Movie Review Fantastic Four

Fantastic Four (2015) 

Directed by Josh Trank

Written by Josh Trank, Simon Kinberg, Jeremy Slater

Starring Miles Teller, Michael B. Jordan, Kate Mara, Jamie Bell

Release Date August 7th, 2015 

Fantastic 4 is far from fantastic. (Yes, I know how cheesy that line is) This attempt to reboot the franchise following the disaster that was The Silver Surfer, assembled a terrific cast, a rising young director and arguably Hollywood's hottest screenwriter and somehow managed to make a movie that disappoints every audience, fanboys and casual moviegoers. This is a dull-witted origin story that fails that while successfully explaining the origins of the supposed heroes, waits until the final 10 minutes of the movie to make them heroic.

In many ways I feel bad for the team behind the new Fantastic Four. Director Josh Trank has stepped out and actually trashed the movie as it was being released. Trank claims that this isn't the movie that he made and that the movie he made was pretty good as opposed to the movie that we are getting in theaters this weekend. Trank's version of Fantastic Four is a movie we will never get to see. Indeed, Trank isn't wrong, this isn't a very good movie. That said, I wish there had been a slightly more diplomatic approach. 

It's a shame that this has gone the way it has because this Fantastic Four movie features some of the best actors of young Hollywood. The film stars Miles Teller as Reed Richards, Jamie Bell as his best friend Ben Grimm, Kate Mara as Reed's future wife, Sue Storm and the brilliant Michael B. Jordan as Johnny Storm, Sue's adopted brother. The film follows Reed as he and Ben invent a prototype for a matter transporter. The successful invention leads to them being recruited by Franklin Storm, the father of Johnny and Sue, and the head of a scientific firm. 

What Reed and Ben don't know about their invention is that it is actually a portal to a parallel dimension. When they find out they are disappointed to learn that Franklin intends to send a group of NASA astronauts into this dimension rather than allowing Ben and Reed the chance to go themselves. Being hotshot kids, they recruit Sue and Johnny along with another friend and scientist, named Victor (Toby Kebbell) to join them as they sneak into the lab and make use of their invention. 

The trip goes horribly wrong and results in all five of the young scientists to be mutated. Reed becomes elastic, his body able to stretch to a remarkable degree. Sue becomes invisible, capable of appearing and disappearing at will. Johnny takes on the ability to become fire. He can fly and throw fireballs and it's as cool as it sounds except that he can't yet control his abilities. Poor Ben gets the worst of it all. Ben has been turned to stone. He can still move and breathe, and speak, but he's covered in rock. It does give him superhuman strength but at the expense of his basic humanity. 

The plot then becomes about Reed's guilt over seemingly dooming himself and his closest friends to a life of mutations that they cannot control. After making it back from the other dimension, losing Victor in the process, Reed manages to escape from a military holding facility and runs off to South America. Located a year later, he's taken into custody by Ben who is seemingly Reed's sworn enemy. Sue and Johnny also aid in Reed's capture having had suits developed for them that enable them to control their powers. 

A return to the parallel dimension reveals that Victor not only survived, but he's also built himself a kingdom. His return to this dimension finds him looking to destroy the Earth as he sees it as a threat to his new home. Thus begins an all-out war between the newly teamed Fantastic Four and Victor on Victor's turf as he launches an all-out assault to destroy the planet. And all of it is shot with a muddy, gross, dark aesthetic that renders the action unpleasant to look at. It's also tonally all over the place as the team isn't fully established as a team and only starts to develop chemistry just as the movie is ending. 

Fantastic Four is a gigantic mess and whether that is the fault of a meddling studio or an insecure director deflecting blame is something we can't know for sure. What we can know for sure is the movie makes little sense, appears to have been cobbled together from disparate pieces and is a general embarrassment for all involved. Poor Kate Mara is perhaps taking the brunt of the bad press as the reshoots and her abhorrent wig have become emblematic of the many, many problems plaguing this doomed adaptation. 

But she's not alone, no one gets out of Fantast Four (2015) unscathed. For poor Miles Teller this was a first shot at super-stardom and it has fallen completely to pieces. For Jamie Bell, the chance to have a regular big paycheck from a popular franchise is lost, though being so thoroughly talented and easily employable on the indie film scene is likely a strong comfort for him. As for Michael B. Jordan, he'll probably be fine. Chris Evans survived a disastrous turn as Johnny Storm in this relatively young century, I'm sure Jordan will as well. 

As for director Josh Trank, none of this reflects well on him. While he valiantly proclaims himself the victim and the artist, he's also coming off as petulant, ungrateful, egotistical. He will likely be a hero in parts of the online world for his supposed integrity but that is unlikely to translate into regular work as a director, especially within a studio system eager to weed out the rebels and troublemakers. Having so openly made enemies while making a major franchise film, it seems unlikely we will see him back behind the camera any time soon. 

This review is becoming an autopsy so I will leave it here. This isn't a very good movie. I feel bad for all involved. 

Movie Review Paulina

Paulina (2015) 

Directed by Santiago Mitre 

Written by Santiago Mitre 

Starring Dolores Fonzi, Oscar Martinez, Esteban Lamothe

Release Date June 18th, 2015 

Director Santiago Mitre’s Paulina is a sharp and uncompromising story about a sharp and uncompromising character. The Paulina at the center of Paulina is portrayed by actress Dolores Fonzi whose inscrutable face and dispassionate voice crafts a performance that some will find off-putting but that I found to be endlessly fascinating, more so than the weighty issues the film employs Paulina to scrutinize.

Paulina is a success in her field in the Argentine judiciary, on her way toward becoming a lawyer, possibly someday a judge, when she informs her father (Oscar Martinez) that she is giving up her position and her education to teach at a rural school. Paulina’s decision is a fateful one as moving to the rural province outside the Argentine capital of Buenos Aires will not come easily. The scene of Paulina informing her father of her decision is one of incredible power that also happens to be the very first scene of the film.

In one unbroken take, that mostly sticks with Paulina’s enigmatic face as she moves through her father’s home, father and daughter debate the pros and cons, snipe at each other willfully and debate the politics of the region, all in the span of a 5 to 10-minute take. It’s a scene remarkable in its audacity as much as in its scripting. The dialogue is as fiery and passionate even as Paulina herself is self-possessed. Paulina argues her point with fervent words while her face rarely indicates the meaning of the words.

Find my full length review at Geeks.Media 

Movie Review Dude Bro Party Massacre 3

Dude Bro Party Massacre 3 (2015) 

Directed by John Salmon, Michael Rousselet, Tomm Jacobsen, Joey Scoma 

Written by Alec Owen 

Starring Alec Owen, Greg Sestero, Patton Oswalt, Nina Hartley 

Release Date July 7th, 2015 Re-Release Date September 1st, 2023 

Published August 31st, 2023 

Dude Bro Party Massacre 3 is a glorious piece of horror satire. Released in 2015, this comic send up of 80s horror tropes and Dude Bro caricatures is now getting a special re-release for on-demand rental on Friday, September 1st. The creation of 5 Second Films, Dude Bro Party Massacre 3 comically satirizes 80s horror movies by picking an in progress franchise with a deathless villain named Motherface and a group of Dude Bro frat guys who make terrific bloody fodder for inventive and imaginative horror movie death scenes. 

Dude Bro Party Massacre tells the story of a twin frat brothers, one of whom has survived two previous Dude Bro Party Massacres at the hands of the vengeful Motherface. The twins are played by Screenwriter Alec Owen and part three picks up with the brother who'd starred in the previous massacres being murdered. This his more shy and reserved twin brother to his old college campus to investigate his brother's death. To do this, he will have to join his late brother's frat, Delta Bi, a group of hard partying survivors known for their epic parties and epic pranks. 

In classic frat movie fashion, those darn Delta Bi's are major pranksters and troublemakers. The only difference is that there pranks tend to have a body count. The frat was responsible for more than 4000 deaths but hey, it's just a prank bro. They also toppled a South American dictator? Maybe? These scenes are hilariously presented as boys will boys stuff punished with a week long suspension, during Greek Week, so you know they are in real trouble. 

The suspension is a ruse to get the Dude Bros of Delta Bi off the campus and onto a lake side where they are set up to be killed by Mother Face. As happens in long in the tooth 80s franchise horror, new supernatural elements tend to get added to the plot. Here, the local sheriff, played in a brilliant cameo by Patton Oswalt needs the Dude Bros to be killed and a virgin sacrifice in order to protect the town from some vaguely specified demonic presence. The sheriff has conspired with the College Dean, played by adult film star Nina Hartley to set up the Dude Bros while he sets up a former Dude Bro turned cop to be the virgin sacrifice. 

Find my full length review at Horror.Media 

Movie Review Insidious Chapter 3

Insidious Chapter 3 (2015) 

Directed by Leigh Whannell 

Written by Leigh Whannell 

Starring Lin Shaye, Leigh Whannell, Angus Sampson, Dermot Mulroney, Stefanie Scott 

Release Date June 15th, 2015 

Published July 10th, 2023 

Insidious Chapter 3 is a vastly underrated entry in this terrific horror franchise. All of the Insidious movies have been pretty good but Chapter 3, with Leigh Whannell writing and directing is a low key brilliant horror movie. Whannell is a thoughtful, thorough, and detailed director and he brings that fully to bear on the trim, ingenious scares of Insidious Chapter 3. Stepping out of the shadow of his friend and partner James Wan, Whannell had a lot to live up and Insidious Chapter 3 was proof that he could hang with the best in the genre. 

Insidious Chapter 3 is set several years prior the first Insidious film. The story finds our hero, Elise Rainer (Lin Shaye), a shell of the woman she was when we met her. It's the story of Elise finding herself again following the death of her husband and the threats made against her life by a demonic entity we will eventually come to know as 'The Black Bride." For now, however, Elise pads about in a housecoat and sleeps with her husband's cardigan in a scene so sad I can't stand thinking about it. Elise's stupor is interrupted by the arrival of young woman at her door. 

Quinn Brenner (Stefanie Scott) is desperate to speak with her late mother and she's been referred to Elise as someone who can communicate with the dead. Elise, at first, tries to turn the young woman away but soon relents. What she finds is that Quinn's forays into the world of the dead have communicated with someone, but it is most certainly not her mother. She warns Quinn not to continue contacting her mother but deep down, Elise knows that this vile entity is now attached to Quinn and she's in great danger. 

Insidious Chapter 3 also gives us the origin of Elise's connection to Specks (Leigh Whannell) and Tucker (Angus Sampson). The duo is a pair of ghost hunters who have yet to encounter any actual ghosts. They do however, have advanced equipment that could, potentially, help them find one. Specks and Tucker are called by Quinn's father, Sean Brenner (Dermot Mulroney), at the behest of his son, who saw them on YouTube. Quinn, at this point, has undergone several inexplicable events that have endangered her life so even her skeptical father has to admit, something is going on. 

That's when Elise returns, partners with Specks and Tucker, and the fight to save Quinn from The Further is on. Whannell's talent for pacing, clever ideas for scares, and atmosphere are on full display in Insidious Chapter 3. Whannell has a sense of wonder about his work that I really enjoy. He has a sort of awe for what his characters are doing which feels appropriate. Eventually, this will be a routine for them, but this is there first adventure together and their chemistry is immediately apparent. 

Find my full length review at Horror.Media 

Movie Review Paulina

Paulina (2015) 

Directed by Santiago Mitre

Written by Santiago Mitre 

Starring Delores Fonzi 

Release Date June 15th, 2015 

Director Santiago Mitre’s Paulina is a sharp and uncompromising story about a sharp and uncompromising character. The Paulina at the center of Paulina is portrayed by actress Dolores Fonzi whose inscrutable face and dispassionate voice crafts a performance that some will find off-putting but that I found to be endlessly fascinating, more so than the weighty issues the film employs Paulina to scrutinize.

Paulina is a success in her field in the Argentine judiciary, on her way toward becoming a lawyer, possibly someday a judge, when she informs her father (Oscar Martinez) that she is giving up her position and her education to teach at a rural school. Paulina’s decision is a fateful one as moving to the rural province outside the Argentine capital of Buenos Aires will not come easily. The scene of Paulina informing her father of her decision is one of incredible power that also happens to be the very first scene of the film.

In one unbroken take, that mostly sticks with Paulina’s enigmatic face as she moves through her father’s home, father and daughter debate the pros and cons, snipe at each other willfully and debate the politics of the region, all in the span of a 5 to 10-minute take. It’s a scene remarkable in its audacity as much as in its scripting. The dialogue is as fiery and passionate even as Paulina herself is self-possessed. Paulina argues her point with fervent words while her face rarely indicates the meaning of the words.

From there Paulina travels to a small village where she is hoping to teach politics to youths who’ve never been exposed to the inner-workings of government and aren’t particularly interested. On Paulina’s first day her entire class walks out after she makes an error while attempting to engage them. The students walk out again the second day when she fails to engage them with a game. Paulina’s struggles with the students are absorbing and yet dizzying. While most of Paulina is subtitled, the dialogue of the students is not transcribed and those who don’t speak the language have only Paulina for context, furthering the intended disconnect between the audience and Paulina while similarly forcing us to identify with her.

Read my full length review at Geeks.Media 

Movie Review Mission Impossible Rogue Nation and Ghost Protocol

Mission Impossible Ghost Protocol (2011) 

Directed by Brad Bird

Written by Josh Applebaum, Andre Nemec

Starring Tom Cruise, Jeremy Renner, Simon Pegg, Ving Rhames, Paula Patton 

Release Date December 16th, 2011 

Mission Impossible Rogue Nation (2015) 

Directed by Christopher McQuarrie

Written by Christopher McQuarrie

Starring Tom Cruise, Jeremy Renner, Simon Pegg, Ving Rhames, Rebecca Ferguson

Release Date July 31st, 2015 

Published July 25th, 2018 

Mission Impossible 3 made an indelible mark in my mind as the most entertaining and accomplished take on the entire Mission Impossible franchise. After seeing both Mission Impossible: Ghost Protocol and Mission Impossible Rogue Nation, I can now say with certainty that the series peaked with number 3. J.J Abrams' kinetic direction was artful and exciting with an eye toward drama, action and suspense all in the same package.

That’s not to say that Ghost Protocol and Rogue Nation are bad, they just lack the same clarity, focus and skill of MI3. Neither directors, Brad Bird or Christopher McQuarrie, appear capable of imposing their vision on the franchise, or at least, they didn’t impose it as well as Abrams did as each seems far more at the mercy of stunt coordinators and the daredevil antics of star Tom Cruise than Abrams was.

Ghost Protocol picks up the action of the MI story some five years after the action of MI3. Ethan Hunt is behind bars in a foreign country, accused of having murdered 6 Serbian nationals. We will eventually be told that his wife, Jules (Michelle Monaghan), a prominent part of the action in MI3, was killed, but death in a spy movie doesn’t always mean death. The big bad this time out is a man code named Cobalt (Michael Nykvist), an arms dealer with the aim of ending the world with a nuclear missile.

It will be up to Agent Hunt and his new IMF team, including Field Agent Benji Dunn (Simon Pegg) and Jane Carter (Paula Patton). Carter is still reeling from the murder of her partner, Agent Hanaway (Josh Holloway, Lost) who was murdered by a killer for hire employed by Cobalt. They are joined by Analyst William Brandt (Jeremy Renner) who gets added to the team after his boss, the Secretary of the IMF (Tom Wilkinson) is murdered and the team is disavowed.

Brad Bird is a competent and highly capable director who keeps the pace up and the action well managed. Unfortunately, the film is little more than set-pieces strung together by a thin plot and a less than compelling villain. Ghost Protocol is remembered for the controversial CGI destruction of the Kremlin and a death-defying sequence in which Cruise appears to scale the outside of the world’s tallest building, Dubai’s Burj Khalifa.

Both sequences are solid and well captured with the Burj Khalifa climb coming the closest to evoking the best of the franchise. That said, they appeared to have the stunts before they had a script and wound up tailoring the story to the stunts. This was seemingly confirmed when writer Christopher McQuarrie was brought on half way into production for an uncredited rewrite of the script by Andre Nemec and Josh Applebaum.

Does this make Mission Impossible Ghost Protocol bad? No, it means that it comes up short of the legacy crafted by Mission Impossible 3. That film had big stunts and a big story to tell along with it. Ghost Protocol has ambition stunts but lacks the story to lift it to what I had hoped the series would be after MI3. Still, the movie is good enough, entertaining enough, and has just enough appeal that I don’t dislike it, but I don’t love it either.

Mission Impossible Rogue Nation, at the very least, improved upon Ghost Protocol. Here, Ethan Hunt opens the movie by being captured by the big bad, this time played by Sean Harris. Harris’ Solomon Lane has been eluding Ethan for two years since Ethan began to track him down. Lane has remained 2 steps ahead of Ethan while creating a series of tragedies intended to have a drastic effect on world markets.

Ethan is in so much hot water that the CIA, seen here in the form of a blustering Alec Baldwin, believes he is responsible for the terrorist acts caused by Lane’s outfit called, The Syndicate. In attempting to stop The Syndicate, Ethan recruits Benji to join him on the run from the CIA and they are joined by a British double agent named Ilsa Faust (Rebecca Ferguson) who has infiltrated The Syndicate and is the key to getting to Lane.

Director Christopher McQuarrie both wrote and directed Mission Impossible Rogue Nation and that fact does lend some clarity to the storytelling. The conspiracy in play is a wild one and rather clever and well executed. The film is still defined by one big stunt, in which Cruise legendarily clung to the side of a plane as it was taking off, but the stunt doesn’t completely overshadow the movie as the Burj Khalifa sequence in Ghost Protocol certainly did.

McQuarrie marries the slick, shallow thrills of MI2 with a little of the grit of the original with the craftsmanship of MI3 and creates easily the second best of the then 5 film franchise. I especially enjoyed the use of Rebecca Ferguson whose lithe physicality matches that of co-star Tom Cruise. The way she floats about fluidly in major fight scenes is really cool and in keeping with the action style of most of the Mission movies. She’s a really solid addition.

Sadly, the villain of Rogue Nation is once again the weakest part of the film. Who’s Sean Harris? He’s not a bad actor but I have no reference point for who he is as an actor. He’s not remotely on the star level of the rest of the cast, even Ferguson who makes her debut in this film. Harris’s lack of a profile makes him forgettable and when compared to the best villain in the franchise, Phillip Seymour Hoffman’s exceptional, Owen Davian, he comes up well short.

The character of Solomon Lane is not all that compelling. His aims are clear but the character is a shell and a full-fledged villain should be. He has no life, no personality, he’s not tough and while he’s portrayed as super-smart, our first time seeing him, he immediately chooses not to kill Ethan Hunt even though he easily could. The sequence makes the character look silly, especially when the script gives him zero reason to keep alive the one man he’s aware could stop his agenda.

The lack of care in the details of the script of Rogue One is part of what keeps the film far from greatness. It’s still solid and has terrific stunt work and top-notch action scenes, but sadly I was hoping for more of a brain. Instead, we get yet another Tom Cruise running chase scene and another Tom Cruise motorcycle chase scene, obligatory action beats that likely existed before a script ever did.

McQuarrie is also the writer-director of Mission Impossible Fallout which hits theaters this weekend. I believe Fallout will be good but my expectations have dimmed for the franchise. I had hoped Ethan Hunt would usurp James Bond as the top movie spy of all time. Sadly, Bond’s legacy is kept safe by a star too eager for stunts and directors unable to make the stunts into a fully compelling story beyond the mere presentation of spectacle that just happens to be part of a story.

Movie Review Jupiter Ascending

Jupiter Ascending (2015) 

Directed by The Wachowskis

Written by The Wachowskis

Starring Mila Kunis, Channing Tatum, Sean Bean, Eddie Redmayne, Tuppence Middleton

Release Date February 6th, 2015 

Published February 5th, 2015 

My cynical 30-something armor can no longer be pierced by the earnest arrows of the artist trapped in commercial hell. Yes, while there is a deep seated part of my soul that wishes for a day I could once again appreciate the trappings of those wounded souls willingly baring themselves before us, as they wring their hands over cashing studio checks but alas, it is for naught. I've been too ironically distanced from my own emotions for too long. 

It is, therefore, impossible for me to appreciate "Jupiter Ascending," the latest work of the wonderfully open and earnest Wachowski siblings. Like their previous effort, "Cloud Atlas," "Jupiter Ascending" is a daringly original piece that attempts to elevate pop to art via pop philosophy with a dash of liberal/progressive politicking. It's an effort I can admire but in a package I can't help but mock ceaselessly.

"Jupiter Ascending" stars Mila Kunis as Jupiter, a house cleaner by trade who happens to be the human replicant of a dead alien queen, destined to inherit the Earth. A mostly shirtless Channing Tatum plays Caine, Jupiter's wolf-like, Spock-eared protector in rocket boots. That's a literal translation of who these characters are and their relationship to one another. How am I expected to take this seriously? 

To be fair, Luke Skywalker was a descendant of an ancient race of spiritual ninjas who fights alongside robots, Wookies, and tiny aliens, but I find myself capable of loving the goofiness of "Star Wars." So why not love the goofiness of "Jupiter Ascending?" Maybe I've reached my “goofy” limit. Or maybe "Star Wars" is simply a superior effort from a more dedicated master of earnest goofiness. 

"Jupiter Ascending" grows only more goofy as it rolls along, picking up the story of three goofball villains. Brothers Titus (Douglas Booth) and Balem (Oscar nominee Eddie Redmayne) and sister Kalique (Tuppence Middleton) hope to trick or kill poor Jupiter in order to usurp her birthright as the owner-operator of the Earth. You see, kids, Earth is really just a farm for the universe, where people are cattle used as commodities to be harvested. If poor Jupiter can't stop them, the Earth becomes the beauty product equivalent of Soylent Green. 

One cannot help but admire the wont of the Wachowskis to create something wholly original. "Jupiter Ascending" is that rare breed of modern movie blockbuster that is not based on a comic book or a young-adult novel. The Wachowskis took great care to assemble this brand-new universe, and their dedication is admirable even as the product of that dedication is incredibly risible. 

"Jupiter Ascending" is not unlike the spiritual cousin of “Avatar,” another overly earnest attempt at pop politics. Like that monstrosity, "Jupiter Ascending" is a massive work of pop art that attempts to smuggle politics under the guise of science fiction. Unfortunately, the politics of both films are so obvious and under-cooked that even as I find myself agreeing with both films’ philosophies, I can't help but mock how simpleminded they both are. 

Modern progressives are growing more open and earnest with each new generation. This is both a blessing and a curse. It's a blessing in that stances in favor of the poor and those affected by the ills of discrimination now have vocal defenders. But it's also a curse as these most vocal progressives tend to run headlong into the buzz-saws of political commerce without the ironic armor that protected generations before. 

My generation wielded humor as a dangerous and divisive weapon against our political foes. We could swing the hammer of cynical humor at our earnest conservative opponents and expose their whiny cores in the process. The more earnest, modern progressive-liberals are far too quick to believe that their opponents can be reasoned with or shown the error of their ways via earnest conversation. This leads to movies like "Jupiter Ascending," where the progressive message is ladled heavily and humorlessly over easy-to-consume-and-destroy pop science fiction. 

For people like me, raised on the misanthropic, self-protective, liberal politics of the past, I feel the need to destroy "Jupiter Ascending" before my opponents get their hands on such an easy and shallow target.

Movie Review The Woman in Black 2 Angel of Death

The Woman in Black 2 Angel of Death (2015) 

Directed by Tom Harper 

Written by Jon Croker 

Starring Phoebe Fox, Jeremy Irvine, Helen McCrory, Leanne Best 

Release Date January 2nd, 2015 

Published January 2nd, 2015 

If the ghost villain of “The Woman in Black: Angel of Death” can kill at will then why didn’t she just kill the hero characters when she had the chance? The answer to that seems to be that if she had simply killed the people attempting to thwart her plan to kidnap a little boy, there would not have been a movie. That, to me, is the worst possible answer to that question.

“The Woman in Black 2: Angel of Death” is a sequel to 2013 film that starred Daniel Radcliffe which was legitimately creepy and compelling. The sequel is set in the same rundown haunted mansion and is equally dark and foreboding as it was in the Radcliffe movie but the resultant film is far less compelling.

Unknown Phoebe Fox stars in “The Woman in Back 2: Angel of Death” as Eve Parkins, a teacher in World War 2 era England. With bombs falling on London children are being evacuated and Eve, along with veteran schoolmarm Mrs. Hogg (Helen McCrory), have been tasked with accompanying a group of children to a home in the remote countryside.

Unfortunately, the home located in the midst of rising and falling tides surrounding a barren island and muddy road, is already inhabited by the dangerous specter of a dead Governess. The evil presence in the home quickly chooses Edward (Oaklee Pendergast) as her target and thus begins a battle for the child between the ghost and Eve. Along for the ride is a World War 2 pilot, Harry (Jeremy Irvine) who provides Eve with a love interest and protector.

The only thing “The Woman in Black 2: Angel of Death” accomplished in its 98 minute runtime was to convince me to watch the first “Woman in Black” again. That film was filled with surprises including Daniel Radcliffe’s unpretentious starring performance. I went into “Woman in Black” referring to him as Harry Potter and came out respectfully using his actual name; a minor symbol of newfound respect.

The central issue I have with “The Woman in Black 2: Angel of Death” is that it never justifies its own existence. On top of being an unnecessary sequel, the plot fails to create a believably frightening scenario. The villain as established about midway through the film, can kill at will but does not do so because the plot needs her not to.

There are no rules established for this ‘Angel of Death.’ The ‘Angel of Death’ has a back story but the plot seems to assign her a child to fixate upon instead of giving a solid, logical reason for her choice. And then there is the simple matter of why the ‘Angel of Death’ allows Eve and her love interest to get in her way. Why doesn’t she just kill everyone? She clearly has the power as demonstrated by the modest body count on display.

The ‘Angel of Death’ doesn’t kill the plot protagonists simply because the muddy plot requires her not to and that is simply bad plotting. Even if the filmmaking had been more dynamic, the characters more memorable or the production design more ominous looking, the lack of a well reasoned plot would doom “The Woman in Black 2: Angel of Death.” Taken all together and you have a truly shoddy effort.

Movie Review Spongebob Squarepants Sponge Out of Water

Spongebob Squarepants Sponge Out of Water (2015) 

Directed by Paul Tibbitt 

Written by Jonathan Aibel, Glenn Berger 

Starring Tom Kenny, Antonio Banderas, Matt Berry 

Release Date February 6th, 2015

Published February 5th, 2015 

How does a film so shamelessly appeal to the tastes of tots and stoners alike and not wind up doomed to be assailed by the culture warriors? By becoming a capitalist commodity first and an anarchic, tripped out, cartoon second. That is the journey of "Spongebob Squarepants" which innocently invaded popular kids culture in the early 2000's and became an unassailable pop titan. 

The freedom of success has allowed this Nickelodeon product to evolve in ways that no one likely imagined. From what was a minor distraction for kiddies a strange cult classic of stoner nostalgia has emerged. Over time the tots who loved Spongebob's seemingly innocent shenanigans were joined in front of the television by their cereal slurping, red-eyed older brother who laughed at the jokes that the little ones just missed. 

Sure, the creators of the series maintain the innocence at the show's heart but their claims to innocence are certainly challenged by a product that has grown increasingly weird in most recent and slightly controversial incarnations. It's a strange evolution that today culminates in the ultimate evidence of the show's sneaky stoner appeal, "The Spongebob Movie: Sponge Out of Water." 

Sure, on the surface this is merely an attempt to return Spongebob Squarepants to the pop ether and make gobs of money while doing it. But, watch the film and the Dali-esque, dizzying imagery comes roaring out at the audience in ways only those on psychotropic stimulants can truly understand. As someone who's never experienced a drug induced freak out, I can only imagine it is something akin to the time travel trip taken in "Sponge Out of Water" by our hero Spongebob and his unlikely pal and former enemy Plankton. 

If you thought Peter Fonda's swirling, twisting vortex freak out in 1969's "The Trip" was trip inducing, wait till you get a load of the wall of sight and sound that takes Spongebob and Plankton through time and space. Only a true stoner, wacked out on the best Maui-Wowie and grooving to Kubrick's "2001" could truly appreciate the sites created herein. I'm not kidding, these scenes are really messed up. 

Things really get tripped out when Spongebob and Plankton, on the run through time and space to escape having been accused of stealing the secret recipe for Krabby Patties, find themselves in a future world run by a talking Dolphin named Bubbles. Bubbles is voiced by the brilliant British comic Matt Berry in full Douglas Reynholm bluster. Throwing Berry into a mix that also includes Antonio Banderas as a pirate named Burger Beard, is really the last piece of evidence needed to prove that the makers of Spongebob are indeed attempting to bridge the gap between Nickelodeon comedy and Cheech and Chong. 

Looking back I realize I am making this sound like a bad thing. In reality, it's more innocuous than anything. Despite the bleating of many conservatives, there isn't anything truly dangerous about stoners. The fact that they can be as entertained as little children by the same form of entertainment is only subversive in the eyes of those who see smoking marijuana as some sort of societal ill. 

There are many more damning things that people could be doing aside from getting baked and watching "The Spongebob Movie: Sponge Out of Water." Things like Sub-Prime Mortgages or murder for hire schemes against their employers or ironically attending WNBA Games are certainly less worthy efforts than getting stoned and laughing hysterically as a talking sponge battles Antonio Banderas as pirate named Burger Beard. 

I guess my main point is that we should just be honest about the appeal of "The Spongebob Movie: Sponge Out of Water" and stop acting like it's just a kids movie. The fact is, Spongebob has a foot firmly planted in two separate but equal satirical worlds that appeal equally and differently to two very specific sets of audiences and there is nothing wrong with that. 

Let's let Spongebob's freak flag fly free and not be so uptight and silly as to believe that just because stoners enjoy a kids show that kids will automatically grow up to be stoners. This isn't a nature or nurture argument over the future of our children, it's just a silly cartoon that happens to be tripping balls and delighting children all at once.

Movie Review Sicario

Sicario (2015) 

Directed by Denis Villenueve 

Written by Taylor Sheridan 

Starring Benicio Del Toro, Emily Blunt, Josh Brolin 

Release Date September 18th, 2015 

Published September 17th, 2015 

Sicario stars Emily Blunt as Kate, a tough young FBI Agent who is recruited for a joint government task force on drug enforcement. Immediately she smells something fishy, especially after she meets Alejandro (Benicio Del Toro), a specialist in cartel politics who is supposedly working for the Department of Justice. Alejandro answers only to Kate’s new boss, an equally shady character named Matt (Josh Brolin).

Both Alejandro and Matt are suspiciously good with a weapon for a pair of Department of Justice lawyers and that’s not the only thing about this new assignment that is nagging at Kate. Among other things, Kate’s first day on the job finds her crossing the Texas-Mexico border to capture a high level drug asset. The fact that she’s flanked by an elite military force for this mission gives the strong impression that whoever has arranged this, is working outside the bounds of diplomacy and the rule of law.

As the story evolves, Kate is torn between the desire for results in the unending battle between the government and the fractured but still functioning cartels which have only grown more violent and territorial since the fall of the Medellin cartel which had kept an uneasy peace among the cartels while keeping the flow of drugs into America as high as it has ever been. The choice for Kate is simple, the idealistic and seemingly futile pursuit of results inside the bounds of the law or giving up a piece of her very soul for the chance to slow the flow of drugs into the country.

How much moral flexibility does Kate have? Can Kate kill unconvicted people if it means capturing or killing those who’ve earned it? These questions form the drama and suspense of Sicario and director Denis Villenueve gives these questions weight and patiently unfolds them as the movie goes on. Villenueve, one of the finest filmmakers working today, an Academy Award nominee for his work on Arrival, has a mastery of pacing and building toward powerful moments.

With the help of two time Academy Award nominee, Editor Joe Walker, Villenueve slowly allows tension to build via clever character moments and splashes of sudden violence. The editing is seamlessly brilliant and essential to how Sicario slowly builds to a pair of remarkably tense closing scenes including a sweaty and intense dinner conversation with a drug kingpin and one final moment between main characters that is downright devastating.

I could go on and talk about the brilliant production design by Patrice Vermette, another two time Academy Award nominee or about the breathtaking cinematography of Roger Deakins, an Academy Award winner for his work on Villenueve’s Blade Runner in 2017 and the only member of the cast and crew of the first Sicario movie to be nominated for an Academy Award. Believe me when I tell you, every sequence of Sicario is impeccable.

Great performances, tremendous direction, beautifully spare cinematography and production design and a great story combine to make me very excited for the new movie Sicario Soldad. It should be fascinating to watch Alehandro and Matf do what they do without Kate around to force them to weigh their consciences. Just how low will these rogue elements of our spy underground go to stanch the drug pipeline between the U.S and Mexico.

Essay on Celebrity Documentaries

Listen to Me Marlon (2015)

Amy (2015)

I don’t know what to make of our celebrity culture anymore. Having recently seen the documentaries, Amy, Listen to Me Marlon and Soaked in Bleach, I can’t help but border on the idea that there is a real life conspiracy in the world to make some people seem crazier than they really are. In Listen to Me Marlon, Marlon Brando comes off as lucid and thoughtful, unlike the boorish, self-absorbed maniac that so many others portrayed him as.

In Amy we don’t see a girl who was a wreck and destroying herself, we see a slightly troubled girl of a slight emotional impairment ravaged on all sides by deceitful members of her family, and a media that are nothing short of vultures. In Soaked in Bleach we meet a Courtney Love that is not too much unlike the public persona, only slightly more human and filled with guilt and regret that she papers over with booze and drugs the way any other guilt-ridden person might use to cover their shame.

We’ve become trained to not see celebrities as fellow human beings, to not feel compassion for them because they are privileged. We’ve allowed ourselves the excuse of that privilege as giving us the right to pry into their lives for little details that we can then use to create versions of these celebrities that we can love or hate or project whatever feelings of inadequacy we have onto them.

It’s terrifying the lengths that we allow ourselves to go in order to create a more relatable or outsized version of these people to satisfy our needs. We harden opinions based on conjecture from people who make a living by inventing stories about these people for us to consume. It’s a demonstration of the ugliest sides of us.

These documentaries, especially Amy and Listen to Me Marlon, are more than just films, they are signposts of our cultural ruin and must be seen so that we can all take stock of who we’ve become and why and maybe find a way to strike a balance in our desire for these beautiful ciphers for our dreams and the reality that they live, love and hurt as much as we do, if not for many of the same reasons.

Movie Review Jurassic World

Jurassic World (2015) 

Directed by Colin Trevorrow 

Written by Rick Jaffe, Amanda Silver, Derek Connolly, Colin Trevorrow 

Starring Christ Pratt, Bryce Dallas Howard, Vincent D'onofrio, B.D Wong 

Release Date June 12th, 2015 

Published June 11th, 2015 

“Jurassic World” has been called ‘”sexist,” “anti-feminist” and, in one review, “gendered,” a new-to-me term for calling out a piece of pop culture for not living up to the ideals of modern pseudo-feminism. These accusations are aimed at the portrayal of the character Claire played by Bryce Dallas Howard, a career-oriented, driven administrator of the Jurassic World Theme Park.

Claire’s character arc finds her not enjoying the company of children, preferring the boardroom and not caring much for dinosaurs as anything other than the products that her company exploits for millions of dollars. These traits position Claire as something of a villain. However, they also position her to learn valuable lessons over the course of her character arc — you know, like a movie character.

As film criticism has evolved away from aesthetic arguments toward easier to write, and to read, socio-political commentary, movies are being held to a more and more impossible standard of standing in for every version of American culture and representing every political perspective so as not to offend anyone or let anyone feel left out. This transition threatens to legislate traits out of characters and limit the ways in which a writer can create unique characters that stand out on their own as individuals with inherent flaws.

One of the criticisms of Claire as an anti-feminist symbol is centered on her clothes. Bear in mind: We are seeing one very unusual day in the life of the park. On any other day, Claire would spend her time in board rooms or in her well-appointed office and not in the woods being chased by a dinosaur. Being chased by dinosaurs was, quite fair to say, not on Claire’s schedule EVER.

And yet we have critics calling Claire out for being dressed for meeting clients, which, by the way, was her original plan for the day before a massively, unexpectedly dangerous new dinosaur escaped its seemingly inescapable cage. Claire is being considered anti-feminist because she chose to wear high heels and a cream colored top and skirt ensemble on a day when she, as a character in a story, did not know she would be chased by dinosaurs.

The character of Claire is well established as being somewhat socially awkward. Claire’s comfort comes from achieving her ambition, which is to be rich and successful. Now, I realize that that is not the kindest character trait, but if we require every character in movies to be kind at all times and eschew ambition, then where will our villains come from? More importantly for Claire, where will the life lesson come from? If she begins from a place of fully evolved traits perfectly suited for both the board room and a dinosaur attack, then what is the dramatic arc?

Is it anti-feminist to wear heels and a skirt? Is it anti-feminist to not concern yourself with your clothing choices when a dangerous dinosaur gets loose in your dinosaur theme park? Some have asked why Claire did not go for a wardrobe change amid the chaotic escape of the dangerous and deadly Indominus Rex — maybe some running shoes and khakis. The film answers that question by simply thrusting Claire immediately into the action of first covering up the danger in her pre-evolved state of pure ambition, to then attempting to save lives. She was a little busy for a wardrobe change: There’s a freaking dinosaur on the loose.

Movie Review Tomboy

Tomboy (1985) 

Directed by Herb Freed 

Written by Herb Freed 

Starring Betsy Russell, Richard Erdman, Jerry DiNome 

Release Date January 25th, 1985 

Published January 26th, 2015 

“Tomboy” is a bizarre little time capsule of an 80’s movie. Ostensibly a typical 80’s T & A flick, “Tomboy” has an unusual feminist streak to it that plays almost as an accident. One of the first movies released in 1985, “Tomboy” illustrates why I chose to watch 30 year old movies: the wonder of the oddball hidden gem.

I came to “Tomboy” with my ironic smirk firmly in place and the film did not disappoint. First, there is a gloriously cheesy, unnecessary flashback/dream sequence that has little to no bearing on the rest of the movie beyond providing a minor inspiration for Tommy’s (Betsy Russell) being a ‘tomboy’.

Then comes a glorious theme song, a song so wonderfully, beautifully and unendingly cheese-ridden that it left me gasping through laughter. The song “Tomboy” sounds as if it were written as a parody by the team that made “Too Many Cooks” and the montage that accompanies seems to go on for a mindbending length of time ala ‘Cooks.’

Now, the way a movie like “Tomboy” is supposed to play, according to Hollywood conventions, is that our heroine Tommy is going to learn a lesson about how to be a girl. She may not give up being a greasy mechanic but she will embrace the pleasures of wearing pink, putting on too much makeup and perfume. Oh, and she will learn these lessons while falling for a “Hunk,” which is an 80’s term not unlike hottie and with a similarly short cultural shelf-life.

“Tomboy” however, rarely plays by the rules of your typical 80’s movie. Much of the credit for that goes to Betsy Russell who, while known for B-movies where she takes her clothes off, here plays a woman who takes her clothes off but not without a purpose. Russell plays Tommy as a surprisingly modern creation who can build a whizbang stock car inspired by her astronaut father and be a beautiful, sexually progressive young.

As played by Russell, Tommy isn’t merely a sex object, she’s an adult woman who owns her sexuality. The sex between Tommy and her love interest Randy Starr (Gerard Christopher) is legitimately sexy and adult. Even in the midst of puerile and unnecessary, even blatantly misogynistic displays of flesh in “Tomboy” Russell proves capable of being legitimately sexy without seeming exploited.

It’s a strange disconnect however because “Tomboy” isn’t a good movie. In many ways, the movie happening around Russell is a rather typically terrible drive in movie. And yet, Russell invests Tommy with a strength of character, a good heart and a strong sense of self. Even as I type this I am trying to find ways to take it back and recognize how campy and unimportant this movie most certainly is, but I cannot deny how compelling Russell really is as Tommy.

It seems very strange to say it but there is a seemingly accidental feminist streak to “Tomboy.” Tommy and even, to a point, her best friend Seville (Kristi Somers), are strangely progressive characters for an 80’s T & A comedy. Both get naked but there is an empowerment to the to display of flesh, they own the screen in these moments rather than being mere eye candy.

And still, the film holds a place of ironic, campy enjoyment. There is no way around how bad “Tomboy” is in terms of directing and dialogue, production design and editing. The movie is a slapdash disaster with zero pretension toward being anything other than a product meant to sell tickets to horny teens. This fact leaves me rather in awe of the subversive strength of Russell’s performance.

“Tomboy” is a fascinating movie of high camp and bizarre quality. Whether intended or not, the film has a progressive quality to its female lead that is unlike any 80’s comedy of its ilk. Did Betsy Russell really sneak a feminist hero into an 80’s teen comedy or have the shifting political and social tides of the past 30 years warped Russell’s performance into something unintended? The fact that a movie like this could inspire that thought is one of the reasons why I love movies.

Time for our re-casting of “Tomboy”

Tommy Boyd: played by Betsy Russell: Re-cast: Demi Lovato

Seville Ritz: played by Kristi Somers: Re-cast: Heather Morris

Randy Starr: played by Gerard Christopher: Re-Cast Skylar Astin

Movie Review Krisha

Krisha (2015) 

Directed by Trey Edward Shults

Written by Trey Edward Shults 

Starring Krisha Fairchild, Trey Edward Shults 

Release Date March 16th, 2015 

Published November 1st, 2016

With Trey Edward Stults’ “It Comes at Night” arriving in theaters I finally remembered that I received a screener for his debut feature “Krisha” just last November. Sadly, though I watched more than 300 films last year I was unable to make “Krisha” one of them. I simply ran out of time before the Critics’ Choice Awards nominations had to go out. It’s an excuse, but it’s what happened and now I am kicking myself. I wish I had seen this movie so much sooner than just this week. 

“Krisha” begins on two separate long, unbroken takes that are equally unsettling and fascinating. Krisha, played by Krisha Fairchild, is the name of a long lost relative returning to a seemingly welcoming family but something about the long unbroken take of Krisha first attempting to locate the front door of the home she is visiting and the otherwise genial and poignant welcome she receives, left me feeling uneasy, especially when combined with the shorter yet still unbroken shot that begins the film. 

The very first scene is a horror movie shot of our main character against a deathly red background staring at the viewer with the rage of a villain. These two scenes combine to throw the audience into a dizzy spell that barely begins to lift once the film returns to a more conventional filmmaking style following the opening title card.

“Krisha” is unyielding in pushing audience buttons following its incredible opening scenes. The following scene finds Krisha in the bathroom unpacking her things and while the scene is conventionally shot and less jarring than the opening, director Trey Edward Shults does not let up an inch on the intrigue. Krisha carries with her a strong box with notes all over it that say “private” and “keep out.” Naturally, this only serves to make the box more interesting. The mysterious nature of the box deepens when we see that Krisha is so paranoid about people opening the box that she wears the key on a necklace.

Even after we find out what is in the box there is still more drama and fascination to be mined from the contents. I won’t spoil the contents, their importance as symbols comes into play later, and I will only say that my curiosity throughout the scene kept rising so quickly I felt a genuine rush. From one moment to the next in this thrilling film my mind was reeling and folks, I’ve only described the first 5 minutes of “Krisha.”

From here “Krisha” doesn’t so much unpack any long family history or dwell on any long simmering family squabbles but rather takes a tact that is unexpected for sure and wildly daring. This tightrope act of genre film-making places audience members in highly uncomfortable situations and while your mind seeks out the comforting twists of classic genre movies, “Krisha” remains defiantly unpredictable until its divisive ending which will either thrill you with its uniqueness or anger you for betraying your expectations.

The story behind the making of the film has a transgressive quality all its own. Writer-Director Trey Edward Shults cast himself in the role of Trey, Krisha’s estranged son, opposite star Krisha Fairchild who is Shults’ real life Aunt. The rawness of the familial exchanges as “Krisha” unfolds lends that fact a surreal quality that only serves this sometimes surreal and always unexpected narrative experiment. I mention those raw exchanges, but don’t be mistaken, “Krisha” isn’t about showy arguments, it is so much more than that.

Let’s talk about Krisha Fairchild, the star of this remarkable film. Fairchild is in nearly every minute of “Krisha” and the moments she is not onscreen are POV shots that ratchet the tension as we wonder what she’s thinking of what she’s witnessing. Part of the power comes from the way in which Trey Edward Shults tilts and twirls his camera around Fairchild seeking flattering and unflattering angles in equal measure. Much of Fairchild’s performance is in her face and eyes rather than dialogue and the shifts from poignant to chilling to achingly sad make for one of the most riveting performances of the past year.

The nature of my job means I see a lot of movies and during awards season I am forced to make tough choices of what I have time to watch amid my obligations to a 40 hour a week job in radio and my beloved obligation to watch as many screeners as I can. I am so sad that I didn’t place “Krisha” at the top of my awards season list of movies to watch. Had I seen “Krisha” in time for the Critics’ Choice Awards or my year end Top 10 list, my ballot and my Top 10 would have looked a little different.

I was stoked to see “It Comes at Night” based on the terrific trailer, my affection for star Joel Edgerton, and the fact that it comes from the glorious distributor A24. Now, however, my excitement for “It Comes at Night” is through the roof. If “It Comes at Night” is half as clever, inventive and disturbing as “Krisha” we are all in for one of hell of a movie.

Movie Review Playing it Cool

Playing it Cool (2015) 

Directed by Justin Reardon 

Written by Chris Shafer, Paul Vicknair

Starring Chris Evans, Michelle Monaghan, Anthony Mackie, Aubrey Plaza, Ioan Gruffudd, Topher Grace

Release Date May 14th, 2015 

Published June 25th, 2015

For years Chris Evans made bad movie after bad movie. He was seemingly settled into being a handsome, bland, leading man, who would take any role that a star with better taste had passed on. Then he became Captain America and things changed. Something about Steve Rogers brought Evans to a place of comfort with his work.

With “Snowpiercer” a more serious and focused Chris Evans emerged and myself as a critic I saw the actor in a very different light. Now, with the charming romantic comedy “Playing it Cool,” Chris Evans seems fully formed as a performer. Is the movie great? No, but it’s not terrible. More importantly, as a vehicle for its star it is a fine showcase for his seemingly increasing talent.

In “Playing it Cool” Chris Evans plays a screenwriter who does not believe in love. Traumatized by his mother leaving him at a young age, Evans is left with an inability to connect with women. He does however, have an active fantasy life. He envisions his heart as living outside his body in the form of a sad, romantic, character in the range of Bogart in “Casablanca.”

Evans also has the tendency to project himself into other people’s stories. When friends played by an all star supporting cast including Topher Grace, Luke Wilson, Aubrey Plaza and Martin Starr, tell stories, Evans projects himself as the lead in the story regardless of the gender of the lead character. This imaginative device becomes important after Evans meets Michelle Monaghan and for the first time falls in love. Suddenly, she is the co-lead in all of these fantasies.

“Playing it Cool” is strange in a number of ways. The first comes in the fact that Evans and Monaghan’s character don’t have names. In the IMDB credits Evans is referred to as Narrator and Monaghan as Her. This is, I think, meant to comment on how the clichés of romantic comedies play out, the characters don’t really matter as much as character beats and human type people. The structure of “Playing it Cool” has Evans struggling to write a romantic comedy screenplay because he doesn’t believe in love and is well aware of the common tropes of the genre as they begin to play out in his real life.

The meta aspects of “Playing it Cool” play alright but the heart of the film is Evans and his interplay with the cast. I enjoyed the camaraderie of Evans and his small band of fellow artists. There is a real sense of friendship, history, and fun among this group and the interplay is strong enough that it doesn’t matter so much that each individual character is really only a sketch of a person.

Then there is the central romance. Michelle Monaghan is incredibly beautiful. Truly, I am not sure I can objectively assess her performance as I was thunderstruck by how photogenic she is, the camera truly loves her. Monaghan is something of a male fantasy as she is endlessly accepting and she gets all of Evans’ jokes and seems to like the things he likes, and she even has his commitment issues.

There is nothing particularly surprising about the way “Playing it Cool” plays out but I don’t think there is meant to be. This is a romantic comedy where the end is pretty well telegraphed. The key is then how to find interesting and funny things to do on the way to the predictable finish and what “Playing it Cool” has is a charming lead performance and strong supporting ensemble whose sense of fun that makes the predictable palatable.

The maturation of Chris Evans as an actor is likely that of a performer becoming more confident. “Captain America” has given Evans the star power to relax a little and be more than just a handsome face. In “Snowpiercer” the new found confidence led to a dark, violent thriller with an incredible resonance. In “Playing it Cool” that confidence emerges in a heretofore unseen charm and playfulness that seemed forced in previous performances.

Movie Review The Spongebob Movie Sponge Out of Water

The Spongebob Movie Sponge Out of Water (2015) 

Directed by Stephen Hillenburg

Written by Stephen Hillenburg 

Starring Tom Kenny, Clancy Brown, Matt Berry, Antonio Banderas, Bill Fagerbakke, Rodger Bumpass

Release Date February 6th, 2015 

Published February 5th, 2015

How does a film so shamelessly appeal to the tastes of tots and stoners alike and not wind up doomed to be assailed by the culture warriors? By becoming a capitalist commodity first and an anarchic, tripped out, cartoon second. That is the journey of “Spongebob Squarepants” which innocently invaded popular kids culture in the early 2000’s and became an unassailable pop titan.

The freedom of success has allowed this Nickelodeon product to evolve in ways that no one likely imagined. From what was a minor distraction for kiddies a strange cult classic of stoner nostalgia has emerged. Over time the tots who loved Spongebob’s seemingly innocent shenanigans were joined in front of the television by their cereal slurping, red-eyed older brother who laughed at the jokes that the little ones just missed.

Sure, the creators of the series maintain the innocence at the show’s heart but their claims to innocence are certainly challenged by a product that has grown increasingly weird in most recent and slightly controversial incarnations. It’s a strange evolution that today culminates in the ultimate evidence of the show’s sneaky stoner appeal, “The Spongebob Movie: Sponge Out of Water.”

Sure, on the surface this is merely an attempt to return Spongebob Squarepants to the pop ether and make gobs of money while doing it. But, watch the film and the Dali-esque, dizzying, imagery comes roaring out at the audience in ways only those on psychotropic stimulants can truly understand. As someone who’s never experienced a drug induced freak out, I can only imagine it is something akin to the time travel trip taken in “Sponge Out of Water” by our hero Spongebob and his unlikely pal and former enemy Plankton.

If you thought Peter Fonda’s swirling, twisting vortex freak out in 1969’s “The Trip” was trip inducing, wait till you get a load of the wall of sight and sound that takes Spongebob and Plankton through time and space. Only a true stoner, wacked out on the best Maui-Wowie and grooving to Kubrick’s “2001” could truly appreciate the sites created herein. I’m not kidding, these scenes are really messed up.

Things really get tripped out when Spongebob and Plankton, on the run through time and space to escape having been accused of stealing the secret recipe for Crabby Patties, find themselves in a future world run by a talking Dolphin named Bubbles. Bubbles is voiced by the brilliant British comic Matt Berry in full Douglas Reynholm bluster. Throwing Berry into a mix that also includes Antonio Banderas as a pirate named Burger Beard, is really the last piece of evidence needed to prove that the makers of Spongebob are indeed attempting to bridge the gap between Nickelodeon comedy and Cheech and Chong.

Looking back I realize I am making this sound like a bad thing. In reality, it’s more innocuous than anything. Despite the bleating of many conservatives, there isn’t anything truly dangerous about stoners. The fact that they can be as entertained as little children by the same form of entertainment is only subversive in the eyes of those who see smoking marijuana as some sort of societal ill.

There are many more damning things that people could be doing aside from getting baked and watching “The Spongebob Movie: Sponge Out of Water.” Things like Sub-Prime Mortgages or murder for hire schemes against their employers or ironically attending WNBA Games are certainly less worthy efforts than getting stoned and laughing hysterically as a talking sponge battles Antonio Banderas as pirate named Burger Beard.

I guess my main point is that we should just be honest about the appeal of “The Spongebob Movie: Sponge Out of Water” and stop acting like it’s just a kids movie. The fact is, Spongebob has a foot firmly planted in two separate but equal satirical worlds that appeal equally and differently to two very specific sets of audiences and there is nothing wrong with that.

Let’s let Spongebob’s freak flag fly free and not be so uptight and silly as to believe that just because stoners enjoy a kids show that kids will automatically grow up to be stoners. This isn’t a nature or nurture argument over the future of our children, it’s just a silly cartoon that happens to be tripping balls and delighting children all at once.

Movie Review The Last Metro

The Last Metro (1980) 

Directed by Francois Truffaut 

Written by Francois Truffaut, Suzanne Schiffman, Jean Claude Grumberg 

Starring Gerard Depardieu, Catherine Deneuve, Jean Poirer 

Release Date September 17th, 1980 

Published September 17th, 2015 

What is it that makes a work timeless? Can an artist set out to create a timeless work or must it organically linger in the minds of those who experience it and share that experience with others for years and decades. Francois Truffaut's “The Last Metro” is undoubtedly a timeless work; one that will linger for me and has taken up space in the minds of many for three decades now. 

”The Last Metro” stars legendary ingénue Catherine Deneuve as Marion Steiner, a famous film actress now operating the Theater Montmartre in Paris following the disappearance of her husband Lucas (Heinz Bennett). It is 1942 and being Jewish while Nazis occupy half the country and members of the Vichy Government conspire with them has made life dangerous for even a man as loved and respected as Lucas Steiner. 

Lucas is supposedly on the run, headed for Spain or South America or maybe Hollywood. We will find out however that he is still in the theater and still very much in love with his wife. Meanwhile, Marion is running the theater and preparing to unveil a brand new production under the direction of Jean Loup-Cottins (Jean Poiret), a noble but not all that interesting director who will unknowingly be receiving Lucas's notes. 

Joining the theaters regular players is an up and coming young actor named Bernard Granger (Gerard Depardieu) who we meet one day as he fails miserably attempting to pick up a woman he meets on the street. The woman, Arlette (Andrea Ferreol), also happens to be the wardrobe designer for Montmartre and she has a very good reason for declining Bernard's advances. 

Between meeting women on the street and now starring in Montmartre's new play, Bernard also happens to be a member of the French Resistance, working in secret to get the Nazis out of Paris by any means necessary. Marion Steiner is unaware of the danger Bernard brings to the theater, especially with Lucas hiding in the basement.  Marion works hard to avoid politics but when one of Paris's most influential theater critics Monsieur Daxiat also happens to be one of the top Nazi conspirators in France, he brings politics to the fore and forces Marion into some very difficult and dangerous choices. 

Reading my plot description I can see that I have described “The Last Metro” as something of a hot-house of plot. However, what is so amazing about Truffaut's work in “The Last Metro” is the complete lack of danger he brings to this material. Instead, Truffaut brings an effortless charm, sensitivity, care and nonchalance to even the most distressing and surprising plot revelations. 

In “The Last Metro” the Nazis are a mounting threat but never the arch, over the top villains of most World War 2 films. Truffaut makes the simple choice to allow the audience to fill in the danger; who doesn't know how evil the Nazis were? Truffaut recognized that there was no need to underline the point. 

We will learn that though Marion loves her husband she will inevitably fall for Bernard because that is what happens in a movie such as this. These two people are called upon to love each other on the stage and that love must eventually spread off the stage. It's part of a conventional narrative that this conflict must exist, what sets this conflict apart in “The Last Metro” is Truffaut's casual acceptance and passive presentation of Bernard and Marion's destined love affair. 

Conflict is maybe too harsh a word to describe the effortless evolution of Marion's love for her husband to her love for Bernard. Making the transition charming and easy to swallow is the ingenious way Truffaut and actor Heinz Bennett conspire to make the audience feel good about Lucas being cuckolded. For Lucas, like Truffaut, art is evolution and the evolution of his production of this play calls for Marion to love Bernard regardless of her commitment to him. 

There are other revelations in “The Last Metro” that also rise and fall like a gentle tide washing ashore. Watch the elegant ways in which Truffaut weaves the story of a pair of homosexual characters. As with his approach to the Nazis, Truffaut allows the audience to fill in the blanks about the difficulties these two characters face in both the time the film is set and, of course, under the thumb of the Nazis. 

The Last Metro is remarkably sensitive and smart, gentle and dramatic. “The Last Metro” is simply a perfect movie, one so graceful and elegant that it could only come from an extraordinarily gifted creator like Francois Truffaut. In a too short life, he passed away at just 52 years old in 1984; Truffaut created a cinematic legacy like few others.

Movie Review The Humbling

The Humbling (2015) 

Directed by Barry Levinson 

Written by Buck Henry 

Starring Al Pacino, Greta Gerwig, Dianne Wiest, Nina Arianda, Charles Grodin, Kyra Sedgwick 

Release Date January 23rd, 2015 

Published January 17th, 2015 

The crazed, narcissistic, sexist, ludicrousness of "The Humbling" almost needs to be seen to be believed. I say “almost” because I really don't want you to waste your precious time watching this dreadful movie. Al Pacino has been wandering in the cinematic woods for years now. While he surrounds himself with talented people in "The Humbling," each is defeated equally by the film. Based on the novel by Phillip Roth, "The Humbling" stars Al Pacino as washed-up actor Simon Axler. Simon is beginning to lose his mind. On stage one night, in front of a disinterested crowd, Simon takes a header into the orchestra pit and winds up in a mental institution. 

Despite his tendency to share his narcissistic rambling with anyone, the talking cure doesn't seem to be working. Nevertheless, after 30 days Simon heads back to his empty mansion in Connecticut to recuperate. There, Simon is joined inexplicably by Pegeen (Greta Gerwig). Pegeen explains that she is the daughter of Simon’s old acting friends. Because she had a crush on him when she was 11, she says, she'd like to give up being a lesbian and be with him. This is, despite his impoverished living situation, his inability to work, and the fact that he is 66 years old and slowly losing his mind.

Here, director Barry Levinson and Pacino might have found a believable direction for "The Humbling" if they they followed through on Pegeen being a figment of Simon's imagination. There is briefly a hint that she's not real and if that had been the direction of the story, maybe the film would not be completely horrible. Instead, the film doubles down on the Pegeen character, rendering her the picture of a sexist fantasy and feminist nightmares. With Pegeen comes a series of reductive caricatures of women including not one, but two, stalker ex-girlfriends. One of them (Billy Porter) is now a man. The other one  is Louise (Kyra Sedgwick), whom Pegeen claims to have slept with in order to get her job as a university professor. I really wish I was making all of this up, but I am not.

Pegeen's arrival at Simon's home is among the more bizarre series of scenes in any movie in 2014. Pegeen arrives, introduces herself and then angrily begins to explain who she is. Why is she angry? Apparently it’s because Simon gave her a ring when she was 11 years old and she thought it meant they were married. It's impossible to tell if this dialogue is meant as a joke, because Greta Gerwig plays the scene with a bizarre, haughty intensity that doesn't fit the scene if it is indeed intended as a joke. It probably should be funny but it is most certainly not. 

That scene somehow ends in a kiss between Pegeen and Simon which is as creepy and awkward as you would imagine between 66 year old Al Pacino and a much, much, much younger woman. Then Simon and Pegeen begin playing with a toy train. Again, all of this is played straight, as if nothing remarkable or unusual has happened. A lesbian has just switched gender preference to be with a man old enough to be her grandfather and now they are playing with toy trains. That sounds like someone describing a fever dream.

The Humbling somehow manages to get weirder and more repellent. "The Humbling" contains a subplot in which a woman named Sybil (Nina Arianda), whom Simon met while he was committed to the asylum, (funny joke, right? Sybil in a mental hospital), Sybil wants Simon to kill her husband. After Simon is released from the hospital, Sybil stalks him and continues to try to hire him to kill her husband. Why? Because in "The Humbling" all women are completely insane.

Oh, but wait dear reader, director Barry Levinson and writer Buck Henry  he film have a cop-out for all of this sexist bullshit on display: Simon is an unreliable narrator. Simon may be suffering from Alzheimer’s or a more simple form of age-related memory loss. As he narrates the story, he can't remember it well. He talks to Pegeen when she's not there. He may be inventing all of this story or none of it. "The Humbling" is a grand, disturbed, mess of a movie that inspires bafflement over those involved in its creation. The once great Levinson continues his 17-year run of terrible films and takes the once-great screenwriter Buck Henry down with him. Henry hadn't had a screenplay credit in 19 years (his sharp wit last crafted the Nicole Kidman movie "To Die For"). He should have remained retired.

Greta Gerwig, Kyra Sedgwick, Dianne Wiest, who plays Gerwig's mother in the film, and the wonderful Charles Grodin also get dragged down into the muck of Pacino's continuing decline. I can't imagine what each of these fine performers thought that they were getting into in "The Humbling," but I am sure they cannot be happy with the outcome. Repeatedly throughout the film, Simon goes meta and muses about how people only want to see him return to the stage to watch the freak, the car wreck in progress. I doubt Pacino recognizes this musing as a commentary on his own career. But indeed there is only that reason to watch a Pacino movie these days. I keep watching Pacino in part because it is my job and in part because I just don't think it can get any worse, and then it does.

"The Humbling" is the latest rock bottom for the once-great Pacino.