Predator Vs. Prey

 

Predator Official Rating: No, this is not a documentary about Ezra Miller

Score: 5/10

Prey Official Rating: Fifty Shades of Prey. Or Eat. Prey. Love. Or The Prey Man. Or...

Score: 8/10

          The original Predator movie is a well-beloved classic of the 80s. It’s spawned a series of sequels that I haven’t bothered to watch yet. But with the biggest film debut on Hulu, the concept of Prey as a prequel set 300 years in the past with the Comanche tribe in America serving as the setting and stars definitely intrigued me. And these two films are very different. The original is a cheesy action flick with loads of gore and big guns probably beloved by people that will change their mind upon a rewatch, and Prey is a much more cinematic and intimate experience with surprisingly good action to round it out. Let’s discuss.

          Predator has interesting elements about it. The story is completely irrelevant about hired mercenaries set on a rescue mission in the jungle or something of the sort. Again, doesn’t matter, and thankfully, they only bother with like 5 minutes of exposition before welcoming the characters to the jungle. The action is often classically over-the-top with unlimited rounds unloaded from firearms, ridiculously big and unnecessary explosions, and an overall sense of machismo that has since been characterized maybe by the likes of Michael Bay. Beyond that, however, you have star Arnold Schwarzenegger spewing lines cheesier than his Mr. Freeze character. But you also have the iconic Predator villain itself that has now infamously faced off against the xenomorphs from Alien and brings about the slasher horror genre to this film.

          The Predator creature has cool design elements, but since this is the original film, it also makes it hard to know what its actual threat level is, and some of its cooler elements aren’t revealed until halfway or even later into the film. Since much of its attack is centered around stealth, don’t expect to see much of the Predator in the film. Some of the kills are admittedly pretty cool, but there’s also an excess of gore that wasn’t to my liking.

          The stars are Arnie and Carl Weathers. All of the acting is really bad, but Weathers is the best and is surprisingly almost as ripped as Arnold. No joke, the most impressive thing about this film are the guns—and I’m not referring to firearms. The film’s cheesy elements weren’t entertaining enough for me, and the more horror sci-fi elements courtesy of the Predator were too few as well. The music from Alan Silvestri holds up really well and stands out from the same score that many action flicks currently seem to be using. Ultimately, for those that remember this film fondly, I don’t think you’ll enjoy it as much now because it’s honestly sub-par.

          Whereas Prey does just about everything it can to not only be a fresh and innovative take on the franchise, I truly believe it is far better than the original. This is not a perfect film, but the setting is interesting, this Predator is cool, and the action is far superior to the recent Marvel films (as far back until Shang-Chi because the choreography in that one is amazing).

          Taking place 300 years ago with a Comanche tribe, our heroine is trying to prove that where her talents and heart lie is actually out on the hunts. I watched this movie in English, but I’ve heard there’s a subtitled option where they speak the native language. Also can appreciate the culturally appropriate cast, but I do have to admit that the acting here isn’t the best either. But our main lead who looked like Aubrey Plaza to me is good enough.

          The dialogue is the weakest aspect of the film, but luckily, it’s pretty sparse overall. This also lends to the fact that since a large aspect of the film are the characters out on hunts, there’s not going to be many conversations had during this time. It’s a more intimate experience and really feels like you’ve been dropped in this era in history with the added sci-fi horror element of the Predator thrown in for good measure. Where the original overused guns and explosions, the (presumably) historically accurate use of weaponry adds the suspenseful element of how will these characters take down this powerful creature with the tools at hand.

          Portions of the score reminded me of The Last of the Mohicans, and I honestly wish they just riffed from the movie even more because the score from that film is incredible and works pretty well in Prey. And I know I said it earlier, but this film is simply cinematic. It reminds me of an indie film needing to stand out with clever practical shots, but this film has the benefit of a solid budget. Not only does the Predator look great, some of the realistic animals they create (a bear for instance) look better than other films I’ve seen recently because they don’t try having the animals perform weird gestures that feels outside of the bounds of reality which is the typical giveaway of something looking “fake.”

          If I had to sum it up, this film is like the videogame Horizon Zero Dawn mixed with the style of Eternals director Chloe Zhao. I’ve given her plenty of crap for the atrocious Nomadland, but I have given consistent praise of her landscape shots. And this film often shoots around waist-high for characters so that you have a view of the beautiful sky; to me it’s the film’s way of saying, “Look at me. We’re shooting this outside and not just on some green screen stage.”

          A couple action elements from the climax aren’t very believable, but there’s really dynamic fight choreography and Predator kills that raise this film from a competent sequel to being one of the best action films I’ve seen this year. When you compare that to the utterly unbelievable traps Arnie sets up for the Predator in like a couple of hours that would actually easily take one man weeks to do, there’s no competition on which is the better film. Not only do I say if you’re going to watch any film in the franchise, make it Prey, I’d make it required viewing for films that have come out in 2022.

House of Gill, Review of Gucci

 

Gillipedia Official Rating: Lady Gucci tries to save the day

Score: 6/10

          Do I care about Gucci? No, not really. Was I aware that there was a dramatic familial Italian drama behind the story of the company? Not in the slightest. And going into this film, I wasn’t shaking at the bits to learn the history. But when I see Lady Gaga and Adam Driver are being directed by Ridley Scott—that catches my interest. I feel like the marketing really oiled up the star-studded cast hoping to drag them along to the finish line of an Oscar-baity checker flag. This film has the stars and the budget and the conceit of being based on a real life story. So if you took a peak at the score above, why is the end result muddled and ultimately pretty meh?

          Well, it’s not because of Gaga. Following up her Oscar-nominated performance (where she should’ve won) from A Star is Born, Gaga shines as Patrizia, an Italian who tries to fit in with social classes above her while working for her father’s humble transportation business. The first third of the film is following her around as she meets the shy Maurizio played by one of this generation’s best talents in Adam Driver. He hopes of becoming a lawyer and doesn’t flaunt his Gucci family’s wealth. Patrizia clearly makes most of the moves in the relationship, and that balance of her ambition and his quiet intellect makes a solid couple. Holding back from a range of golf puns, Jeremy Irons plays Driver’s father. He considers Patrizia to be a bogey match for his son, and when Maurizio talks of marrying the girl, Irons boots him off the green and forces him into the bunker. Undeterred by his father’s disowning, Driver makes his way to Patrizia’s house to ask for her hand in marriage as well as a job at her father’s business.

          If the first third focuses on the stars’ relationship, the second act is Patrizia slowly inserting Maurizio back into the high-end clothing family business and thus getting herself involved as well. Irons’ brother is played by Pacino who instantly takes a liking to Patrizia and tells her to come visit the store in New York. While Pacino has a strong grip on the business, he has also come to terms with his bumbling son Paolo played by an unrecognizable Jared Leto. While most of the cast either embraces a subtle Italian accent or honestly doesn’t make an effort, Leto goes full-on Super Mario Bros. mama mia I uh cannota believa you coulda do this toa me! with his accent. And honestly, I’m here for it. Yes, it’s the clear comedic relief and brazenly over-the-top, but the contrast from the serious acting from everyone else is actually welcome.

          That’s enough for now about the story. Let’s discuss execution. Because aside from Leto, this movie over two and a half hours plays too much into family drama without being nearly as compelling as other Italian families like say The Godfather or any number of Scorcese films. But it also has an occasional inkling to think it is also a comedy, or at least it wants to insert enough comedic elements to pass the runtime along. There are moments that maybe are played for laughs? I’m honestly not sure or if the pacing and delivery of lines was just a little weird for serious dialogue.

          Outside of the film’s inability to hone in on a genre, it sadly also suffers from story. I think Gaga’s rise into the family business with her husband there as the bloodline name is pretty good overall. And we get about an hour and fifteen minutes worth of that content. If you’re not familiar with the story, you may have seen Salma Hayek also make an appearance in one scene and thought that was a bit weird—probably could’ve left that on the chopping block. Only, to actually tell the story of Gucci, it turns out the film has to pivot into new territory. The film is forced to change its pathway narratively due to the real-life circumstances, so after the halfway mark, House of Gucci really starts going downhill. Patrizia drives a wedge between Maurizio and his family, and he in turn becomes more and more obsessed with wealth and his newfound interest of behaving however he so chooses. What was built up over the first half feels thrown to the wayside a bit; I won’t say why, but it feels more like they were forced to reach the end point of the story rather than having the characters naturally progress toward the conclusion.

          The end result of Gucci has interesting criminal undertones and how the stars are ultimately involved; however, how we get to this point is disjointed among how this story is told. Combine that with a confused tone and it leaves a slightly sour taste in your mouth. But Gaga and a subtle Driver both shine. The makeup and hair people on Gaga alone deserve an Oscar, and the production design of this glamorous family is quite engaging to watch. Leto is wonderfully bizarre, and the characters overall are varied in their personalities. There’s parts to appreciate, but the end result isn’t altogether satisfying. When you don’t rise to the level of the Oscars when that is the clear intent, the film falls flat. House of Gucci ends up being par for the course. There it is, one last golf pun.

Nope

 

Gillipedia Official Rating: Yeah no yeah, it’s good

Score: 8/10

          Jordan Peele creates films that I enjoy. I wouldn’t go so far as to call Get Out a masterpiece, but that’s a great movie. The more divisive Us captured my attention and is still a film I think about. Peele reunites with star Daniel Kaluuya in Nope, and it also isn’t a masterpiece, but I thoroughly enjoyed it. To say Peele sticks with the horror genre is far too simplistic. At this point you can almost expect his films to go in unexpected directions. Nope is his furthest deviation. There are still horror elements, but this movie ventures more into the sci-fi thriller realm while truthfully not being bottled up in any true genre. Which is part of one of the big compliments I have for Peele—you won’t find common tropes and cliches. He honors and homages classics, but we’ll dive deeper into that later.

          I saw like one trailer for this film, knew I would see it, and attempted to avoid any further promotion. I enjoy not knowing what to expect, and the experience of this film is better that way too. So I’ll address some things from the trailer but keep the review relatively vague and spoiler-free. There are 3 elements you’ll probably take away from the trailer, and that’s all you need to know. 1) It stars Daniel Kaluuya as a ranch hand of some sort. 2) UFOs are somehow involved. 3) It has a bit of a wild west vibe.

          For those that need a bit more than that, basically, Kaluuya runs an isolated farm specifically for entertainment horses with his sister, and The Walking Dead’s Steven Yeun runs a little circus nearby. UFOs come into play pretty early on, and the rest of the film is around the characters figuring out what exactly is going on and if there’s danger.

          Back to the three main elements, let’s talk about now Oscar-winner Kaluuya. It still brings me great joy when people learn that he’s British. When I first saw Get Out, I was like wow, that’s one of the best American accents I’ve ever heard. That’s because I was first introduced to him from the very British comedy Johnny English Reborn. Very different style of film. But others would watch his interviews and see that this mate is very British. And in Nope he plays American OJ. Don’t expect his name to pop up during awards season; however, it’s not because his acting is bad. Stylistically, his character is very reserved. He knows horses, and that’s what OJ interacts with most. His family’s company deals with Hollywood, but the social aspect was run by his father, played by Keith David, and now by his sister—costar Keke Palmer. Pretty sure half of Kaluuya’s lines are him saying, “Mmm,” when asked a question. It’s relatively an understated performance, and he plays the introverted ranch hand really well; but it’s not the role that will attract award buzz.

          Kaluuya is the star, but Palmer provides lots of high energy as a balance for our sibling main characters. And if I’m being honest, she kind of annoyed me at first. Her character doesn’t portray too many redeeming qualities at the start of the film—showing up late to a gig, promoting herself over the family business, brushing off duties. But there is a definite passion to her and an underlying love for her brother, and she won me over a bit by the film’s conclusion.

          I don’t want to reveal too much, but there is a comedic relief character that oozed with Peele’s comedic abilities, and the other main player is Yeun. People know him from The Walking Dead, and I adored his performance in Minari. He makes some interesting choices as the owner of a circus with a long history in the spotlight—but some trauma in there as well. Can’t say I loved his character here and his scenes are what brings the film over 2 hours, but it’s also where some of the themes of the film come into play. Yes, there are UFOs. But I appreciate how Kaluuya, Yeun, and their occupations and interactions with horses and mother nature in general come into play story-wise and thematically. It’s not revolutionary stuff, but there is some intrigue in there and just enough bones to gnaw on after the end credits have rolled.

          “Okay, Gill, you have to give us something about these UFOs!”

          As I mentioned previously, Peele does a superb job of avoiding tropes. How UFOs come into play takes this concept two-fold. Unlike the plethora of horror films with supernatural elements that either never reveal the main baddie or save them for one climactic scene, we see our UFO fairly early on and there are multiple interactions throughout the film. It’s engaging, there’s still plenty of mystery, but it also instills a sense of awe that yes, this is what you’re looking at… but you still don’t know the full truth behind it yet. Which brings me to the second element: this is some of the best cinematography I’ve seen all year—courtesy of frequent Christopher Nolan collaborator Hoyte Van Hoytema.

          It’s not just the sweeping landscape shots films with wild west settings need. It’s the fact that there’s a pretty even 50/50 split on scenes in the day vs at night. Daylight scenes in horror films are typically where you can relax back into your seat knowing there shouldn’t be any suspense. Jordan Peele takes Nope and says, “Yeah, I’ve got UFOs. Here they are.” The ability to discern this object in the sky that moves in such an unnatural fashion—a threat constantly looming over you—instills that suspense and dread from quality horror films. But you also have nighttime scenes as well. And not only do these take place at night, but they are lit by a full moon. No, I’m not saying werewolves come into play. What I am saying, however, is that these scenes are still bright. They have that quiet terror of night, but you can still see everything. Contrast that to say the A24 film It Comes at Night. You never see the villainous creatures, and the scenes at night make you scared of what you can’t see. If you’re wondering where the title of Nope comes from, it’s the ability to see what you should be scared of and saying, “Nah, I’m good.” And yes, there are characters that will say, "Nope,” in the film.

          There’s really only one true jump scare in the film, and it will get you. But that’s not what the film is reliant on. More than anything, I wasn’t so much on the edge of my seat as I was trying to piece together in my mind where the film was going and what the end goal is. It sounds vague, but it’s true that the best way I can describe this film is interesting. It has an interesting premise, and it keeps you engaged without the tropes of jump scares or relying on nonsensical plot twists. There’s still a monologue or two that lasts too long, but the 2 hr 10 min runtime overall flows really well.

          The climax got a little overly dramatic with a couple of characters making dumb decisions, but it doesn’t detract from the experience as a whole. You can tell Peele enjoys movies and the moviemaking process, and his homage to classic films comes through without being overbearing. In particular, there’s a scene in the rain that is the clear standout moment in the film. The score, especially at the climax, is strong. Overall, this may not be the film many people came to expect, but I enjoyed my experience and can mark this down as a memorable movie.

Thor: Love and Thunder

 

Gillipedia Official Rating: Watch out, Thor, because this review is gonna bring the lightning-- KA-CHOW!

Score: 7/10

 

          Marvel needs to be careful. In terms of the quantity vs quality debate, they have undeniably overwhelmed DC by churning out multiple movies every year while mostly still entertaining audiences more than the DC films have been able to. While Marvel ventured into the TV realm way back with shows coming out on many different networks and multiple shows on Netflix, there has been a more concerted effort to integrate both mediums into the Cinematic Universe with the emergence of the Disney+ shows. They have been largely successful—both overcoming the obstacle of filming over the pandemic as well as taking advantage of butts in couches the last couple of years. So with all the success—across both TV and film, why does Marvel have to be careful? Well, after the incredible buildup to Avengers: Endgame back in 2019, Marvel has ventured further and further into the cosmos and are broadening the breadth of characters and worlds travelled to. The expansion of scope is necessary, but with it is the possibility of fatigue. Multiple TV shows, 3 Spider-Man related movies, and the Doctor Strange sequel have all come out just in 2022. It almost feels like they’re taking the business strategy of Netflix that promised a new original film every 2 weeks to ensure constant content. Marvel can survive some hiccups like Morbius, but the fanbase—especially those that have been around since the beginning in 2008—can be weary of the oversaturation.

          I think that fatigue leaked through to this movie which is why there’s been a split reaction to Thor: Love and Thunder. Following up from the huge success of embracing a goofier side to the character in Thor: Ragnarok, Taika Waititi returns as director and co-writer for this 4^th Thor film. They double down on the humor and pushed the boundaries even further with improvised moments. The end result is everything but the kitchen sink of humor, and while I found myself laughing consistently throughout with some clever recurring gags, there’s plenty of stuff that are like half-jokes that make you smile but not really laugh. This is where Love and Thunder lives and dies. Some of the rehash works, but it doesn’t have the same shine that the previous movie had. Personally, I really liked this movie! But the reactions weren’t all the same even among the friends I went with.

          For those that remember how things were left with Thor from Endgame, he’s fat, single, and forced his way into the Guardians of the Galaxy and proclaiming them as the Asguardians. Despite this being Thor’s 4^th solo film—the first in the MCU to do so—this is actually one of the most accessible of the MCU films. Early on we get a recap of the previous films and where Thor left off in quick and humorous fashion. They have some “classic Thor adventures,” but it quickly makes way for the real heart of the story.

          The film starts off with a dying Christian Bale and his young daughter. Pleading to the gods for help, not only is he shunned away, but he also loses his daughter. A cursed sword with the capability of slaughtering gods whispers out to Bale, and he makes it his mission to eliminate all gods so that people aren’t misplacing their hope. Outside of the hilarious Christian vs Atheist Bale meme, honestly, this is one of the strongest villains. The backstory is intriguing, his ability to summon shadow creatures is unique and way different than the MCU villains just copying the heroes’ abilities, and it’s Christian Bale.

          While I’m a huge fan of Bale’s Gorr the God Butcher, the issues I also hold with his character is a microcosm of my main issue with the film. There’s powerful themes of dealing with loss and cancer… and love and thunder… but the film suffers from the cardinal sin of telling, not showing. In the opening scene, Gorr is brought in front of his god and talks about how his daughter sacrificed herself in the god’s name. Like yes, I just saw that happen two minutes ago. That instance is easily forgivable, but he talks about how he lost his daughter due to the gods at least two more times in the film, and he’s not in all that many scenes. Bale’s performance is also certainly not nuanced, but it provides a great foil to Thor and adds a much-needed darkness to the light tone. We also don’t actually get to witness too much god-butchering happen, but Bale being Bale and losing all that weight to commit to the role still leaves him as a memorable villain.

          This movie also marks the return of Natalie Portman’s scientist Jane Foster from the first two films. Now, I love me some Portman. And my understanding is that all that beautiful beefing up she did to be Mighty Thor is all her. So well done on that. How’s she integrated into the story is proper enough. But if we’re being honest here, I think she struggled the most to adapt to Waititi’s style. She does this little like head bob as if saying, “tee-hee look at me, I’m a silly little scientist!”

          I think I’ve said this now for a couple Marvel films, but I’d describe the action as fine. While teaming up with the Guardians of the Galaxy, there’s so much happening on screen that it’s a little dizzying. There’s some great spectacle, but it’s hard to focus your eyes when so much is happening and the action cuts every second because we’re trying to hide the fact that there aren’t all that many stunts and this is green screen. Plus, with all the gods and different worlds and the only real explanation of Gorr’s powers being that he can summon shadow creatures and can kill gods, there’s never much weight to the stakes of the action simply because I don’t know what anyone is capable of. The shadow creatures are mostly just fodder for Thor and Jane to swing some hammers at. Also, I don’t want to misspeak because the visuals are dazzling and really well done, but there’s still times that I can clearly tell are filmed on green screen, and the physics of superheroes still looks a little rubbery.

          Don’t hate me in the comments for it, but I wasn’t stoked for the Guns N’ Roses songs. There’s an undeniable 80s vibe with the soundtrack and the outfits and poses Thor strikes, and the end credits fonts are some of the hardest names to ever read. I really enjoyed the fact that overall, this film kept to the core group of Thor characters to focus on. Waititi has such a distinct style, and even if it wasn’t perfect, I still had a blast. There’s so much to enjoy. The whole black and white sequence in the film is visually stunning. I’m a sucker for those Sin City type aesthetics where you highlight certain actions by mixing in small amounts of colors in an otherwise black and white environment. Also major props to the climax. I think I’m being clever here when I saw one of the characters wearing a Phantom of the Opera shirt, and the visual from that shirt tied into the climactic setting. The climax is fun, heartfelt, and the way it ended was great.

          There’s still a couple surprise cameo appearances to be had, and Love and Thunder might not rise to what Ragnarok accomplished, but it’s still so much fun. I enjoyed this more than Doctor Strange in the Multiverse of Madness. The story could’ve had some powerful material, but it was a bit ham-fisted in its delivery, and Gorr could’ve been utilized a bit more. But even that critique is a bit of a double-edged hammer, right? Because this was a brisk 2-hour movie. If it was longer and developed more content, maybe the pacing would’ve suffered a bit. But I digress. I still prefer real stunts and long action shots like from Top Gun: Maverick and The Northman respectively, but the action here is fine enough. The core characters are all endearing, and with Waititi at the helm, you know you’ll laugh and enjoy your time. This isn’t a perfect film, but it should hold us over until Jordan Peele’s Nope comes out later this month.

Jurassic World: Dominion

 

Gillipedia Official Rating: So bad this film brought us back to the Triassic era

Score: 4/10

          Okay, I relented. Time to score these films on a 1-10 scale. Which does not bode well for our first-ever rating with Jurassic World: Dominion sitting at a paltry 4/10. This film, outside of fleeting entertaining moments, is hot garbage. I’ll break it down, but save your money on this one.

          Let’s start in general. There is a terrible flow to the film. Each scene feels contained within itself. It’s like the filmmakers wanted a scene with the velociraptors, they wanted one on an icy lake, and in a jungle, a giant dino battle, a chase scene, so on and so forth. While all of these worlds sound like the perfect elements to a videogame, there has to be connecting threads and emotional investment for a film. There’s a couple of fun shots here and there and a few jump scares, but there’s hardly any suspense, lingering shots, or elements foreshadowed early on that come into play later. Frequently, if there’s an action scene with a dino, it’s pretty standard to showcase the prehistoric creature almost immediately. That already desensitizes us to the thrill of the unknown of what blood-thirsty beast might be lurking in the shadows.

          It’s too bad because the opening is actually pretty good. After the events of the second (or rather fifth) film, dinosaurs have been released into the wild. This is broadcast over news segments and show handheld footage of the dinos interacting with everyday objects and in our contemporary lives. The visuals are solid, it introduces us to the world at large, and it sets the stage. After a forgettable scene that shows Bryce Dallas Howard teaming back up with Justice Smith to rescue a baby dino from some poachers, the real plot of the film starts taking shape as Howard is living in a remote cabin along with star Chris Pratt and the British girl who is the genetic clone of an old scientist from the previous film.

          The girl Maisie yearns to venture out into the world and discover what life has to offer, but Howard’s Claire and Pratt’s Owen Grady fear that there are companies and people that only want to kidnap the girl and perform research on her. It doesn’t take long before Maisie sneaks out, gets captured, and the rest of the story is Owen and Claire trying to rescue her. She’s kidnapped by Biosyn which is a genetic company with many resources claiming to take care of the dinosaurs while researching cures for all kinds of diseases. To the absolute surprise of nobody, once again, the big baddie is the evil, greedy corporation. They even keep BD Wong around as Dr. Henry Wu working for this company. I’m so tired of them not being able to come up with any other human villain to have, and it’s used as an excuse for the dinosaurs to keep a supposed sanctuary for themselves in the remote mountaintops of Italy if I’m not mistaken.

          The next action scene takes place in Malta in like an underground market. Owen and Claire stumble upon it, Claire goes to the bathroom, runs into a random lady, and happens to plead with her to help find her daughter. It’s such a stupid setup because of course this lady, a mercenary pilot, becomes one of our main players.

          This Malta scene really should’ve been the highlight of the movie, but all I can think about are the glaring flaws. The great Omar Sy helps our heroes find and trip some of the Biosyn baddies; here, Sy’s team points guns at Biosyn, and then Biosyn points their guns back. There’s yelling, then the camera cuts away, you hear a gunshot, and suddenly, everyone is scattered and allows for individual fights to happen. But that’s the thing. The writers think of a tense situation where you’ve trapped the bad guys, but because they can’t think of a plausible way for the action to continue, they just use editing and cutting to hope in the confusion you don’t pay attention to the fact that despite everyone standing close together with guns pointed, no one is injured and now we’re running after each other and punching each other because that’s more exciting than a gunfight that should’ve been over in 5 seconds. At one point a henchman catches on fire and gets eaten by a T-Rex. That’s fun stuff you would love to see, right? Well, they cut away after he catches on fire, and you only see him get eaten in the background of the next shot while the focus switches to other characters.

          Biosyn has some technology that I don’t understand, but basically, they point a laser pointer, and that triggers the dino’s tummy to tingle, so it’s like a homing beacon. Claire starts running away, falls out of a window, and literally lands in the back of the pilot’s jeep from earlier. The pilot went back to her plane, saw Claire’s daughter being led into a car, and decided that was enough motivation for her to drop everything and be the moral person to help these strangers out. Next thing you know, they’re at her plane ready to chase after Biosyn.

          Meanwhile, Owen takes a motorcycle and narrowly avoids the raptors among other dinos. The driving portion is mildly entertaining, but the CGI raptors are not quite there. Their movements feel floaty, so it isn’t believable whenever they run. Without any communication, Owen happens upon the pilot’s plane and is able to board safely just in the nick of time. This marks the end of the first half, and the rest takes place at Biosyn’s corporation.

          At the same time, Laura Dern’s Ellie Sattler and her botox decide to visit Dr. Grant. Classic Jurassic Park music plays, and the shots linger—hoping the pause is for the audience to clap that they paid these aging actors lots of money to return to a much-worse version of the franchise they used to be a part of. Ellie is in contact with Jeff Goldblum’s Dr. Ian Malcolm who has been teaching chaos principles to college kids at Biosyn’s campus. With an invitation from Malcolm, they take a plane to go visit and try to find evidence of Biosyn’s shady dealings.

          The very next portion of the film is infuriating. The plane starts failing and is going down. Claire has to eject and gets separated. The pilot and Owen end up crashing into an icy lake. When they come to, they feel surprised that they’re still alive. Snowflakes float down as they cautiously step onto the frozen lake and find a smaller dinosaur eyeing them. Keep in mind that Owen is wearing a long-sleeve shirt with the sleeves rolled up. At no point does he roll down the sleeves, acknowledge the cold, or we ever see his breath. Nothing feels authentic, and yes, I’m talking about a movie with real dinosaurs, but it takes away from the experience.

          It turns out this dinosaur likes to swim, so it dives underneath the surface, and our heroes make a run for it. Owen falls into the water as well, and then using his Starlord strength, he like literally jumps out of the water to avoid any attack. Again, they show him soaking wet, and they are able to make their escape. He doesn’t shiver, the freezing cold along with his wet clothes never comes back into play, and they disregard it altogether. This is also the perfect point to mention that the acting is completely phoned in. Chris Pratt looks like he’s having a miserable time in every scene, the villain goes for some weird tech CEO vibe, and none of the performances anywhere are much better.

          It must’ve warmed up that evening because the final dino battle takes place in the rain. Does it add a cool, dramatic effect? Yeah, I can admit that much. But even then, there isn’t any buildup to the final killblow, so we’re not even able to fully enjoy that either.

          Eventually, all of our heroes team up, find what they need, and try to escape with the evidence and the girl. It’s a formulaic process without surprises, humor, or any effort. Directed and co-written by Colin Treverrow, the dialogue is also terrible. Characters will say something either confusing or really cheesy, and this tends to prompt the character they’re speaking to to respond with, “What?” Just because you are self-aware enough to show that the line you wrote for your character is crazy doesn’t excuse the fact that you acknowledge and move on—especially when you do it multiple times. People also stumble over their lines in what I’m guessing is supposed to mimic realistic conversation, but instead it feels like the writers literally didn’t know how they wanted the character to finish their sentence, so they have them simply stop speaking mid-sentence instead. Some of these times I think it’s played for laughs; I gave a chuckle or two during the runtime (primarily whenever Goldblum was speaking), but the pacing, delivery, and editing of the lines is so bad that there wasn’t any laughter in the packed house I watched this movie in.

          There’s no overarching theme that the film has, and it didn’t know how to believably end. Ultimately, what makes Top Gun: Maverick the more successful box office hit is the character elements. We’re able to believe why Tom Cruise is back at Top Gun, and we feel the real stakes of the choices he and the fellow pilots have to make. We’re invested in their success. Here, they had to introduce so many elements that character arcs are thrown to the wayside. All plot elements and motivations are a stretch and how they end up together. The music is only good when it references the original. The effects are mostly good but wasted by the film. I will give props to the fact that some of the more stationary or smaller dinosaurs did appear to actually be animatronics, so that was a nice callback.

          It’s not like you’ll leave the theater mad about what you just watched. Rather, it’s simply disappointing to see how downhill the franchise is now from its ground-breaking original from the book of my favorite author Michael Crichton. There’s not a great selection of films currently out, but don’t bother with this one. If you want a true summer popcorn flick, go watch Top Gun: Maverick. I’m seriously considering watching it a second time just to wash the bad taste of this dino pee out of my mouth. How did that taste get in my mouth in the first place? It’s a reference to Jurassic Park 3 so hush up.

Top Gun: Maverick

 

Gillipedia Official Rating: Pulled 2.5 G’s writing this review. Inverted.

Score: 9/10

          Tom Cruise personally thanked me for going to watch this movie. Did it happen to play to the rest of the theater as well? Sure. But we all know the truth. Top Gun: Maverick reminds us of why we go to the theaters. It’s a form of escapism entertainment to watch movie stars perform the unimaginable. You can argue that the enhancement to visual effects over the last couple decades has allowed for even more creative freedom to craft the artistic vision from the director. But with novelty comes imitation and over saturation. Films like The Northman have its flaws, but there are still standout moments of shooting at real locations—not on a green screen at a studio. And Cruise’s insistence to only do this movie if using real planes and practical stunts where possible immerses the audience so much more than the rubbery looking CGI fights.

          But it takes more than a couple stunts for a film to remain memorable. Because at over two hours in length, this film has to pull us in and make us care about these characters for the action scenes to resonate. The story isn’t groundbreaking, but Maverick makes clever use of familial and internal conflicts to bring us characters that have stakes that we care about. When I first heard the news of this sequel years back, I honestly was just meh about it. The original Top Gun isn’t top tier Tom. Entertaining, sure, but not close to his best work. This was around a time where everything was being rebooted, revived, or sequelized. Simply bringing back characters and actors from the past and rehashing their stories isn’t enough and can feel like a money-grab… And then the first trailer dropped, and I was hooked.

          Before I drool over the F-18 plane sequences further, let’s talk about that character drama I was referencing earlier. Tom Cruise plays a Captain for the Navy. At least 4 characters throughout the film question why this old-timer either hasn’t retired, been dishonorably discharged for all his antics, or promoted further at this point in his career. And to the credit of this sequel releasing over three decades past the release of the original film, being a Captain is who Maverick is. He can’t seem to stick his roots either in his career or with a family. Despite this, he has close ties with Rooster—a Top Gun graduate and son of the late and former wingman Goose from the original. Rooster is played by Miles Teller, and despite their obvious ties, there’s a rift between him and Maverick that the film develops. Teller not only believably looks like the son of Goose, but he brings some heart to the role too. Maverick also reconnects with an old flame in Penny played by the stunning and ageless Jennifer Connelly. Penny runs a local bar and has a tween daughter smarter and more mature beyond her years.

          After flying too close to the Sun once again, Maverick returns to Top Gun to train the best of the best Top Gun graduates for a time-sensitive mission to destroy a nuclear facility in enemy territory. There is a note of finality to this mission, and with Rooster as one of the possible recruits for the mission, Maverick is torn between duty and the very real possibility that he might send an underprepared pilot to his death. Not only does the mere weeks’ timeframe add a sense of urgency to overarching plot of this mission, but Maverick has to contemplate what happens to his life professionally and personally with and after this mission. Again, not groundbreaking stuff, but it’s well developed and well utilized to make the suspenseful moments from the action sequences -ahem- soar.

          12 recruits are brought into Top Gun for Maverick to train, but only some will be chosen to actually fly for the mission. We get to know the call signs of each pilot; unfortunately, they don’t have much personality beyond that. These are pretty stock characters, jock type Hangman being the primary foil for our heroes. Their banter is fine, but the dialogue also isn’t the highlight of the film. But both Maverick’s training methods and the overall sense of camaraderie comes through in spades.

          The film doesn’t lean too much into glorifying moments from the original which is perfect. Iceman returns in a limited capacity. I also wasn’t aware that Val Kilmer is suffering lung cancer in real life, and both the way they fit that into the story as well as apparently using AI technology for his voice since he can’t really speak in real life either is impressive. What I appreciate most about the sequel is that everything makes sense. The plotlines and character arcs aren’t phoned in. It makes sense what path Maverick has taken over the years, and there’s enough plausibility to bring him back and connect the way he does. But with new technology and new characters, the film isn’t overly reliant on the past; in fact, seeing the original by no means is a prerequisite to enjoy this film. Also expect to hear music from the original but updated by Hans Zimmer. Really solid work; Lady Gaga also performs a song.

          Now the moment we’ve been waiting for. The action and stunts. Cruise designed a program to train the new actors on how to get used to the F-18’s they’d be flying for the film and how to handle all the force. There are cameras cleverly positioned in the cockpits, and we are treated to true aerial sequences. There’s a scene about two-thirds through where Maverick goes a bit rogue during a training sequence, and watching Cruise swerve left and right at dizzying speed is the kind of thrill I absolutely go nuts for at the movies. It’s the stuff that makes the price of admission 100% worth it. The entirety of the climax is some of the most suspenseful and thrilling action I’ve seen all year. Some of the action from say Doctor Strange in the Multiverse of Madness was fine, and all the action involving Scarlet Witch was a blast, but it never had me on the edge of my seat like this movie did. There is power in authenticity. Tom Cruise is abundantly aware that I am buying a ticket to watch this old man perform insane stunts. I will watch all genres of films and appreciate craft, but I am partial to real stunts. Essentially, I am partial to Tom Cruise.

          I’ve already been treated to great action from Everything Everywhere All at Once and The Batman from this year, so I won’t make any hasty proclamations, but Top Gun: Maverick has my vote of confidence in recommending to see it in theaters. With recent Mission Impossible director Christopher McQuarrie coming in to help produce this film, you know you’re in good hands. It makes me very happy to see this film succeed so well at the box office—especially with the countless delays due to Covid. I get Mission Impossible for the next couple of years, but I don’t know how many more Cruise years I have left. Savor what you have, ladies and gentlemen. Watch this movie in theaters and be prepared to be entertained. God bless America.

 

Bonus Review

Men

Gillipedia Official Rating: They’re the worst

          From Ex Machina and Annihilation director Alex Garland comes a new A24 slow-burning horror film Men. After the tragic and unexpected death of her husband whom she recently just separated from, Harper travels to the English countryside to get away from the stresses of life. She rents a house from a quirky Englishman and interacts with other members of town. Er, interacts isn’t the right word. More like she has encounters with men in the town that have an underlying feeling of something off, but nothing noticeable or grave enough to take much action. And as you may guess, this culminates toward a finale. And since this is Alex Garland and A24, that climax is a doozy. It’s one of the strangest sequences in recent memory.

          In some regards this film is reminiscent of Midsommar, but it also feels like Garland pushing the boundary of metaphorical storytelling further than the crazy climax in Annihilation. It’s interesting, but it’s been over a week since I saw this film, and I still don’t have a full grasp on it. For those familiar with other A24 works or the above mentioned films, you might have appropriate expectations. There’s not going to be jump scares or needless gore; rather, there’s unnerving sequences, solid filmmaking, and it’s punctuated by an at-times gruesome, at-times downright confusing climax.

          Our star is Jessie Buckley. I’m not familiar with her, but she is strong-willed, yet also incredibly emotionally vulnerable considering the traumatic events that just transpired in her life. She’s the sort of female character I love seeing portrayed. She’s not a simple damsel in distress, but she’s also not a plain Captain Marvel that has no weaknesses or personality. This film relies on the strength of the star, and she shines well.

          My interpretation is this film addressing victim blaming. At each turn as the events become stranger and more dangerous, Harper is continuously dismissed by the men around her. The quirky Englishman Geoffrey might be an ally, and her best friend whom she FaceTimes throughout is a comforting ear. But this also isn’t preachy and “taking sides” in terms of whatever political platform people want to jump on. I think it’s an exaggeration of a perfectly plausible situation and works well in a relatable manner.

          It isn’t nearly as dreary as Midsommar and has a breezy runtime well under 2 hours; however, the slow burn can still feel a little too slow at times. We only receive a couple embers of horror before the climax, and I would’ve liked to see more flames flickering. The climax is of course the highlight, and it has very memorable and gnarly moments. Like, very tiny spoiler, but the way a character has a hand torn and ripped up and how it still comes into play later on is one of the grossest but most innovative things I’ve seen. But there’s also some weird metaphors that didn’t land with me, and a very, very bizarre end that makes sense but is nasty in a way I don’t think I really needed to see.

          There’s something to be said about how the vast majority of this film could be done on a really small budget. Compelling characters, a visionary director, and a consistent tone are the only ingredients you really need for this type of horror film. I also have no idea outside of visual effects how some of the sequences at the end could’ve been done, but that’s something else entirely. Unlike the above review, I won’t be recommending this film. In a bit of hypocrisy, I actually enjoyed it. But there’s still more I think it could’ve done and didn’t have to try to be so arthouse at the end. It’s not the style of film that appeals to a wide audience—which is on brand for any A24 film really. But there’s lots to appreciate, including the willingness and creativity to be different.

The Northman And Some Small Budget, Indie Film Called Doctor Strange in the Multiverse of Madness

 

The Northman

Gillipedia Official Rating: Apparently, yelling “Skol!” in the theater is not considered appropriate.

          The Northman is very much the case of needing appropriate expectations when viewing. Yes, I knew this was from director Robert Eggers and watched his previous two films The VVitch and The Lighthouse. He has a distinct style. And after viewing the trailer for this film, I thought he might bring some of that over, but it also looked like he was branching out toward a more mainstream, blockbuster territory with a grander scope and budget for this film. That is partially true. I was looking forward to an action-packed, gritty adventure film about family and vengeance. Although that is in the film, action-packed is a little heavy as a descriptor. The bulk of the primary action is shown in some regard from the trailer, so the rest of the 2 hr 20 min runtime has to be filled with something else. And that’s really where Robert Egger’s background comes in. Because this is not non-stop thrills. This is much closer to a historically accurate representation of the age of Vikings and is reminiscent of epics from olden days like Ben-Hur. Meaning there are standout moments, but there’s a lot of added information as well such as weird rituals and an inkling of supernaturalness. And that is not going to be to everyone’s liking.

          Before we talk more specifics, let’s dive into the plot a bit. The opening is too long, primarily due to a weird rite of passage among our young protagonist, Ethan Hawke playing the hero’s father and king, and Eggers teaming up with Willem Dafoe and having him do his creepy smile as a court jester. And then in a weird transition immediately afterward, the uncle Fjolnir reveals himself as the villain and beheads his brother in front of the hero Amleth. Amleth also sees Fjolnir (fun names I must say) carry his mother Queen Gudrun off (played by Nicole Kidman). Amleth escapes by boat, and as he paddles away, he channels some inner Princess Bride as he exclaims, “I will avenge you, Father! I will save you, Mother! I will kill you, Fjolnir!”

          This is the driving force and motivation for the film. We then fast forward some years later (not making that up, that’s what it said in the film) to our hero grown up and all buffed up now as Alexander Skarsgard. Skarsgard has been in some films that you’ve probably seen, but you’re likely to be more familiar with his father Stellan from the Thor films and brother Bill as Pennywise the Clown in It. The story remains relatively straightforward in his quest to find his uncle to carry out all three promises he made. He’s also visited by witches that tell him his destiny and what will happen, and he disguises himself as a slave to get closer to his uncle, and in the process of figuring out his revenge, he also meets another slave Olga played by *chef’s kiss* Anya Taylor-Joy. Yes, I’m entranced by those giant eyes, but she’s building up a really impressive filmography from breaking out with Split, captivating Netflix in The Queen’s Gambit, and previously teaming up with Eggers from The VVitch.

          Before I talk about more of what bothered me with the film, there are honestly plenty of compliments to dish out. First and foremost, this is a visual masterpiece. The action that we do get is superb. There are some gnarly kills and moves, the camera frequently follows Amleth around without cutting as he chops down adversaries, and none of it ever looks like green screen. I’m guessing they shot a lot on actual location in Europe. I have no idea what countries they use, but it looks Scandinavian, and we start off in villages near rocky, oceanside cliffs, move to the forest where we travel down a river, and end off in a more remote location with vast landscapes and rolling hills set with an active volcano as the backdrop. This might be a bit controversial considering the review following this one, but this kind of action is what keeps bringing me back to the theaters and is so refreshing from -albeit well done- green screen backgrounds typical of superhero films.

          Skarsgard puts in a great performance as Amleth. He has a simple Viking mind, but he experiences many complex, often difficult emotions. And bro bro’d out at the gym and seriously got that Viking bod going. If you saw The VVitch, then you’ll know that they tried making it as accurate to that time period—same with the The Lighthouse. Taylor-Joy has used many accents in her career already, and I think her accent in this film is the most spot-on of any of the actors.

          When we first transition to adult Amleth, he’s in a group of marauders rowing down that river I mentioned earlier. They pass a fisherman and shoot him with an arrow and laugh because that was amusing for them. They approach a village where the first guard throws a spear that Amleth catches and throws back. And this sequence is incredible to watch as we follow Amleth traversing the wall and killing the guards inside without visible cuts (there are multiple cuts, but they use the editing technique to make it look like one shot). The action is brutal and unflinching, but it’s also conflicting because Amleth’s comrades gather the villagers and lock them in a building and set it on fire. They plunder, recruit, and take women and whatever else they want and drunkenly celebrate at night. Amleth doesn’t partake, but he makes no efforts to stop his friends either. Of course, we recognize this as morally bad behavior. But you also have to commend Eggers for his commitment to historical accuracy—one of his most defining traits. It does not paint Amleth in the best light, but he is on a singular path of vengeance, and without having done the proper research, I can confirm that this is indeed what the behavior of Vikings was like when this film takes place in 800something AD.

          Like I mentioned before, the film spends too long on weird rituals and supernatural prophecies. And it’s not until we’re approaching the climax that the film engages with some of the more interesting principals of if your destiny has already been chosen for you or if you can make your own fate. Does Amleth follow through with this lifetime oath of vengeance, or can he ignore destiny for a future better forged with the possibility of Olga? I think this is a path that could’ve really driven the second half even further. But the film keeps its sights in line with Eggers needing to go supernatural, and despite the climax being thrilling, it’s also not the film I was hoping for.

          Not only is the beginning too long and kid Amleth can be kind of annoying, but I’m sorry, Ethan Hawke’s accent wasn’t great either. The second half also takes too long to build up Amleth and Olga’s relationship as he continues to plot his vengeance. Part of that oath Amleth swore involves saving his mother, and Kidman is indeed with the uncle. Now I could take this opportunity to say that Amleth saving his mother was a driving force of me writing this review for Mother’s Day… But if you watch the film then you’ll understand the twist that happens about two-thirds of the way through that is not at all the vibe I’m trying to give. That’s all I’ll say, and we’ll move on from there.

          This is arguably Egger’s most accessible film, but if you’re a fan of horror, then you’ll want to start with The VVitch. A24 is not involved with this film, but Eggers fits in with their style which is well done but also not very approachable. For better and worse, this is exactly what you could expect Eggers to do with a film when given a larger budget. It’s an epic vengeance tale during a historically accurate Viking time period with incredible visuals and some great acting. There are slow, weird moments, but there’s also some standout action scenes as well. I wanted so badly for this film to try to be non-stop action in the vein of Mad Max: Fury Road, and in that regard was disappointed. It’s hard to justify the whole runtime, but if you’re looking for something different and have the stomach to handle the occasional spewing guts, there is still a lot going for this film. But it won’t be something I’ll revisit for awhile.

 

Doctor Strange in the Multiverse of Madness

Gillipedia Official Rating: I dreamed of this review

GOR: This second official rating takes place in the paint universe

          As I have done in the past with these films, I’ll keep this part spoiler-free THANOS RETURNS and then clearly mark spoilers afterward. Which means this first part will be pretty short because you honestly can’t say much about the film without giving some stuff away.

          I’ll use this first half to talk about my thoughts on the film more in general. This is a good movie! If you’re an MCU fan, yes you should watch this. It won’t be joining the ranks of like my top 5 MCU films, but there’s some good action, some surprises, and a well-rounded vision (not Vision, just vision).

          It’s also worth noting that although I don’t keep up with every single thing, I have watched all the films and all the new shows on Disney+. And this film integrates past story points extensively. I feel like the majority of filmgoers will have some sort of familiarity with many of these points or will come with a friend that can quickly whisper in their ears what the film is referring to. I can’t confirm this, but I do imagine that if you’re a casual moviegoer, even someone that’s seen a good chunk of Marvel films but nothing on the streaming services, this could be a little frustrating. Doctor Strange in the Multiverse of Madness is like Wendy’s 4 for 4: it’s a great bundle deal that combines many elements. But if you’re not already familiar with those spicy nugs, you’ll be feeling out of the loop a bit.

          And I’m sure in at least one universe that metaphor made sense. One thing I have to applaud Kevin Feige and Marvel for is keeping everyone on their toes. Having watched the show What If… and most of the trailers, I felt like I knew exactly what to expect from the plot. I’m sure many fans felt similarly, and I enjoyed the direction of the film. That’s really all I’ll say about the story to avoid any spoilers.

          The film is at its best when dealing with the multiverse stuff. The trippy visuals that are still reminiscent of Inception are great, and I never wanted any of the sequences involving them to end. Director Sam Raimi has a background in Spider-Man and Evil Dead, and I think that shows. There’s a couple squeamish moments and even the tiny amounts of horror here were way better than what Morbius was trying to do.

          Benedict Cumberbatch is one of the better actors of the stars of the MCU. He’s always a joy, and this film lets him branch out even further. Newcomer superhero America Chavez is a great addition, and Wong is given a good amount of screen time. There’s also plot points involving love interest Christine played by rom-com all-star Rachel McAdams, and it’s been so long since the first Doctor Strange that I had no idea where that relationship had left off that.

          The film starts immediately with some action with a demon chasing Chavez, and here the demon’s animation was too much and hard to follow. I could watch Cumberbatch do his wizard hand motions all day, but some of the other action is chopped up and overall unspectacular.

          The plot remains relatively simple throughout. One of the best things about the first film was that it was clever. I’m happy to report the same is true with this sequel. Like Strange’s adversaries typically have some sort of magic power like all Marvel villains, but he is frequently outmatched and has to use his wits to win the day. That made the first film’s climax so entertaining, and there’s continued wit in this film too. But in all honesty, it’s hard to watch something like Everything Everywhere All At Once so recently and then come to this film. Because that film does ultimately have more emotional weight and standout action than this film. And for those not familiar, yes it also deals with the multiverse.

          Strange, M.D. 2 is a solid addition and I’m sure will make some of the comic fans go nuts with some of the stuff that happens. The action is fine, there’s better visuals here than other Marvel films, the characters are fun with some surprises, and it’s a breezy 2-hour runtime. You will have a good time when you watch. But it doesn’t dethrone Spider-Man: No Way Home as the best MCU film dealing with multiverses. Of madness or any other emotion.

 

Spoilers

          Let’s start these spoilers off strong.

          John Krasinski is in the MCU, and I love it. That whole scene with him and the other alternate superheroes was the best scene in the film. And again, Marvel is clever. Despite its outcome it’s hard to tell what more to expect. Yes, Agent Carter is now in the films. Should we be happy that we got Captain Carter before the demise? I can also see Krasinski not wanting a long contract to appear in many movies as Doc Fantastic and this being a one-off. So it’s hard to predict which keeps things continuing to be fresh and interesting.

          One of my biggest critiques of WandaVision was how Wanda mind-controlled the town and it felt like everyone was sort of just willing to gloss over it and, in fact, go out of their way to justify her actions. Granted, it appears people still didn’t really care about that in this film, but having Scarlet Witch so prominent in this film did make the events of the show feel more in sync now.

          The two end-credit scenes (yes, stay all the way to the very end) are some of the best of any of the films. I wonder how prominent Strange’s third eye will be used because that thang be ugly. Also, with how little you can trust character deaths, and this is a big spoiler here, I can see Elizabeth Olsen being satisfied with her character’s conclusion, but I did not see a dead body, so she could easily come back.

          I think part of the thrills from this film is dependent on the cameos and the whole aspect of the multiverse. The camera would pan into an actor’s face frequently with them acting over-the-top, and it honestly got a little silly at points. Like when alternate Christine yelled, “Go back to Hell!” or whatever she said to those souls of the damned, that was a terribly cheesy line. If you return to this film with the future knowledge of where the cinematic universe has gone, I think some of this film’s initial shine will wear off. But I do want to stress that this was a good time at the theater, and I’m happy with the result and how Marvel has managed to continue to surprise me despite everyone and their mailman becoming conspiracy theorists.