Lights Out

Gillipedia Official Rating: Mediocrity at its finest

          I remember this film being released right around the same time as Don’t Breathe. It’s this latter film that really made waves, but I always thought the concept of Lights Out was just so good. Like with The Departed, It Follows, and In Time, there are just some films that start off with really cool ideas. And while those first two films follow through on their execution, I would file Lights Out near In Time in a folder labelled “Wasted Potential.” 

          Lights Out follows a young boy and his older sister as they deal with their depressed mother trapped by some sort of entity that has such an extreme sensitivity to light that it only can be seen in the dark. A horror villain that can only hurt you in the dark brings about memories of A Nightmare on Elm Street where the danger really only feels tangible at night. But with unlikable characters determined to make the oft-parodied horror film sin of making dumb decisions, this film loses interest fast and doesn’t make up enough ground to recover fully.

          One thing I quickly want to give credit for is not making the villain totally supernatural. They try to explain some science to justify the “demon’s” appearance, which is laughable, but it’s nice that this isn’t simply some evil being that toys with the important characters until the final twenty minutes of the film. I won’t give more away about the backstory, but it’s not anything all too interesting ultimately.

          Produced by horror moneymaker James Wan, this film starts off with the stepdad of the main characters being -surprise- killed by our dark demon. Yes, we learn that he was trying to research how to help the mother (played by Maria Bello), but the stepdad starts the trend of bad decisions, so his death doesn’t affect us much. The biggest star here is the older sister played by Teresa Palmer, and while she redeems herself somewhat later on, she starts off super cliched and unlikable—but at least her boyfriend is consistent throughout.

          Outside of a decent action scene where the demon comes in and out against the backdrop of a flashing neon sign, this film is extremely dull early on. The gist is that the younger brother starts seeing the demon and can’t get much sleep, and this causes friction between the sister and the mother. The mystery of the demon isn’t compelling, and since there’s only the core group of characters to deal with, the stakes don’t feel very high for the middle chunk of the film.

          There’s some cool shots that can mostly be seen from the trailer, but there’s not much outside of that. The climax is a pretty entertaining ride; however, two cops come to help out and my goodness. It’s the most frustrated I’ve been with movie characters in quite some time. The characters are yelling to the cops all kind of useful information like telling them to use their flashlights, and the cops completely ignore them, don’t say a word, and blindly head into the dark for easy kills. Like, okay, the film needed a boost in death count, but these movie cops are some of the absolute worst.

          Don’t Breathe isn’t the best horror film out there, but there’s a reason why it was more talked about. Lights Out still made great money off its modest budget and PG-13 rating, but that also brings about the point that it’s tame in many regards. You can still be atmospheric and creepy like Insidious or go all-in on the jump scares like The Woman in Black, but Lights Out doesn’t really embrace much at all. It’s not all clichés, but the parts that are clichés are frustrating and close to unforgivable. If you want some scary fun, the best movie that comes to mind of recent memory is Crawl.

 

In Brief:

• I’ll withhold my thoughts on Birds of Prey for now in case I do a review, but what you need to know here is that it ain’t that good. And I was rooting for it to be good.
• Richard Jewell is well-acted, Kathy Bates in particular, but it also just doesn’t have quite enough story to stay compelling all the way through. But this talkie was pretty good.
• The Way Back is really good and that much more compelling knowing Ben Affleck’s personal connection with the story. This has basketball, but this is a movie about addiction and recovery.
• I watched Side Effects from way back and have very mixed feelings over it. I think it goes one twist too far, but Rooney Mara is great.
• Jojo Rabbit has some funny moments, but they’re much fewer and far between than I would expect from a Taika Waititi film. But very reminiscent of Moonrise Kingdom.

Water for Elephants

 

Gillipedia Official Rating: Robert Pattinson can’t escape love triangles

          In the midst of Team Edward vs. Team Jacob fever, Robert Pattinson decided to bat for both teams by playing Jacob Jankowski in the circus film Water for Elephants. There’s elements of the farm work from films like Days of Heaven and Of Mice and Men early on, but the film takes a more fantastical approach about halfway through once the animals become the stars of the show. There’s some impressive filmmaking shots and even good acting on display, but the driving force becomes the complicated nature of the relationship among Pattinson, sweetheart Reese Witherspoon, and Christoph Waltz who only knows how to switch gears between kind-hearted and intense.

          After his humble parents die in a car crash, Pattinson abandons veterinary law and wanders along without a goal or purpose in sight. He boards a passing train in the dead of the night only to realize that it’s the train carrying all the workers for Waltz’s Benzini Bros. travelling circus company. Instead of being thrown off, old-timer Camel sees Pattinson’s potential and finds work for him. It doesn’t take long before he locks eyes with Witherspoon before being warned about crossing Waltz and his wife. Pattinson takes a liking to the whole show, but he notices that one of the current star horses has a disease in its hoof and will have to be put down. In need of a new starring act to drive ticket sales, Waltz buys an elephant and puts Pattinson in charge of its caretaking.

          In the circus are some side acts like the heaviest woman and tattooed lady, but there’s animals like lions that make an appearance. Anytime the movie has the introverted Pattinson interacting with these animals is when the film is at its best. The film also has the benefit of likable side characters to support the main three stars. What the film tends to lack is compelling drama or real stakes. Pattinson’s rise through the circus ranks is quick, and it has to balance developing a love story around turning Waltz into a formidable antagonist. And as he has shown multiple times in his career, Waltz knows how to turn on the evil. But the circus and the Waltz and the pleasant 30s setting all sit in the nosebleeds for Pattinson and Witherspoon.

          As far as love triangles go, this isn’t terrible. I mean, it’s not what I was rooting for in this movie, but it’s well-crafted for what it is. And there’s plenty of smirk and jaw line from Pattinson to keep the motors running.

          Water for Elephants will most likely leave my mind in under a week, but it’s also one of those films after watching where you shrug and remark, “Yeah that was good.” I wouldn’t gawk at anyone for watching this movie, but I might give a side eye if someone suggests that this is Pattinson’s best work—especially with how busy he’s been taking challenging and left field roles in a desperate plea to put his shiny vampire days behind him. He’s exchanging his fangs for a cowl in the upcoming The Batman next year, and I have cautiously high hopes for that film. Now to go watch him in Tenet as soon as that is available to me in a theater nearby.

          Oh, and if you’re wanting a film with Waltz as the villain, please watch either Inglorious Basterds or Django Unchained.

 

In Brief:

• Wakanda Forever.

The 15:17 to Paris Works as a Tribute but Not as a Film

         Gillipedia Official Rating: Thought: Movies are better with actors

    The bravery of the three young men in this film in a dire, unexpected, and terrible event is unendingly commendable. They rightfully received high honors and awards from both the French and Americans. Instead of going down as a tragic terrorist attack, the world knows the events that took place on an Amsterdam train headed to Paris as a tale of heroism from some regular guys trying to do the right thing. But friends, coworkers, and potential lovers, this is the Gillipedia. We critique a film based on merits, and it brings no joy to this Clint Eastwood fan to say that The 15:17 to Paris is not a good movie.

          For those that somehow missed this event or need a refresher, three American guys were on a train to France, enjoying a vacation. A terrorist was strapped with three-hundred rounds of ammunition ready to wreak havoc upon the people aboard. With quick thinking and a steadfast mentality, the Americans tackled and subdued the terrorist, and he was arrested when the train reached its destination. It’s the kind of story that grabs headlines and brings forth a feeling of togetherness amidst difficult times. Not only was it decided to make a movie out of the event, but the real three Americans were cast to play themselves.

          Let’s start with the potential of the film. Because it’s not like the film is in bad taste or controversial for wrong reasons. The theme here is all about how people grow up and want to help others, but they struggle to find real meaning to their lives; sometimes the biggest moments in life are those that you don’t see coming. But when the moment comes, you’re ready for it, and you do the right thing.

          Like I said, the message isn’t bad. But so many factors come into play that work its way into creating what becomes this mess. Since the horrific incident on the train is so quick, that means you need to fill the runtime with a bunch of other scenes for a complete film. The train scene is the centerpiece of the film, but the movie has to build up to get to it.

          And there are a couple things that actually work with this. For instance, of the three guys, the main character is Spencer Stone—a guy who tries and fails at most of his ambitions like basketball and football. He joins the Air Force, but he isn’t able to apply for the position that he is really drawn to. During his training he’s taught about how to treat wounds with whatever you’ve got on hand, and that comes into play in a subtle enough way on the train. The driving force of what put Spencer where he was at that moment in time in life is framed well, and the cool touch of Eastwood’s directing can be felt.

          So where’s the problem? The film starts off pretty inconspicuously as it follows the three guys, Spencer, Alex, and Anthony, as they cause trouble in school and bond as friends. Some of the best things about the film are in the supporting cast of real actors that play the moms of Spencer and Alex, Jenna Fischer and Judy Greer, and Tony Hale in a brief role as a gym coach. Anyways, after 15 minutes of childhood, the film follows Spencer as he joins the Air Force. He shows that he has a passion for the work that’s done, but he continues to mess up. After 40 minutes of this, Spencer gets in touch with Alex and Anthony about traveling all over Europe.

          If you haven’t put the pieces together yet, that’s okay. Let’s break this down. The climax on the train is well put together if still brief, so the film has to fill up a running time of 90 minutes, and it really struggles to drag it out. Having the bulk of your film be about backstory and then contemplating and enjoying life across Europe isn’t necessarily a recipe for disaster. Films like Before Sunrise spend the entire film talking about life while the two main characters walk around pretty locales. The thing is, Before Sunrise starred Ethan Hawke. When there’s only one action scene, a film is carried by the actors saying the dialogue in the rest of the scenes. And the traveling around Europe scenes have neither compelling dialogue, nor the strong actors required to carry the scenes.

          The guys try their best to act. They really do. But their delivery is flat, and they clearly don’t have training on how to inflect and vary the way they speak. It’s compensated a little by the naturalistic approach to dialogue, but I’m really stretching when I say it's compensated. There’s also a lot of times where Spencer walks across a room, and his motion is just too robotic and rehearsed. Instead of making scenes flow together, it simply reminds me of how stiff the acting is and takes me out of the experience. It’s not the worst thing I’ve ever seen, but it’s also not very entertaining either.

          The whole concept of the film is to go as naturalistic as possible. The locations are real, the story is real, and hey! The actors are real too! There’s a minimal amount of music, and the guys talk to each other like how they normally would. Even the climax on the train doesn’t feature music to put the audience right there with the guys in the throng of this crazy, spur-of-the-moment event. But it doesn’t come together.

          Three things needed to have happened to help this film out. First, and most obviously, cast real actors. It’s awesome that they wanted to honor these guys by letting them star in their own film, but it really brings down the experience. Second, the story needs to be overhauled. There’s way too many scenes in the Air Force and traveling around Europe that don’t lead anywhere or conclude in a humorous or meaningful way. It’s meant to help bring the audience into the world, but the conversations at hand aren't compelling. And the editors of this film knew that too. That’s why every 20 minutes the film flashes forward to the train to reassure the audience that don’t worry, you only have to sit through a little bit more of these scenes before we take you to the real reason you’re watching this film. And third and most importantly, just don’t make this movie. While watching the credits, it stood out to me that the three young men wrote a book and that’s what this film is based off. I haven’t read the book, but I assume it tells just about the same set of events that the movie does; however, the format of a book works much better for a story like this. You can still garner the intensity of the train in a book, but you don’t have to worry about the rest feeling like filler because not everything translates from book to film and vice versa.

          If you happened to enjoy this movie, it’s probably due in large part to the real story behind it all. And there’s nothing wrong with that. I have nothing to critique about the heart of the three young men, and I have nothing but praise and respect for their actions. But if you’re going to be stars in a movie, you’re subjected to the same treatment that I give to everyone else. And in the case of this movie, it’s just not good.

 

In Brief:

I recently watched the Renee Zellweger film Judy, and I hate to admit it, but she did indeed deserve the Oscar. I was pulling hard for Johansson who put out a brilliant performance in Marriage Story, but Zellweger is transformative. The film as a whole is pretty standard drug-abuse biopic; however, I wasn’t very familiar with Judy Garland’s story, and it definitely gave me Macaulay Culkin vibes.

Amazon Prime has a new original movie out called 7500 starring Joseph Gordon-Levitt. It takes place in the cockpit of a plane as JGL deals with terrorists trying to hijack it. It brings intensity, and JGL plays a more reserved character which is different from what is usually seen and that’s refreshing. It’s pretty good.

I also watched two Netflix originals: The Night Clerk, and I finally got around to Extraction. I’m a big fan of Tye Sheridan, and he stars in The Night Clerk alongside Ana de Armas from Knives Out, John Leguizamo, and Helen Hunt. Sheridan puts in a dedicated performance, de Armas is always charming, but—and I’m sorry for this—Helen Hunt is frightening. She plays Sheridan’s caring mother, but I think she’s fallen victim to too much plastic surgery because it looks like she wears some twisted mask throughout and it’s all I could think about whenever she appears. If you watch it, I hope you see what I’m talking about. But don’t watch it. The story is very problematic on multiple levels, and it doesn’t satisfy in the slightest. Extraction, however, is so much fun. It’s gaining notoriety for the 12-minute, simulated one-shot action scene in the middle, and it’s absolutely amazing. The rest is pretty good action fare overall, but I do have some critiques. But go watch it, or at least watch the big action scene.

Bangkok Dangerous is a Truly Terrible Nic Cage Movie

Gillipedia Official Rating: Very Not Good

            Hitmen like Jason Bourne and John Wick have carved their identities through distinct styles and memorable films. And then there’s Joe. And not like the gritty, realistic drama Joe starring the titular Nic Cage and Tye Sheridan. No, we’re talking about the nephew of Francis Ford Coppola playing hitman Joe in Bangkok Dangerous.  Please don’t watch this movie. I did chuckle a couple of times, but it’s not the levels of bad that Batman & Robin is where it’s super entertaining to watch. It’s just really, really bad.

            The opening scene must be one of the most boring introductions to an action film. Niccy Cage narrates dully about having four arbitrary rules as a hitman (so that he can proceed to break them over the course of the film) as he scopes down the sight of his target in Prague. The narration is amateurish, the directing is laughably one-note (after the guy is gunned down, the film cuts to two separate shots of guards nearby reacting with over-the-top surprised reactions), and it’s edited quickly to make it appear like a lot has happened. What really happens is the movie spends a couple of minutes of Cage lying down before finally taking the shot on the guy that doesn’t move. This is the action film you won’t be watching, people.

            The basic premise is that the fourth rule Cagey has is to know when to step away, and he realizes that his next job in Bangkok is that job. He’s hired by two guys whose sole motivations are that they’re bad guys, and he’ll be sent four targets to eliminate over the next few weeks. He finds a lowly character in Kong because he knows Kong is willing to aid him for money and—in Nic Cage’s words—most importantly, he’s disposable. Kong acts as the courier for Cage and picks up his briefcases from a weird night club where Kong becomes infatuated by one of the dancers. Pretty basic stuff so far but nothing too egregious.

            Twenty minutes into this mess, the film decides to become a weird hybrid between Leon: The Professional and The Karate Kid. Kong gets beat up by a group of guys that open the briefcase, but he slashes their legs and through the magic of editing also somehow retrieves the case. He manages to bring it back to Cage where he apologizes for being late and mentions that the target in the briefcase is a bad guy. Cage considers killing him because he knows too much, but because he somehow sees himself in Kong I guess (?) he turns a 180 and proceeds to give Kong his first lesson in becoming a hitman.

            Around the same time, Cage rides a motorcycle on his way to kill his first target. On the drive back, he clips his arm on something and has to go to a pharmacy. There, he is treated by the deaf worker and Cage starts falling for her. They go on a couple of dates where Cage is supposed to be the clumsy foreigner that makes her laugh, but it really just comes off as supremely awkward. It’s also Cage not even trying to phone it in. They go on a dinner date where he eats spicy food. He says, “Ah, it’s hot.” Then she offers him some herbs to chew on and says, “Ah, that’s better.” Now I’d like you to read those lines with your best Nic Cage impression but remove all emotion from the equation, and that’s just about what it sounds like. Those interested in a film that not only portrays deafness in a real way but is also an incredible film from start to finish should watch A Silent Voice. Another option is Babel.

            Back to Bangkok! Cage’s second target is another terribly filmed scene. We’re greeted to a gangster type living it up with girls by his side. He takes a casual dip in his outdoor pool where a girl reclines nearby and a bodyguard watches. The film decides the best approach here is to treat the movie like it’s Jaws. We see the target swimming, then a black blob under the water trails behind. There’s no explanation of how Cage got there, and the film occasionally cuts to the bodyguard to remind you that yes, he is still there, but no, he doesn’t spot any of this happening. We never see Cage surface; instead, he pulls the guy under and drowns him. Never surfacing himself, the next shot shows UnCaged swimming away still under the surface. It’s almost like the sequence from Mission: Impossible – Rogue Nation except not at all.

            I’d like to point out that I’m not a glutton for criticism. There’s actually one single good scene. Kong recognizes that he’s being followed after he picks up the new case, and His Cageness tells him to put the phone in the case and throw it off. The baddies pick it up and bring it to the boss. Cool Hand Cage takes a page out of Jack Reacher and threatens the boss over the phone while he’s having dinner with his family. Enjoy the scene while you can because the rest is still trash.

            The mission for the third target goes haywire so that we can be treated to action, and it’s honestly Cage’s fault. The hit is riding on Bangkok’s gondolas, and Minimum Cage poses as a tourist on his own gondola. It’s really crowded, and he has to cover his gun, so his aim is limited. He can’t get a shot, so the target recognizes he’s in trouble and flees. Cage chases, and the target shoots some barrels that explode in laughably dramatic fashion. Mr. Cage catches up and does… something. The way the scene is shot, I really have no idea what happened, but the target’s hand holding the gun is sliced off and Cage finishes the job. These action scenes have no special awareness, so it’s impossible to tell where people are, what the stakes are, and what is even happening. The worst case of this is the climax which we will mercifully get to soon.

            Soon afterward King Cage and Kong are hanging out and a politician on the TV comes on. Kong has previously praised Cage’s killings because the targets are bad guys, and he remarks here how this is a good guy who helps the poor. In a movie with approximately zero surprises, we learn a couple scenes later that this politician is Cagey Boy’s final target. The film also switches back to the guys that hired him, and they talk about how they better cut off loose ends and retrieve Kong and his girl.

            Before we get to the climax, we have to wrap up the romance with the pharmacy girl. In a scene I’m still struggling to comprehend, Supreme Overlord Cage and the girl go for a walk in a park. Two guys approach him from behind and tap his shoulder or something. Believing them to be baddies, Cage shoots them, splattering some of the blood on the girl’s shoulder. One of the guys motions to maybe a wallet? Maybe he was just trying to give him something back that he dropped? I’m not sure. Regardless, the girl is understandably mortified by the actions of the guy that she previously believed to be a banker. And that’s pretty much that with her.

            So Chancellor Cage goes to assassinate the politician, but he has a change of heart. Oh, I guess I should say now that I will be spoiling this whole movie, so say your objections now before I move on… Okay, moving on. So Cage doesn’t kill the guy, but we’re treated to a bodyguard spotting him through his window and ordering for all guns to be fired at him immediately. He rushes out onto the street and takes a guy’s hat, and the guy acknowledges that his hat has just been stolen, but I guess it’s fine that he’s in enough of a panic that he runs away. Cage takes advantage of his disguise and manages to escape.

            Some goons are sent to kill Cage Against the Machine, but he handles them and takes one prisoner to guide him to where Kong and the girl are. We did it. We’ve reached the climactic battle. Near the end of it, Cage has the jump on one guy, but he decides the best move is to charge guns blazing at him in what is supposed to be a cool looking shot where they shoot at each other with water jugs serving as a blockade between them. Cage gets shot near the shoulder, but he’s able to kill the guy. Kong and the girl have managed to escape at this point, so the only thing remaining is the main bad guy in a car with three of his best buds. Cage shoots the three, leaving a scared villain in the car. The police have shown up, waiting for this movie to the end so that they can check out the scene. And in an ending that makes no sense to me, Cage gets in the car with the villain. I guess this is supposed to be a heroic sacrifice—something with the magnitude of say Gran Torino. I don’t get why Cage felt like the only option left was to kill himself. The police are there, sure, but he could definitely escape. Is the pain of not seeing pharmacy girl anymore too much? Has he taught Kong everything he needs to know? Before this happens, though, I’d like to point something out. The driver was the second person that Cage shot. By the time Cage enters the car, the car has remained stopped. Realizing that the scene has to continue, Cage knows what he must do as the driver’s foot falls off the brake and the car slowly drives backward in a straight line toward where the police are hunkered down. Cage lines himself and the bad guy up, and he takes them both out in one shot. We’re then treated to Kong staring out over a bay or something in a low frames-per-second shot for about seven seconds, and then the credits roll after that.

            Everything here is so bad. The audio quality is inconsistent, and the directing is awful. I can just see the directors being like, “Okay, Nic, now look off into the distance. More menacing, more menacing. There you go. Perfect. Annnnd cut, I think we got it, guys.” Nobody’s motivations during the story makes sense either. Nicster has been accepting movie roles left and right the last decade and a half to help pay off his terrible real estate deals and tax troubles. To be fair he’s still shown up in some good movies. Bangkok Dangerous is not one of them. I can’t even recommend watching this ironically. It doesn’t work. The best reaction I can possibly see a person having to watching this film is, “Yeah, it wasn’t that bad.” But you’re wrong, person, because I stand by the title of this review.

 

In Brief:

• Christopher Nolan and Warner Bros. clash a little over the release of Tenet. Nolan is a firm believer in the moviegoing experience and refused to delay his film set to come out in mid-July. Considering his track record of box office hits, it looks like the compromise is to delay it a couple of weeks to the end of July.
• Knives Out is available for Prime members. If you haven’t watched it yet or haven’t seen it for a second time, I highly recommend it. It was my second favorite film of 2019.
• Also available now on Prime is their original movie 7500 about Joseph Gordon-Levitt as a pilot on a plane with hijackers. I haven’t watched it yet, but I’m sure I will soon.

Uncut Gems

Gillipedia Official Rating: Rocky

^took me about 10 seconds to think of that

            Just like actual uncut gems, this movie is rough around the edges. I went in all high and mighty with my prior knowledge to A24 films feeling confident I was in for another hard-hitting flick. And I feel like with just a few changes, the movie is well on its way to that status. But as it is now, I can’t help but feel underwhelmed.

            Before we move on to my factual opinions regarding this film, let’s talk about what we’re actually dealing with so far. Taking place over a couple of days, the film completely revolves around the chaotic mess that Adam Sandler’s Jewish jeweler (impossible to say Jewish jeweler quickly) character Howard has created for his business. He owns a high-end jewelry shop in Manhattan’s diamond district with big-ticket items. The problem is that he gets loans and proceeds to place risky parlay sports bets using that money, and evidently, it hasn’t all worked out. One of the highlights of the film is that we’re not given a history lesson on any of this. We’re able to put all the pieces together as we follow Howard around interacting with all of his associates.

            The basic formula for the film is a debtee comes to collect from Howard, and he either brushes him off or tries telling some form of a white lie. Howard proceeds to another location where he is hell-bent on one objective, and he ignores any obstacle in his way—and these obstacles come back in one way or another to his detriment. It’s in these moments that you see the best of Sandler and the failure of the film. These are supposed to be anxiety inducing, squirmy scenes. In one way I totally agree that watching Howard conduct business is hard to watch in a great way; however, it’s totally undermined by the score. Let me explain.

            Actually, before I explain, now is as good a time as any to discuss Sandler’s performance. Some of your thoughts may be along the lines of, “Wait! Adam Sandler from 50 First Dates and Happy Gilmore and Grown Ups?” Or, “Adam Sandler from all those failed Netflix movies is doing drama?” Or even, “You’re telling me the star of my favorite movie ever Pixels is in a serious role? Cool!” Regardless of how familiar you are with Sandler, it’s worth pointing out that over a decade ago he starred in a film called Punch-Drunk Love. That role still allowed Sandler his comedic moments, but it was a truly committed performance in a highly underrated film. The point is that it has been established that Sandler has acting chops with the right material. I wouldn’t go so far as to say that his performance here is Oscar worthy, but he’s perfect and transformative as the character and works really well.

            The other noteworthy person in this film is Kevin Garnett. The whole film takes place during his Eastern Conference Semis series with the Celtics against the 76’ers in 2012. It’s a smart choice considering he hasn’t aged in pretty much the 20 years he’s been playing in the league. It’s his film debut, and he holds his own. It also marks the debut for The Weeknd, but we don’t care about that. If you want a notable debut from a musician, check out something like John Legend in La La Land. And The Weeknd isn’t even the last debut we’re mentioning—it’s also the first film for Julia Fox who plays Sandler’s lover and sometimes employee. There was one line of dialogue in particular that stood out as bad writing for her character, but beyond that, I’m immensely impressed and look forward to seeing what else she’s in. And last but certainly not least, LaKeith Stanfield has a supporting role. He’s a tremendous actor that broke out in Donald Glover’s show Atlanta and has appeared in big movies like Get Out and Knives Out. The focus of the film is on Sandler at all times, so Stanfield’s role is delegated mainly to the background, and I think that’s a bit of a shame. Would’ve liked to have seen more of him in this. Oh, and Elsa from Frozen is here too.

            Now then, back to why the intensity of this film fails. I put the primary fault on the choice of score. There’s huge synth vibes straight out of Blade Runner running amok out here in the movie, and it’s one of the oddest choices I’ve seen. I’m a huge fan of the Blade Runner soundtrack, but I would never put it in this film. A lot of what’s supposed to be frenetic energy is lost here, and it’s a shame. The fix here would be to go largely drum-based and take a play out of Birdman’s handbook.

            All in all this film takes Spielberg levels of characters talking over each other and ramps it up to a 12. Yes, it’s interesting to see how Sandler’s debts start piling on top of each other, but there isn’t all that much variation in how these play out. There is a scene that let’s us breathe a bit where the family partakes in Passover celebrations, and I commend the film for it—it was interesting to look into a religion I don’t have much knowledge about. Then we get to the climax which was fun to watch and added much more tension because we were following both Sandler and Julia Fox. But I can’t say I’m happy with the finish. It makes sense in enough ways, but it’s also not satisfying. I was expecting a bit more grit out of this A24 film honestly. Not quite a winner for me.

 

In Brief:

I wonder how Joss Whedon feels about the Snyder cut.

The Peanut Butter Falcon

Gillipedia Official Rating: Bayou Goodness

            This is the sweetest film you’ll see in a while. No, it’s not perfect. It’s also a little simplistic, but its heart carries it through its 100-minute runtime. What is The Peanut Butter Falcon? It’s a tale with hints of O Brother, Where Art Thou? and Mud about a young man with Down Syndrome named Zak who has been put at a retirement home for the last couple of years because he doesn’t have anywhere else to go. He watches Thomas Haden Church perform as the Saltwater Redneck on video and runs away with the help of Bruce Dern to fulfill his dream of becoming a wrestler. Through unusual circumstances Zak is thrust upon Tyler (Shia Lebeouf) who is also on the run, and together they have an adventure through the coast of North Carolina.

            This isn’t a hilarious film, but there’s enough humor to keep things running—most provided courtesy of newcomer Zachary Gottsagen. As you may already know if you’re familiar with my reviews, I will critique a film based on its merits first and foremost. And I have to commend Zak for his performance; he feels like he belongs, and it takes guts to perform in your underwear for as long as he does in this film.

            Shia Labeouf’s Tyler plays out about as you’d expect. He’s a fisherman who lashes out at the world because he’s still grieving over the loss of his brother (played by Jon Bernthal in flashbacks—these are mostly subpar and are really used to pad the runtime) by stealing crab and burning gear. Zak sneaks onto Tyler’s boat as he has to avoid the fishermen whose gear he torched (one played by a rapper who goes by the great name Yelawolf). Tyler is dismissive of Zak, and even though he doesn’t bully him like others have already in the film, he’s also not keen on keeping him around considering he doesn’t bring anything to the table. But as the pair continue along, Zak proves to be a loyal partner, and Tyler helps teach him to swim and trains him up to be a wrestler. We’re treated to a couple of montages, and the entire soundtrack is filled with old bluegrass, folksy tunes and I’m all for it (Just wanted to point out that while doing my research for this review, I came across a band called The Electric Peanut Butter Company and I felt like sharing that. That is all. Now back to your regularly scheduled programming.). My biggest issue is how quickly Tyler goes from solo outlaw to seeing Zak as a brother figure. It fits in well enough with the brisk pacing and light tone, but a critic’s gotta critic after all.

            Dakota Johnson of 50 Shades notoriety is also here. Outside of Zak’s roommate played by Bruce Dern, Johnson is one of the few people at the retirement center that truly cares about Zak’s well-being, and she’s sent by her boss to retrieve him. It doesn’t take much convincing for her to join the motley crew; a few googly eyes later and her and Tyler hit it off. Again, their relationship is rushed—even more so than Tyler and Zak’s bond. Like when they first meet in a convenience store, Johnson leaves by giving the Tyler the middle finger. It was in a playful way, sure, but it all felt like a quick turnaround. And yes, I understand they bond over their fondness for Zak, but I’d just like to sit over here and nitpick in peace please.

            There really isn’t anything here that will surprise you. It’s a formulaic feel-good movie with the twist of Zak as one of the main characters. And truthfully, it doesn’t need to be more than that. I’m a fan of my dark noir thrillers and my action escapades, but there’s nothing wrong with enjoying a sweet film. Enjoy this movie and don’t forget that the #1 rule is party.

 

In Brief:

• I think Netflix is clogged with substandard content with some great shows and films mixed in. I think Steve Carell’s Space Force could be good and is probably somewhat funny, but I wasn’t impressed by the trailer.
• If you didn’t check out The Last Dance on ESPN, you missed out. Not only was it great to get some sort of sports content, it was also just super engaging. A lot of young athletes especially can learn what mindsets and consequences it takes to achieve what MJ did. And it was really funny seeing the slight behind-the-scenes peek at Space Jam.
• I recently re-watched the John Wick trilogy and can safely say that I had no regrets about that. I know after the third one the series has become mainstream, but if you haven’t checked them out yet, I highly recommend them. Some of the best action movies ever.

The Lighthouse + The VVitch

Gillipedia Official Rating: “It’s metaphorical!” – Ki Woo, Parasite

            If you’re wondering why I chose these two films, they are the two highly critically praised films from relative newcomer Robert Eggers. The Lighthouse gained a bit of notoriety when it came out last year for its choice of shooting in black and white. It follows two lighthouse workers in the late 19^th century as they maintain this essential seafaring service in sometimes blistering weather off the coast of New England. Willem Dafoe is the veteran skipper, and Robert Pattinson is the new guy, but not all is at it seems.

            You will probably never hear me talk about stuff like aspect ratios, but this film is shot very narrowly and creates a bit of claustrophobia while lending itself to the decision to keep the actors’ faces in center frame for a large portion of the film. We start off with the two men on a small, canoe-like boat heading to the titular lighthouse. There’s very little dialogue in the first 20 minutes of the film as Willem farts a bunch and leaves the menial tasks to the upcoming Batman. Already early on we’re treated to these almost dream-like sequences of Pattinson wading farther and farther out into the water and logs floating towards him and Willem doing some Willem things by going up the lighthouse and baring and basking in all the glory of the light at night. And during much of the slower parts, there’s a low, deep roaring like a ship horn that blares ominously throughout. There’s intrigue here, some good shots, and not bad—but rather slow—start overall.

            Willem performs most of the dialogue which mainly consists of drunken soliloquys that could’ve been taken straight from Shakespeare. He talks a bunch about gods and the sea and Poseidon and you’ll hardly see him blink. What does that mean, you might ask? It’s the stuff that critics eat up and draws most of the attention, but it’s not really all that enjoyable honestly. In fact the biggest praise I have of the film is actually for Pattinson. His performance is subdued, but it slowly becomes more and more deranged as the psychological effects of the isolated area and the story unfold, and it makes me very excited to see what he will bring to Gotham’s Dark Knight.

            I should take the time here to say that if you saw The Witch then you probably already suspected that this is a slow-burning movie, but as little of a plot as that film has, it’s easier to follow than this one. There’s actually more story points here and delves into the characters’ lives, but that serves more as a backdrop to the real grim metaphorical tale here. There’s specks of supernatural, but the main draw is in the cinematography and abstract quality of the film. And I don’t much care for it. I am all for abstracts and metaphors and what have you, but there’s nothing satisfying that comes from this. It’s fun listening to the accents and witness the period piece, but I never felt rewarded for anything that I figured out and left utterly confused by all the junk that made no sense. And even one of the biggest selling points of the Oscar-nominated cinematography using black and white doesn’t feel too impressive. There’s some good shots and occasional cool uses of lighting, but it’s nothing spectacular. If you really want to watch this film, you can find it on Prime. But unless you really just want to put yourself through pain by abstraction, I don’t recommend this movie.

 

Gillipedia Official Rating: Yeah, ain’t too shabby

            The debut film for filmmaker Robert Eggers and actress Anya Taylor-Joy (who has remained extremely busy since), The Witch (got tired of spelling that with the double v’s) is an atmospheric horror film of a banished family residing on a farm near some woods in 17^th century New England. And the filmmakers were so proud of the fact that the dialogue is accurate to the time as well as the story being taken from diaries recovered from the time, they included mentioning that as the end credits roll.

            The dialogue is neat, but if anyone actually understood everything that was said in the film, they deserve a job in speech immediately. I probably missed every fourth line of dialogue just because of how quiet and muddled the voices are. I didn’t watch with subtitles because I felt that might break the tension a bit, but they’re a necessity for this film.

            There’s a great family dynamic established here with little exposition to get in the way. The father is a hard worker and has one of the coolest sounding voices to listen to, the mother is a complex character that is stern but with love in her heart, there’s a younger brother who wants to prove he’s mature enough to help provide, young boy and girl twins, and a baby. But the real star here is definitely Taylor-Joy. She does a great job, even if her character is stuck with the name Thomasin.

            There’s actually action early on, but don’t expect that to be a common theme. The baby is taken by a witch, and there’s quite a disturbing sequence that is hard to make out entirely, and that’s for the best. This sets the whole story off as the family copes with the loss of the baby in their own ways and the witch continues to toil with the family that is struggling to put food on the table. Eventually, the primary tension evolves into the mother believing that Thomasin is actually the witch and they must rid of her to save the family.

            Don’t expect this horror film to be full of jump scares—it’s not that type of film. There’s some disturbing images for sure, but what works best is the whole atmosphere of the film. You really get a good sense of what a family on its own in the 17^th century might be subjected to. With this being a 90-minute film, it may be a slow-burner, but the films moves along with enough pace to hardly allow yourself to take a breath of relief. This film draws a lot of comparisons to Hereditary, and I think that is an apt comparison. This is an A24 film after all, so you won’t be seeing too much of the witch.

            What makes the film rise above Egger’s subsequent effort in The Lighthouse is how the film comes together. No spoilers here, but the way the story resolves itself with the family and with the witch and Thomasin’s arc works so much better. The Lighthouse does a good job of showing the lifestyle of that job during the time period, but the period piece is executed better here; the hardships of the lifestyle come through. At the beginning the family doesn’t have beds to sleep on because there’s no Red Roof Inn to stop at, and Bed, Bath, & Beyond possibly made a killing off of this film from all the candles that had to be used to light the night scenes in their cabin. The Witch succeeds if it gets the daunting atmosphere correct, and they do it right. And the final scene of the movie definitely is a doozy. If we’re continuing with comparisons, I do still think Hereditary edges this film out, but if you’re looking to watch a Robert Eggers film, definitely watch The Witch over The Lighthouse.

 

In Brief:

• As I mentioned earlier, I am now excited to see Pattinson in The Batman whenever that comes out. I know he’s been seeking out challenging roles in primarily indie films since his Twilight days, and if you write him off because of that franchise, then I’m guessing you haven’t seen his other stuff.
• There’s been some internal drama between movie companies and movie theaters. Trolls: World Tour made some big bucks in its improvised release for rentals at home, and that’s put the money-making companies into a frenzy about continuing this trend, and the theaters are upset and blah blah blah. Going to the theater will certainly be different as the country gradually opens up, but that’s okay. I will go in whatever socially acceptable way I can and support the films I want to see because as it stands, the next couple years will be loaded with films desperate to release. I just want to go watch stuff like Tenet and A Quiet Place Part 2 on the big screen, that’s all.
• There’s plenty to review, but as always I will absolutely look into any recommendation anyone has for me.