Captain Marvel

March 9, 2019 at 7:07 pm | Posted in 2019 | Leave a comment
Tags: , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,

◊ ◊ ◊ ½

With the premier of “Avengers: Endgame” less than two months away, the behemoth that is Disney/Marvel (let’s call them DisMar, for short) has a close eye on the behemoth that is the MCU (Marvel Cinematic Universe). Everything changes after “Endgame,” with the MCU losing at least three of its tent pole characters: Iron Man, Thor, and Captain America. But, don’t worry, Marvel president Kevin Feige has things well in hand. The next generation of Marvel will be led by the likes of the Black Panther and the eponymous character of “Captain Marvel.” And the MCU looks to be in fine shape, thanks for asking. “Captain Marvel” is headed toward a $150M opening weekend, making it the highest grossing film of 2019 so far and among the top highest grossing Marvel films. And, in the process, Marvel introduces its first female lead and arguably the strongest hero in the MCU. What helps is that the film is genuinely entertaining. It keeps a fairly sprightly pace, effectively intermixing action and humor. Set in 1995, the film is chock full of every 90s reference it could possibly make; some are obvious, some are subtle, and some made me laugh out loud. Brie Larson’s (“Short Term 12,” “Room,” “Kong: Skull Island”) Captain Marvel has an easy charm and smart aleck attitude that is a natural fit in the MCU. It also helps that she is so powerful and really loves to kick ass. There is something undeniably fun about watch a smart, powerful woman beating the shit out of arrogant men. While not as evocative as “Black Panther,” this film also embraces its role as voice for a marginalized group. The message of being a strong woman in a sexist world runs throughout the film is both obvious and subtle ways, as when a man tells Larson’s character to lighten up and smile. This becomes most obvious, and emotionally affecting, in a scene where we see a fallen Captain Marvel remember all the times as a little girl she got up, got tough, and kept going. The message about how strong girls can be is not even slightly preachy, but it is undeniable, none-the-less. It helps that that scene is followed immediately by Captain Marvel kicking some serious ass while No Doubt’s “I’m Just a Girl” plays in the background. The story line felt a bit overly-convoluted at times, though I understand that they were trying to reconcile the character’s very convoluted origin story/stories into a coherent whole. But that is a small quibble, really. It’s hard to not image young girls getting inspired by Captain Marvel, now and in the future. That’s reason enough to make more films. If they keep being so damned enjoyable, that’ll be the cherry on top.

Fantastic Beasts: The Crimes of Grindelwald

November 17, 2018 at 2:47 pm | Posted in 2018 | Leave a comment
Tags: , , , , , , , , , , , , ,

◊ ◊

Well, I think there is one thing we can all agree on: “Fantastic Beasts: The Crimes of Grindelwald” has to be one of the most unwieldy (and worst) movie titles in recent history. The second film in the second Rowling film series, “Grindelwald” takes place in New York, London and Paris in 1925. It follows Newt Scamander (Eddie Redmayne) as he is recruited against his will into the escalating battle with Grindelwald (Johnny Depp in his best role in years). After the gentle slapstick nature and light-heartedness of the first “Fantastic Beasts” movie, it is clear Rowling, et al. are returning to the same dark, serial format that has served them so well. This is not a bad thing. I was most engaged with the “Harry Potter” series when it went dark, and the goofiness was the least engaging thing about the last “Fantastic Beasts.” This will, no doubt, be one of several films in the “Grindelwald” series. Grindelwald is a promising villain, but the writing needs to be a lot better if I am going to be drawn in. While riddled (may I say Tom Riddled, or is that going too far?) with lots of beautiful special effects and some fun creatures, this film has little else to offer the viewer. The plot meanders pointlessly for the films 2:15 run time, only getting any real momentum in the last couple of scenes. My impression was that the story was an excuse to stitch together all the cool effects they wanted to show the audience on their way to the 30-minutes of story they had actually written. The characters felt equally ill-conceived. There is real complexity in Grindelwald’s and Dumbledore’s backstory, but it is only hinted at in the vaguest way. I hope that’s because they are saving that story for a future movie and not because they are afraid to make Dumbledore’s sexuality too overt. As much as I love Redmayne, I find Newt to be too awkward and painfully shy to draw an audience in. The sexual/romantic tension between Newt and Tina Goldstein (Katherine Waterston), or Leta Lastrange (Zoë Kravitz), or his animal keeper all fell flat. He was so repressed that nothing really showed through; no relationships had any impact. The only relationship that seemed to contain any emotional punch was the one between Queenie and Jacob (Alison Sudol, Dan Fogler), particularly at the end of the film. I will be curious to see how that develops. Ultimately, this felt like an empty affair: a lot of flashy effects and a lot of setting the stage for something Rowling presumably has planned. Well, let’s hope that comes quickly. I’m not sure I can sit through too many more films like this one, on the way to something better.

Spy

June 28, 2015 at 7:22 pm | Posted in 2015 | Leave a comment
Tags: , , , , , , ,

◊ ◊ ½

So, this is my first Melissa McCarthy experience. I don’t watch her show and have not seen any of her other movies. I was planning on making her my new Sandra Bullock (before “Gravity,” I had only ever seen her in “Speed”). However, I was drawn by the 95% on Rotten Tomatoes and decided to give her a try. I was not completely disappointed. As many have stated, McCarthy is a natural physical actress with a great gift for pratfalls, slapstick and a beautiful range of facial expressions. In addition, she has a unique skill for looking wide-eyed and innocent while simultaneously being aggressive and shockingly vulgar. This style of humor was on full display here and mostly to positive effect. The film started slowly and took a while to build any momentum. Most of the cast of A-list actors (including Jude Law, Allison Janney, Jason Statham and Bobby Cannavale) play utterly one-dimensional and largely unfunny characters. It is not until McCarthy’s character meet’s Rayna, played by Rose Byrne, that the film actually finds its groove. While both McCarthy and Byrne are reasonably funny by themselves, they are laugh-out-loud funny when interacting with each other. Those scenes, and there are a fair number of them, lift the film into something more than the formulaic mess it would have otherwise been. The plot, action scenes and so many of the film’s conceits are ridiculous but one can allow for that in what is essentially a caper comedy. All that is required is that it entertains and, for large chunks of the film, is does that quite well. I’m not sure how much of these type of characters I could put up with or how many times I would find it funny and I hope McCarthy has a broader range than the crass slapstick required here (I know Byrne does). That said, they did exactly what was required and did it better than I can imagine many actors doing. Often this film doesn’t work (as in the needless 50 Cent cameo) but, when it does, it is entirely because of the McCarthy-Byrne chemistry.

The Grand Budapest Hotel

March 17, 2014 at 1:22 pm | Posted in 2014, Uncategorized | 2 Comments
Tags: , , , , , , ,

◊ ◊ ◊ ◊ ½

Wes Anderson appears to be hitting his stride.  His last three films: this one, “Moonrise Kingdom” and “The Fantastic Mr Fox,” manage to be the best of what you expect from a Wes Anderson film, which is to say, you will either love it or hate it. His mix of absurdity and whimsy is definitely not for everyone but, if you love him, you will love this. He sadly stumbled a bit with “The Life Aquatic” and “The Darjeeling Limited,” somehow managing to make the films seem twee rather than whimsical and pretentious rather than absurdist fun. However, “The Grand Budapest Hotel” almost rises to the level of “Moonrise Kingdom” with its brilliant visuals and joyfully convoluted plot. This is caper movie in the grand tradition of caper movies, owing as much to the “Muppet” movies as it does to the likes of “The Sting” or “The Thomas Crown Affair.” The plot is ridiculous but of course it is. You don’t see a Wes Anderson film for a nuanced plot; you see it for ridiculous dialogue, deadpan acting and weirdly wonderful visuals and this film has all of those in spades. It’s a lot of fun to see all the Anderson regulars here: Bill Murray, Jason Schwarzman, Owen Wilson, Bob Balaban, Edward Norton, Tilda Swinton and Harvey Keitel, all clearly enjoying the hell out of themselves. In addition, they are joined by the usual gaggle of the odd and unexpected: Ralph Fiennes, Jude Law, Willem Dafoe, Adrien Brody, Jeff Goldblum, Fisher Stevens (!), Tom Wilkinson, Saoirse Ronan, F. Murray Abraham and the newly hot Léa Seydoux (“Blue is the Warmest Color”). Everyone is great in their roles, however large or small, though Fiennes and Dafoe were the real joys to watch. Tony Revolori, the heretofore unknown 17 year old who places the main character, “Zero,” also did a fantastic job in what I hope is a breakout role for him. It can’t be easy to step into a film like this, that requires a real knack for comic timing, but he was up to the task.  Wes Anderson’s movies will never be lauded on Oscar night but thoseof us who truly love film have great respect for the voice that is uniquely his.

Side Effects

March 3, 2013 at 7:34 pm | Posted in 2013 | 1 Comment
Tags: , , , , , ,

◊ ◊ ½

Steven Soderbergh is very hit or miss for me.  He has made brilliant films (“Traffic”), edgy art films (“The Limey”), pretentious nonsense (“Bubble”),  vapid blockbusters (the “Ocean’s” series).  I had not idea what to expect from his one.  It turned out to be a film in two parts.  I liked the first more than the second.  It started out as a serious and realistic drama exploring the ubiquity of mental health meds and the large industry behind their distribution.  The story starts with a 28 year old wife (Rooney Mara) reuniting with her husband (Channing Tatum) who has spent the last 4 years in prison.  He wants to reconnect with her and rebuild his life but she is deeply depressed.  She sees a psychiatrist (Jude Law) and he prescribes an SSRI.  When it has unpleasant side effects, they try another and another.  He consults with her former psychiatrist (Catherine Zeta-Jones) and she recommends a new drug.  So far so good.  Mara really shows her acting chops as she convincingly plays deep depression, lethargy, spaciness and the various other side effects she is required to pull off.  While the film appeared like it was going to be a complex look at our pharma-industry in this country, I was excited and drawn in.  Then act two begins.  I won’t bother to tell you anything about “act two” other than to say that, once I realized it was that type of movie, I suddenly had the whole story figured out; I knew the part each person was meant to play and how it was going to end.  This was no longer a thought-provoking drama, it was a Hollywood formula movie.  Now, having said that, it’s not a bad formula and can be a fun one to watch.  I did end up enjoying the ride, though (as is the case with this particular formula) the plot got less and less credible as the movie went on.  It ended up being silly fun.  Not a bad way to spend time at the movies but not the movie I wanted and not good use of a talent like Mara.

Create a free website or blog at WordPress.com.
Entries and comments feeds.