’m not sure it’s enough to be classified as “one of the greats.”

And if you’d like a review on any of his other films like Blade Runner: 2049 which I think is still in theaters, I’m always open for suggestions. Just don’t tell me to watch The Human Centipede because, even if I hit rock bottom in life, I don’t think I’ll ever have an urge to watch that film. Stay thirsty, my friends, and keep on keeping on.

American Beauty

In case you don’t know, this is a beloved and treasured film for many. From those CGI rose petals to the 5 Oscars (including writing, best picture, and acting for Kevin Spacey), if it’s not being taught at writing workshops for its natural progression and deep characters, then it’s probably been suggested to you by some friend, colleague, or troll under a bridge. But in case you don’t know, I’m not many people.

            The movie starts off on a terrible foot. The producers and directors tried a bunch of different scenes to start the film off, and eventually they decided on a scene that happens much later in the film; however, it provides enough information to spark a red flag in your mind, but it’s cut short before the scene finishes—leading you to believe the movie will come to a certain outcome. It tries to ground the audience in this airy and dreamlike film into paying attention to this manufactured tension. Then again, maybe I’m just picky. That’s certainly another possibility.

            So let’s move on. What is American Beauty? Kevin Spacey plays a father who suffers a midlife crisis of sorts where he despises his fake wife, hates his dead-end job where he might be fired, and he has lost touch with the daughter that he used to be so close to. Then he meets his high school daughter’s best friend (American Pie actress Mena Suvari), and suddenly he has a goal to work towards. Oh, and he also has a couple fantasies about this girl. Known to be iconic? Yes. Did I actually care for them? No. It felt like the director loved these sequences, but he had no idea where to put them, so he just stuck them in whenever there was a lull in the plot. Side note—the movie poster is of some random model’s belly, not Mena Suvari.

            Speaking of the director, Sam Mendes was another person to win an Oscar for his film. If that name sounds familiar, it’s because he’s directed the last 2 Bond films. And he has some good moments, but it also felt like there were just so many cliched director moves in there that I grew tired of. Too many moments of characters looking into mirrors to reflect upon what kind of person they have become. I guess since this was his film debut, I’ll give him a pass. After all, he did give us Skyfall.

            What many people probably don’t realize about this film is how much of a role the neighbors play. There’s a creepy high school guy who video tapes everybody—and he would later go on to have a crazy beard as the gamemaker of The Hunger Games. Boy, what a transition Wes Bentley made. At first he just creeps out Kevin’s daughter and her best friend; but slowly, due to his relentlessness and soft nature and serial killer vibes, Thora Birch (the daughter) ends up finding him sweet and meaningful and unlike any other boy.

            Oh but we’re not through discussing these neighbors yet. Wes Bentley acts as the driving force behind encouraging Kevin Spacey to make these radical changes in his lifestyle. He acts as the carefree, free-spirited young adventurer who appears to be the only character in the film that truly enjoys life. I think it’s supposed to come across as profound, but it still just feels a lift off and creepy. But please, enjoy the pot smoking scenes between Kevin and Wes. And even though there is a divide between Kevin and his daughter, the bigger contrast comes from Wes and super strict Colonel father that believes Wes makes his money through working hard at jobs. Granted, there are some interesting surprises with the Colonel, but the characters feel too different in their personalities, too scripted. But do you want to know what threw me off the most? One of the most -ahem- profound scenes is when Wes shows Kevin’s daughter some of the stuff he has filmed over the years. This includes following a plastic bag as it drifts through the wind. And I know it’s not the movie’s fault, but while Wes is giving his huge monologue, all I could think about was Katy Perry’s “Firework.”

            I have essentially covered all the bases except for the writing. This film is basically a basis for screenwriting basics in plot, structure, and characterization. And I can honestly respect how people feel that way. It just didn’t work for me. With the characters so different from one another, this film took me more to a made-up world than something more believable, realistic, and impactful. Kevin Spacey’s progression is iconic, but his character largely evolves after his talks with creepy high schooler Wes, and that just didn’t fly in my books (not sure if that’s an actual phrase). Annette Bening plays the realtor wife, and people love the scenes of her screaming after her failure to close a real estate deal. But she played it too big. I will give her credit for one scene in particular near the end, but I can’t say anything due to company policy on spoilers. Ultimately, a lot of what I didn’t care for are actually the most iconic moments in the film. There’s plenty to discuss about this movie, so if nothing else, I can give it credit for being a conversation starter.  

Christopher Nolan's Dunkirk

It’s been over 2 months since my last review, so what better way to return than with my favorite director! The man—who not only directs but writes basically every movie as well—has wowed audiences through a memory-impaired Memento, rival magicians in The Prestige, The Dark Knight Trilogy, his imaginative and downright iconic Inception, and most recently where he took his visions to space in Interstellar. And after that last film, I found myself wondering where he could possibly go next with his next film. So my first compliment (and there will be so many more) is to take on history with the intriguing Dunkirk.

            On the surface having 400,000 British soldiers surrounded at the titular city should have been notorious for being one of Britain’s worst military defeats (only second to the entire American Revolution. USA! USA!) that allowed that square-mustachioed swastika freak to

conquer all of England; instead, the noble efforts of citizens coming to help rescue goes down as an important moral victory that the new British Prime Minister Churchill used to rally troops.

            So let’s talk about the film’s structure because in typical Nolan fashion, the simple story ends up being much more complex in the final result. You have the point of view of the infantry on the beach trying desperately to avoid dive bombers and get on a boat back home. This segment mainly follows 3 young men—2 newcomer actors and some guy named Harry Styles (Nolan compared his casting to that of Heath Ledger for The Dark Knight because everyone underestimated both). And you know what, the boy band singer pulls his dramatic weight!

            The story also frequently switches to the naval side. There, we follow Mark Rylance as a civilian determined to help along with 2 young men. This is where perspective is vital. Since they aren’t soldiers, they bring more of a human element that only elevates the relevancy of the stakes. They soon pick up a shocked Cillian Murphy, and to prevent any spoilers, I’ll stop talking here.

            Finally, we are treated to dogfights as Tom Hardy attempts to shoot down the baddies while also worried about how much fuel he has. I’ve been trying to think of a film with more impressive plane fights, and I seriously don’t think there is one. Nolan teamed back up with his Interstellar cinematographer, and these scenes are some of the most beautiful and tense sequences you will watch.

            Branagh is only a supporting character here, but I’m guessing that he has the most lines in the film. That’s not at all a criticism—I mention it to give some semblance of an idea of the amount of dialogue here. And there doesn’t need to be. With an almost constant soundtrack featuring clock ticks and frantic violins, Nolan and Hans Zimmer tell the story through visuals and tense pacing signifying the impending enemy troops breaking through.

            Nolan never cheats his audience. He hates CGI, so if he can shoot something practically, he will (think hallway fight in Inception, 5^th dimension black hole stuff in Interstellar, and many batmobile scenes in The Dark Knight). There is such an enormous sense of scope filled with extras and other practical effects that create one of the most authentic feels you will find in a historical war film. Everything from the dogfights, to all the naval ships, to the sweeping shots of soldiers on the beach will stick with you. If you have a chance to watch this film in IMAX, I can only imagine how incredible that would be. And I don’t believe it would be so primarily from the visuals, no, I’m talking sound effects. Yes, dialogue is sparse (again, compliment—heck, Nolan knew how little dialogue he was going to use, so he took a lot of influence from silent films), but the whizzing bullets, screeching planes, and terrifying bombs alone warrant the need to see this film on the big screen.

            This is not only the film of the summer, it is the film of the year. Yes, I have some bias due to my platonic love for Christopher Nolan, but I simply can’t stress how much I recommend not just watching this film, but making sure it’s watched in theaters. In preparation for this review, I was trying to think of critiques for this film. It’s hard. I had small issues with the very end of the film (don’t worry, no spoilers… For this historically accurate film…), and there can be slight confusion due to events not being portrayed chronologically, but I really can only think of one big criticism. And that would be that Nolan didn’t consider me for a part in his film! Alas, I will appear in one of his films, mark my words.

            Coming up, I recently watched War for the Planet of the Apes, so we take a look at that Andy Serkis trilogy. Might also rank The Hunger Games Trilogy (that’s actually 4 films). Or literally anything else. We’ll just have to see, so stay tuned, folks.

Deus Ex Machina

Today is Domhnall Gleeson’s birthday. If you have no idea who I’m talking about, he is a typical red-haired Irishman. You probably know him as Nazi-wannabe villain in Star Wars Episode VII: The Force Awakens, or from his role as the leader of Leo and Tom’s group in The Revenant. Heck, you may even know that he played one of the many Weasleys in Harry Potter. But for tonight, we look at his starring role in the super slick and smart sci-fi gem Ex Machina.

            This film was the directorial debut for Alex Garland who garnered attention for writing 28 Days Later and Sunshine (and even Dredd). The movie really didn’t get much love at the box office (unlike that fast-movie car franchise), but it rightfully received some Golden Globe nominations for the acting. Even more impressively, it beat out films like Star Wars, The Revenant, and Mad Max for the Oscar for best visual effects. When you look at the aforementioned movies and see their 100 + million dollar budgets, it only makes it all the more impressive that Ex Machina won on a budget of 15 mil.

            All this talk about the awards and talented film crew is fine, but what really matters is what happens when you sit down (you can stand or squat if you want, I’ll only slightly judge you) and actually watch the film.

            This film is 1 hour 57 minutes long. Why should you care? Well, if writer/director Garland wanted to provide crummy backstory and exposition at the beginning, he very well could have. Lucky for us, this man understands story structure and character arcs, and this understanding is why this movie is under 2 hours. So what is the story? Gleeson plays Caleb, a young programmer chosen to visit the remote house of the company’s CEO Nathan (this takes up probably the first 2 minutes—keeps the pace going, the mystery of the story intact, and the ability to fully develop the characters through their actions in the film itself). Nathan, played by Oscar Isaac who was with Gleeson in Star Wars playing Poe (and he’s been in numerous other hits), introduces Caleb to Ava. Ava is a female AI, and Nathan wants to see if she could pass the Turing test, using Caleb as the human element. Very briefly, this test basically has a human interacting with a cyborg/AI/robot. If the human can’t tell that the person they’re talking to isn’t actually human, then the AI passed the test.

            The film essentially consists of 2 elements: Caleb and Nathan’s interactions, and Caleb and Ava’s interactions. Nathan is a peculiar, eccentric genius with a love of women and alcohol, and Caleb is much more innocent and reserved. The scenes with Caleb and Nathan function in many ways; for example, the slightest of foreshadowing is given through their allusions to classic mythology, literature, and philosophy. Also, the talks switch between being inside and out. And both the technologically enhanced house (unlike some sci-fi films, all the futuristic stuff is logically placed and actually is put to practical use) and the isolated surroundings are beautiful in stark, contrasting ways. The house has the slick, clean white look with vibrant, almost neon red and blue lights used throughout; and the world outside takes us away from any claustrophobia and allows the audience to relax in the lush greens, the flowing streams, and the warming sunlight. And in case you started getting lost in all of my explanations, above all, Caleb and Nathan’s conversations are fun, well-written, and smart.

            When the 2 boys of the house are done talking, it’s time to get down to business. Alicia Vikander plays Ava, and her performance is breath-taking. As much as I enjoy Scarlett Johansson, as far as anything related to cyborgs are concerned, Vikander’s performance takes the artificial cake. Caleb and Ava’s sessions start off basic, but as the questions become more relevant, layers upon layers are pulled back—both on an intellectual level and an emotional one. Does Ava’s responses constitute as her consciousness replying? Sorry, ya spoilbrats, you’ll have to watch the film for that answer. And it’s an answer well worth watching for.

            The visuals are outstanding, the acting is superb, and the story structure is brilliant. It all adds up to one of the smarter and better films you watch with an ending that will probably surprise you (for better or worse). Heck, nerdy little me even applauds this movie's sound mixing. Seriously, pay attention any time Ava moves her body-- that noise alone is synthetic supremeness. We’ve seen the dumbed down side of robotics in I, Robot, and we’ve seen cyborgs integrated well in the Alien franchise. What we get in Ex Machina is the cyborg we didn’t know we needed. It’s simply an engaging and interesting movie in general, and for one that flew past the radar of nearly everyone in its theatrical release, it’s high quality stuff. Check it out. And then check out the other films I mentioned in this review. I named a whole bunch of great films. Except that stupid franchise that has Vin Diesel saying “I don’t have friends… I’ve got… family.” Take my advice, Vin. Stick to lines like “Superman” and “I am Groot.”

Cloverfield and its Sorta Kinda Not Really Sequel

Following the release of The Blair Witch Product, there was a brief lifespan where found footage films were new and hip. This technique takes the perspective of a character of the film deciding to film everything going on, and it’s through this lens that the audience sees. This is the style of Cloverfield—it’s horror like the low-budget witch hunt film above, but this is all about normal young adults living in New York that get caught up in an attack from a giant monster thing.

            If you’re sitting there thinking that a blend of found footage and giant monster flick sounds like something that belongs on the SyFy channel, don’t discredit it immediately. Using both the strength of a strong marketing campaign before the release of the film and the fact that J. J. Abrams was a producer, this movie gained traction.

            Besides being found footage, the film is known for one other interesting aspect. The plot revolves around an attack from a giant monster, and you get glimpses throughout the film, but you don’t get a good look at it. And this is by design to keep the audience grounded in the characters’ perspectives. Basically, a lot of the film rides on it being found footage. So does it work? Well, I will say that there’s a bunch of running around that causes shaky camerawork to a nauseating effect. And I’m sure just with that witch in the forest film, the handheld cam is supposed to entice more suspense and horror from the film. There’s a couple moments from the film where I thought to myself “Huh, that’s pretty cool.”… But that’s it. There’s a scene in a subway tunnel obviously meant to be scary, but I really don’t think the movie was scary.

            Ultimately, it’s a monster flick with boring characters trying to upgrade itself with a fad. I guess I enjoyed watching the movie, but it held no impact on me otherwise. Well, that’s not totally true because the ending is the most preventable ending I have ever seen. You know what’s going to happen a minute (this is actually a long time when you know what I'm talking about) before it actually happens, and it makes you realize how dumb either the characters were or the screenwriters were because they needed more tension at the end. It’s stupid and dumb and I don’t like it.

            In the words of J. J. Abrams, let’ move on to the blood relative movie! Let’s move on to the movie that wasn’t even written in the same universe until Abrams’ production company bought it and reworked like probably a page worth of material to make it tie in to Cloverfield! That’s right. I’m talking about 10 Cloverfield Lane. After a car accident near Lake Charles I think, Michelle (Mary Elizabeth Winstead) is “rescued” by Howard (John Goodman) and taken to his bunker next to his farmhouse where she also meets Emmett (John Gallagher, Jr.) who had a track scholarship to Louisiana Tech but decided not to go because he thought he was too dumb. Which he really probably is. The bunker they’re in is fully equipped and prepared for an apocalyptic situation that Michelle is skeptical about but Howard is adamant towards; it’s a good thing it’s well equipped, too, because we spend the majority of this film in this bunker listening to Howard’s eclectic taste in music and watching fictional films like Cannibal Airlines.

            Just to be clear, this film doesn’t use the found footage format. And that’s a good thing for this film. But the camerawork is not what I’m concerned with here. I always talk about story and characters, but this film has a unique situation on how these 2 critical elements are intertwined with each other and the success and failure of each.

            I wouldn’t say the characters are boring like they are from the previous film. You get your surface characters and they each tell stories designed to make you care about them more later in the film and whatnot. They aren’t poorly written, but I didn’t fall in love with anyone—but character arcs are so critical in a confined movie like this with 3 principal characters. Never really cared about Michelle—I always found her rash and quick to jump to conclusions. Emmett tries to bring humor, and I laughed on occasion, but he is a bit more of a filler character. The interesting one is Howard. John Goodman is downright incredible. He’s supposed to be a character that wavers between moral father figure and possible pervert kidnapper. And I’ll explain some of the problems with this from the story perspective in just a bit, but the characterization itself by Goodman is scene-stealing.

            I have multiple problems with the story, so let’s see how much I can get out. This movie doesn’t know what it wants to be. It hints at a drama focused on the characters, but then it’s like the movie thinks to itself, “Wait a minute, I’m supposed to be a horror film!” and then makes characters think or act irrationally. Like when we first meet Howard, he is this mysterious character that doesn’t explain anything and only leaves a plate of food while Michelle is tied up to her mattress, so this makes her jump to the conclusion that he kidnapped her. I swear in the first 20 minutes Michelle stabs Howard and hits him over the head with a bottle; the very following scenes to both of these incidents is Howard explaining his backstory which provides rationale as to the way he acted. It’s plot convenience for the sake of unnecessary tension, and I will have none of it!

            But the plot convenience is not the biggest insult this movie makes. That would be relating itself to Cloverfield. So much of this move depends on Michelle believing that the air outside will kill her just because Howard said so. That’s an interesting idea that could make any plot reveal interesting if it weren’t for the fact that anyone who knows anything about the previous film will know exactly what the situation is exactly like. This also means that we know the inevitable. What I mean by this—and if you consider this a spoiler, then you don’t watch movies enough and probably won’t ever see this film anyways—is that we’re going to see the outside at some point and there’s going to be monsters. That only leaves the question throughout the film of how we end up outside. And that’s a much less interesting question when the best character is the sort of antagonist.

            Probably the biggest similarity between these 2 films is the fact that I didn’t like the endings. You can give me somewhat valid reasons for the monsters in 10 Cloverfield Lane, but I still see a huge disconnect between those things and the giant creature from the first film. And I just think the ending is stupid. If you want me to give a spoiler reason why, feel free to ask me about it. Because it’s also stupid and dumb. Not as atrocious as the garbage ending from the first film, but still pretty offensive.

The story creates innate flaws within Goodman’s character, but he is talented enough to overcome these to give a still excellent performance. Oh, and this is the first film directed by Dan Trachtenberg. For a first outing, I’d say he gives pretty strong directing, and that’s no small feat with a film like this. If you’re still curious about these 2 films, I have 2 recommendations. If you’re bored one night, at the very least you can call these films somewhat enjoyable. Or if you are simply curious at the outcome of both films, look up a quick summary. That might bring as much joy as actually watching the films. 

Ghost in the Shell

If I were to summarize my opinion of this movie to a hypothetical audience, I’d tell them that Ghost in the Shell essentially has 3 acts: a promising start, a flat middle act, and then a somewhat redemptive final act. If you’ve read any other reviews for this film, you know that the critics would flip flop what I said about the second and third acts. And critics are idiots, so that’s why I’m here.

*Before I go any further, I need to put in this sidenote. I won’t be addressing the controversy of this film about whitewashing for 3 reasons. 1) It’s a claim made my idiots that made up their minds about the film well before it ever reached theaters. B) It’s actually a really easy claim to refute and prove wrong. And 4) I’m simply here to discuss the merits of this film and give my recommendation on whether you should watch it or not or hopefully provide a different way of seeing the movie if you already watched it.*

            As I said from the beginning, this movie has a strong start. There’s a bit of reading at the beginning to introduce cybernetics—basically telling you to be prepared for cyborgs; after that, however, it jumps right into this futuristic world without trying to explain things too much. It wants the audience to accept what’s happening and learn as the movie goes along. It’s a smart approach that really elevates this film. What obviously also stands out are the visuals. But it’s not just that you get a shot of the futuristic Japan and all the digital billboards and upgraded technologies that gives this movie its impressive visuals, it’s the fact that they make sense. When Section 9 (all you really need to know is that Scarlett Johansson is a really powerful cyborg with a human brain and she’s working for a company that built her, and her and her coworkers are part of Section 9) analyzes a crime scene using virtual red laser technology, it feels like an approach that is both convenient and useful—something that isn’t always seen by the overuse of holograms in other films. Throughout the movie, ScarJo experiences what are called glitches when going through the real world because it’s like repressed memories from her life as a human coming to the forefront. I’ll discuss the merits of the plot later, but I added it in here because the glitches are a clever way to have shots of the real world and incorporate visuals directly into it, and they are one of the more intriguing mysteries of the film.

            The biggest issue of Ghost in the Shell is how one-note it gets. The digitalness of everything is really cool at first, but it loses a little appeal after awhile. What ends up being criminal in this film is the score and background noise. It’s the same droning sound the entire time, and it takes its toll on you. And in the middle is where a lot of exposition is given with a “twist” as to whom the actual villain is. The thing about it is that lots of the characters are essentially cyborgs, so there isn’t a whole lot of inflection in their voices. When you pair cyborg voices with the annoying score, it creates a muddled middle where you should paying the most attention but instead are at your most distracted.

            The third act is able to pick itself back up a bit. I’ll talk about movie comparisons later, but this is really where the movie tries to find its most humanity and philosophy. Although it doesn’t stand up to the deep thinking of other films, it’s still more refreshing from all the exposition and subpar story development from the middle act. Oh, and don’t expect the most tension or action from the climax; the action is there, but it’s just a by-the-numbers climax scene.

            Inevitably, this film is going to draw comparisons to Blade Runner—emphasis is on the humanity behind the cyborgs and not the action itself. The difference is that while Blade Runner cleverly toys with morality and what it means to be human; Ghost in the Shell feels more like an empty shell than anything else. The ideas are presented, but it gets lost through the high budget effects. There’s nothing wrong with having a large budget, but if characters aren’t properly developed, it nulls any meaning. This issue is more apparent in this film due to the poor writing. In particular, a couple one-liners are thrown around that are groan worthy ("I wasn't built to dance!"). Overall, the ScarJo main character Major is fine, and I have no issue with her human’s background story that is gradually revealed; my problem comes with both the supposed and actual villain. Neither of these characters are well-written, and they both have motivations and arcs anybody who has seen a movie can guess right from the start. The worst offense Ghost in the Shell makes is one that will probably be overlooked by most.  It succeeds on many levels of creating an interesting world; however, this world is populated by dull characters. There isn’t a distinction made on why we should pay attention to who is a cyborg, who has cybernetics, and who is purely human. It doesn’t really matter in the grand scheme of things, so why should we care? And the answer is that we don’t really care, and we won’t be very compelled to hold any discussion of this film after watching it. This movie isn’t a bad watch—in fact I kinda liked it—but there are so many obvious mistakes that could’ve easily been fixed that makes me upset by the final product. Oh, and to end on a properly irrelevant matter, if you’re like me (which you most likely aren’t), then you would’ve noticed that the Asian guy from The Dark Knight that’s all like “As I said, I’m good with numbers” makes an appearance in this film. 

Give Twilight Another Chance

Having never read the books, I’ve always found it easier to be a fan of this series. What truly works for this film is the acting. Seriously, hear me out. Yes, I admit, you can get more emotions out of emojis, but there’s something about the subtlety in the facial expressions. It gets to the point where you’re on the edge of your seat in anticipation of the next time you might see a hint that Edward’s face will give a twitch.

            I guess you could call me a mix of a traditionalist and an innovator. So if you’re going to give me vampires, you better respect their origins while updating them to keep things fresh. Which is exactly what Twilight does! Never before have I been so enthralled by such a twist that has vampires sparkle in sunlight.

            Now if you’re like me, you’re a bit bored of Twilight already. So let’s take a break and talk about something more interesting. Baseball season starts in just a couple days! I think I’ll take this time to help people out by giving pro tips on how to swing a bat at a baseball. The most important aspect isn’t the swing itself; rather, it’s the approach to the plate. You gotta have the right walk-up song, so here are a couple of my top picks: “Stuck in the Middle With You,” “Tik Tok,” “Pumped Up Kicks,” “Can’t Stop the Feeling,” “Yesterday,” “Theme from Schindler’s List,” “Strangers in the Night,” and my personal favorite “La Marseillaise.” Before stepping into the batter’s box, retighten your batting gloves, spit into your right hand, then left hand (order is very important), and rub them together. Kick the bat with your toes, step into the box, and touch the plate with your bat. Now that you’re all set to hit a 3 pointer, let’s go over the basics of the swing. If you’re a righty, right hand goes on bottom with left hand over it. If you’re a leftie, it doesn’t matter because you’re striking out. Now if you can imagine a lumberjack chopping wood, it’s the exact same swinging motion. I think you’re good to go!

            Anyways, Twilight stars Jennifer Lawrence as Tris and the entire cast of Glee for the supporting roles. In a shocking and controversial move, the studio didn’t hire a director because they had complete faith in the cast to give it their all. Rumor has it that due to budget cuts, one-third of the film was shot on the iPhone 4. Definitely a bold strategy, Cotton.

            The film was almost completed in post-production, but due to unforeseen circumstances, the editor had a heart attack and died. The scenes he wasn’t able to cut made it to the final film, drawing praise for the avante-garde plot structure. After the red carpet premiere, Taylor Lautner’s mom herself gave the film a raving 3 ½ stars, stating, “Obviously, this movie is groundbreaking. I would have given it 4 stars, but like I always tell my son, there’s always room for improvement.” Reportedly, after hearing this review, Taylor Lautner went back to gym to hit the shake weights—convinced the half-star loss was due to his underwhelming physique.

            If you’re looking for a jolly good time, going to see a movie is the perfect way to do so. I’m not saying this movie needs to be Twilight, but if it is, watching at 9:30 p.m.  on a Saturday night by yourself cuddled in a snuggie is definitely the ideal way to maximize viewing pleasure.

The Ides of March

It’s that time of year again. That’s right, today is the day you can stab your Caesar salad with a fork and not feel guilty about it. It’s also the name of the movie George Clooney wrote, directed, and acted in. It’s based off the off-Broadway Farragut North. You may have known that it stars Ryan Gosling, but you might not have known that it was originally set to star Leo Dicaprio; he dropped out, but he remained on as executive producer.

            What seems to be one of the most relevant questions of today is would you take Ryan Reynolds or Ryan Gosling? Especially after Deadpool most say Reynolds in a heartbeat. Personally, I’ve been more of a fan of Gosling ever since Drive. So I was excited about this movie. I also remembered that it would have Philip Seymour Hoffman (who I will abbreviate as PSH) which can only ever be a benefit, and the film was rounded out by the likes of Jeffrey Wright and Paul Giamatti. Right off the back this movie is built to be a dramatic powerhouse aiming at the Oscars.

            Ryan Gosling plays Stephen, a man just under the campaign manager (PSH) for George Clooney’s democratic campaign in the primaries; the political aspect focuses on needing the delegates from Ohio’s primary as the ticket to the White House. Giamatti comes in as the rival campaign manager, and Wright is a representative who has dropped out but has plenty of delegates and support to give to the candidate that promises him a cabinet post. All of this is good, smart stuff that is just asking to have a plot twist happen somewhere. You can just feel that there’s going to be some kind of punch that drives the film through.

            But it totally falls flat. Gosling plays an optimistic staff worker who sees the best in his candidate, but as the movie goes on, he starts seeing the darker side of politics. This eventual darker turn is supposed to work well; however, without giving away any spoilers, the movie has a plot twist about an hour in and sticks with it through the remainder of the film. The problem is how basic the twist is. It feels like such a cop out. There’s a bunch of political intrigue to dive into, but instead the movie takes a clichéd personal route where the characters all relate to each other in some “meaningful” way to tie it all up. And it’s just lame. It’s formulaic, and anyone who watches movies will be neither surprised nor interested in the plot twist.

            Okay, so the story and intensity let me down. “How about the acting?” you may ask. Well, good question, devoted readers. Overall, Gosling’s character is pretty simple. It doesn’t call for him to really do much besides be charismatic in the first half and darker in the second. It’s a good performance, but there isn’t much depth. Clooney limits his own screen time to focus on the directing, but what we do see of his character is pretty interesting. Again, the twist is lame, but that doesn’t take away from his performance. Giamatti and Wright are always strong supporting characters. The real hero is PSH. I swear, this late actor was the actor of our generation. He has a very distinguished style in his acting, but every single character he has in every movie he does he makes his own. They’re all different, interesting, and scene-stealing.  It seriously hurts knowing that he died well before his time was due, but every movie I’ve watched with him is only ever elevated by his performance. The same goes for this movie. He may not carry the same kind of gravitas you see with A list actors, but the subtlety in his expressions and vocals is some of the greatest work I have ever seen. This by far isn't his best film, but it still brings me so much join watching PSH do his work.

            Honestly, I’d say stay away from this film. It’s not a drama that will bore you by any means, but it won’t have any effect on you at all. Except maybe that there’s dirt in every profession, there isn’t really a message to take away, and there was zero intensity necessary to make a true drama work. And it all stems from the plot twist an hour into the film. It’s a shame to see a mistake like that basically ruin a decent film. I knew I should’ve watched Beauty and the Beast instead of this film…

Wick, John

January was a rather slow month for movies. Nevertheless, yesterday marked the release of John Wick Chapter 2, The Lego Batman Movie, and all the shades of everyone’s favorite color. So tonight we take a look at John Wick, the surprising hit of an action flick from a couple years ago.

            Keanu Reeves will always be known for The Matrix, and this movie reunites him with his stunt double from those films who takes a shot in the director's chair. The film basically has 2 directors (and one is scheduled to direct Deadpool 2 so there’s that), and since both come from a background of doing stunts from dozens of your favorite action movies, this film gets boiled down to its essence. They aren’t going to try wowing you with a special plot; no, they’re going to deliver high-octane action. And really it’s quite successful.

            Keanu did some major training for the highly choreographed scenes and performs most of his own stunts, and the result pays off. Expect a high body count, and expect many of them to have some really cool kill shots. This film knows its goal is to entertain with cool, quick action, and that’s exactly what it does.

            I will say, however, one of the best and worst parts comes from the beginning. The film honestly almost takes an Up approach of giving the audience all the exposition it needs in a small time without much dialogue at all. And I love that. But it—along with just a few action moments—gets heavy-handed. Like at one point Keanu is grabbing all his guns and gearing up, and the movie blares a rocking song about guns and killing and it feels a bit too obvious.

            I wasn’t going to talk about the plot because, well, who cares for this film, but it leads to my other critique. The film gets a nice supporting role from Willem Dafoe and gives way too little screen time to John Leguizamo, but the plot gets going after a mob boss’s son steals from John Wick and leaves him for dead. This son, Iosef, is annoyingly stereotypical. He’s brash, arrogant, and above all else, completely inept. He fits the bill of all the stereotypes, and it just makes you wonder how long it will take John Keanu Reeves Wick to hunt him down.

            It’s been awhile since an action film has had this much style to it. It overcomes typical shortcomings by thoroughly delivering in well-executed action scenes. And it really makes me want to go to the theaters and watch the sequel. If you do go to the movies, just please don’t see the darker shades of grey. Like why would you do that to yourself?

Forget it, Jacob. It's Chinatown.

I was trying to find an excuse to review this movie, and the Chinese New Year is close enough for me. What we have here today is truly a powerhouse of a film. Chinatown is a drama about a private investigator Jake (Jack Nicholson) who gets hired by a Mrs. Evelyn Mulwray (Faye Dunaway) because she believes her husband is having an affair. Jake quickly gets to work, but when Mr. Mulwray turns up dead and Evelyn not possibly actually being Evelyn, the movie starts messing with you in the best possible way.

            Before I discuss anything further, I have to talk about the script. It’s truly amazing just how good the writing is. It kills me not to discuss any spoilers, and I won’t, but you learn just the right amount of details from every scene as the depth to the complexity of the story and the characters slowly unwinds in metaphorical wonder. If there aren’t classes that already do this, then scriptwriting classes should always point to this movie when discussing how to essentially write a perfect script. No joke, as experienced of a writer I am, this script is almost as well-written as these reviews.

            Anyways, Roman Polanski directs this film, and one of his most notable contributions is the tone. The dude had a rough past, especially with where they shot the film, and admittedly this is a formula that does not equal out to a rainbow and smiles kind of movie. And this has got to be the most normal character Jack Nicholson has ever played, and the best thing to say is that it’s just a joy to watch an actor take the protagonist and make it his own. The supporting cast shines—I shouldn’t even have to say it, but this obviously includes the brilliantly complex performance from Faye Dunaway.

            Obviously, the most famous line is the one I reference in the title; however, that’s not actually my favorite line of the film. What’s so much fun is that I actually can’t tell you what it is because it’d be too much of a spoiler, so all I will say is that the line is a big reveal I did not by any means expect in the latter half of the movie. It’s some deep subject matter, and I say with a smirk that you have to watch the film to understand what I’m talking about.

            I understand that some movies I review and recommend will not exactly put you in a good mood after watching them… And yeah, this movie isn’t different. But if you’re prepared for a slow-burner that will shock and entertain you (but not put a smile on your face), then watch Chinatown. Well, that’s all from me. Now that you’ve read this review, go out and celebrate with your roosters.