Don't Worry Darling

 

Gillipedia Official Rating: Pretty sure a comma is needed in the title

Score: 5/10

          The score above might feel harsh. This isn’t a terrible movie. But it’s certainly also not great. It relies too heavily on shock factor moments and the reveal behind the plot, but the story has holes and the flow of the film is far too inconsistent. Since this is a spoiler-free review, we won’t talk heavily about the plot, but there’s plenty to discuss.

          Don’t Worry Darling had plenty of drama outside of filming. It’s the sophomoric film for director (and supporting actress) Olivia Wilde, and we have Florence Pugh, Harry Styles (yes, the guy who puts sugar on watermelons or something), and Chris Pine. A video went viral with Styles possibly spitting on Pine, and Styles’ relationship with Wilde appears to be quite rocky. In a strange way, it made the whole experience of watching the film more entertaining, but outside of that, none of the outside drama affects my scoring.

          Stars Pugh and Styles are lovers living in an idyllic community against what appears to be the backdrop of the 50s—think Marty McFly traveling to the past. While Pugh lovingly takes care of the house and day drinks with bff Wilde, their husbands, including Styles, go to work for the community company referred to as Project Victory. The leader is Pine, and he clearly comes across as charming and dominating; the community loves him, but it’s very apparent something else is happening.

          One of the best things Wilde captures as a director is the synchronicity of the daily activities (Pugh making coffee and breakfast and wiping windows, the husbands driving off to work). It’s hypnotizing to watch, and it only adds to that feeling of something off with the world around. From the very early scenes, I was getting huge The Truman Show vibes.

          The film is played as a psychological thriller as Pugh starts questioning everything, and nobody appears to take her seriously. And this is where the film falls flat most. If you watch the trailer for the movie, you’ll see quick moments like Pugh wrapping her face with plastic wrap, glass squeezing her against the wall while cleaning a hallway, crushing eggs without any yolk inside, etc. All of these moments are certainly engaging and slightly unnerving. But that’s also exactly what they are—moments. There’s never buildup to these actions—only occasional quick changes to obscure and somewhat abstract shots of stuff that are, again, in sync and played both forward and backward. And once the film reveals its revelation, it works but won’t blow you away. It fits well with the underlying narrative, but it won’t really shock anyone and leads to some plotholes.

          But the film is still entertaining! Florence Pugh can do no wrong, and if anyone is questioning Styles as an actor, don’t forget that Christopher Nolan gave him a substantial role in Dunkirk. Styles does overact sometimes, but he’s still fun. Pine is good, but he also does this small chuckle after going through all of his monologues. The best way to write out what his chuckle sounds like is: “heh heh.” And he does it way too much. The soundtrack is great, and the costumes are amazing.

          Don’t let the score get too much in your head. If you want a good time at the movies, you’ll probably enjoy Don’t Worry Darling. But it doesn’t succeed as much as it hoped. For an “R” rated film, it’s pretty tame in terms of disturbing content. I’ll defend only giving this a 5/10, but hey, I was still entertained at the end of the day.

Barbarian

 

Gillipedia Official Rating: Felt like a barbarian eating my popcorn watching this

Score: 9/10

          This is the best horror film of the year for me. It’s also the twistiest. So with that said, I’ll keep the details limited to preserve the experience for you when you take my advice to go watch this movie. And without much else at the theaters to pay attention to, now is a great time to check it out.

          I’ll say this much about it. We start off with our star Tess arriving to her AirBnB on a dark and stormy night. To her surprise there’s already a man there. His name is Keith, and he genuinely appears to be a normal guy, if a little reserved, wondering why there’s a woman at the doorstep in the middle of the night. It turns out that he rented the place using a different app, and rather than putting Tess out for the night, he invites her to come in just to be able to use the wifi and figure this situation out. You can see the skepticism and internal alarms going off in Tess’ eyes, but she relents. And of course with this being a horror movie, there’s more to this setup than meets the eye.

          It’s also absolutely worth noting that Keith is played by Bill Skarsgard. If his eyes look at all familiar, it’s because he played the titular clown in It. And that knowledge kept playing in my mind as Tess reluctantly stepped into the unknown house. In a great coincidence, I had just recently watched the horror film Drag Me to Hell from a decade ago. I don’t recommend that Sam Raimi directed flick; however, it has Justin Long playing the sweet, sympathetic boyfriend. Why do I bring this up? Well, the only other piece of information I’ll divulge is that he makes an appearance in this film.

          In a bit of a redundant statement, this movie starts immediately. What I described above consists of the first 10 minutes of the film. And this is a brisk film, but how does it fill the rest of the screentime? Well, that’s where the twistiness comes into play. But it takes more than the ability to make M. Night Shyamalan proud to create a great film. Without beating you over the head, Barbarian really impressed me by its ability to have me wonder about the morals of the characters and what the film is ultimately trying to say by the time the credits roll around. It’s not like material that you take to Sunday Bible School, but it scratches beneath the surface that say slasher flicks don’t even make an attempt at while being wildly entertaining.

          There’s plenty to rave about this film. The dialogue has a naturalistic feel to it. There’s a couple lines that feel closer to lazy writing, but it works really well overall. The score is also great. And one of my favorite things is how the film shoots its different characters. The film frequently is on Tess’ face, but we also get to peek over her shoulder. So as she faces forward, we’re squirming in our seats and wondering what might be behind her. In contrast, once Long makes his appearance, he brings about a carefree attitude like he won’t ever end up on the bottom no matter what life throws at him. Thus, he is shot more from behind as he frantically twists his head with no clear direction on what he’s doing.

          I am not familiar with leading actress Georgina Campbell, but she does a great job portraying a capable woman who is still aware of the dangers around her. Outside of a couple lines of dialogue, the only thing I feel like the film could’ve possibly improved upon was more of a character arc for the leading lady. But even writing out that critique, I have to recognize that not every movie needs to have the protagonist experience some sort of epiphany. The film had its goals with its story, succeeded, and excelled beyond what I was expecting in terms of simply being entertaining. So who is the barbarian of the film? In a twist piece of writing, I don’t reveal that answer. If you’re a fan of thriller horror films, you have to check Barbarian out.

Bird Box

 

Gillipedia Official Rating: Please don’t bring back the Bird Box challenge

Score: 6/10

          Bird Box is ultimately fine. There’s nothing egregious about it. But it does frustrate me in ways that I’ll discuss, and it also has the unfortunate circumstance of releasing after A Quiet Place and inevitably drawing the comparisons of being that movie except you can’t see instead of speak. It’s really more like M. Night Shymalan’s The Happening but better. Where the aforementioned film has people killing themselves for smelling the roses, Bird Box has people commit suicide after seeing some “creatures”.

          The film begins with a tense situation where our hero, Sandra Bullock’s Malorie, tells her 2 kids that they have to make a journey down a river blindfolded. It’s a fun premise, sets the tone appropriately, and introduces us to our main character in what feels like a post-apocalyptic setting. And it’s just enough of a tease for when it flashes back 5 years to Bullock pregnant and talking with her sister Jessica—played by Sarah Paulson—about mass suicides happening across Europe. During a prenatal visit at the hospital, the mysteries from the East have suddenly made their way over to the U.S., and Malorie and Jessica frantically start driving back while chaos ensues around them. Jessica is presented as the level-headed sister while Malorie doesn’t appear to have taken to the role of an expectant mother yet. But when Jessica’s eyes appear to simultaneously glow yet appear blank, she rambles about their mother and drives their car into incoming traffic. Malorie gives her best efforts to stop this episode, but the car crashes, Malorie escapes, and she manages to get people inside a house to let her in.

          This sets up the main focus of the story. We’re introduced to many characters in a classic apocalyptic setting now together all trying to survive. But as their story continues, it periodically flashes forward to Malorie and her 2 kids on the river; we assume we know the fate of everyone in the house, but there’s still the intrigue of what happens next and the hope that we as an audience want things to end well in both timelines—although we both know that’s more than likely not the outcome. So that’s the goal of the movie: make us care about the characters in the house knowing full well that all except Malorie and her unborn child most likely won’t make it. Oh, and before we talk about this more, I do need to address that on the river, Malorie calls the kids “Boy” and “Girl”. While I can see this as something you can get away with in a book, it feels hollow and too sharp from Malorie. Anyway, keep reading this review, People.

          The characters in the house are my biggest frustration with the film. We have all the stereotypes at this party: two young adults who are horny because they’re young, a sweet old lady, the grumpy old man who wants everyone off his lawn, a comedic relief, and the charming and caring romantic interest. Oh, and there’s also BD Wong who doesn’t fit any mold actually and isn’t actually trying to genetically mutate a giant dino for the literal, what would it be, 5^th film. Soon afterward, there’s a knocking at the door, and a young, sweet pregnant woman joins their crew as well.

          There’s some scenes with genuine tension like when they run out of supplies and take a car to the supermarket (they cleverly use GPS and detection systems on the car since they black out the windows) and back on the river when a crazy man encourages them to open their eyes. But since it’s proven that if they don’t look out at the open world they’re fine, some other scenes’ tension feels more manufactured. I do have to compare this to A Quiet Place. Yes, I understand the novel Bird Box is based off was released prior to A Quiet Place; however, I can still compare the quality of story and filmmaking and not run into the debate of originality between the two. But I digress. Whereas John Krasinski’s film introduces the malevolent creatures in the opening scene, we never see the creatures of this film. The rules feel more defined and it’s interesting to see how the characters in A Quiet Place have adapted to survive. Bird Box puts less emphasis on their vague creatures and focuses more on the characters. But that does put the mindset of, “Okay, just don’t look outside,” in my mind; plus, I didn’t find the Bird Box characters well fleshed out—which is central to the success. You learn a little about the creatures and their effects and how it affects the outside world, but it honestly isn’t as compelling as A Quiet Place.

          I see what Bird Box was going for, and all in all, it’s entertaining. The latter half is better with the focus being on Malorie, Boy, Girl, and the love interest Tom. John Malkovich plays a pretty decent role, and Lil Rel Howery is obviously the comedic relief. While I find A Quiet Place a true masterpiece in its execution of horror, Bird Box has some solid moments as well as more phoned in portions. But if you take it compared to The Happening, it’s basically what that movie could’ve been. If you haven’t watched it yet, I’m sure you’ll enjoy it enough. But for those that have already seen it, I have a feeling if you go back to it, you’ll see where I’m coming from in it not being as complete a film as it wants to be. Oh, and it took the birds thing from War of the Worlds. Sorry about it.

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.