Showing posts with label Ty Simpkins. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Ty Simpkins. Show all posts

Movie Review The Re-Education of Molly Singer

The Re-Education of Molly Singer (2023) 

Directed by Andy Palmer 

Writing Todd M. Friedman, Kevin Haskin 

Starring Britt Robertson, Jamie Pressley, Wendie Malick, Ty Simpkins 

Release Date September 29th, 2023 

Published September 25th, 2023 

The Re-Education of Molly Singer is a bit odd and I kind of like it. Britt Robertson is the title character, Molly Singer, an irresponsible party-girl who is consistently late to work and often hung over. Molly's career is hanging by a thread when her best friend, Ollie (Nico Santos), convinces her to stay out late on the night before a trial. As you can predict, she oversleeps, she shows up late to the trial, and the judge rules against her client because she wasn't there in time. Naturally, Molly's boss, Brenda (Jamie Pressley), fires her with cause. 

Then, just as Molly is about to leave her office for the last time, Brenda gets a call from her son, Elliott (Ty Simpkins). He's ready to quit college and come home after something he did led to an injury that hobbled the school's star football player. With everyone threatening to harm him over this incident, he's ready to quit. This is when Brenda hits upon a completely insane idea. Remembering that Molly had attended the same college as her son, Brenda offers Molly a lifeline. Brenda will go back to college, befriend Elliott and help him rebuild his confidence and social status, and Molly might get her job back. 

Find my full length review at Geeks.Media 



Movie Review Insidious The Red Door

Insidious The Red Door (2023) 

Directed by Patrick Wilson

Written by Scott Teems 

Starring Patrick Wilson, Ty Simpkins, Sinclair Daniel, Rose Byne, Lin Shaye 

Release Date July 7th, 2023 

Published July 7th, 2023 

The key to the Insidious franchise is the wildly brilliant mind of writer-director Leigh Whannell. His consistently terrifying and inventive work on each of the Insidious films, co-writing and directing the first two and providing the screenplay for Insidious The Last Key, are proof that he's one of the modern auteurs of the horror genre. Thus when I saw that he'd neither directed nor provided the screenplay for the latest Insidious movie, Insidious The Red Door, I was immediately skeptical. My skepticism peaked further when it was announced that star Patrick Wilson would be making his directorial debut with Insidious The Red Door. 

That's not intended as a negative judgment of Wilson's work before I had seen it, rather just a manifestation of my overall skepticism of an Insidious sequel without the direct influence of the franchises creator and steward. Whannell does make a cameo in Insidious The Red Door, but his presence behind the camera and the keyboard becomes notable as the film goes on. Insidious The Red Door is lacking the essential ingredients of an Insidious movie, those that Whannell's fertile, creative, and slightly disturbing mind had always provided. 

In his directorial debut, Patrick Wilson also stars in Insidious The Red Door, reprising his role as Joshua Lambert. As a child, Joshua discovered that he could travel into a nether-realm called The Further. There he would be menaced by demons who would attempt to steal his body to return themselves to the real world. Joshua's mother, played by Barbara Hershey, was able to rescue her son with the help of a psychic medium named Elise Rainer (Lin Shaye). Through Elise, Joshua was made to forget his ability to travel into The Further. 

Cut to many years later, Josh is married to Renai (Rose Byrne), and they have three kids including their oldest, Dalton (Ty Simpkins), who has been exhibiting some odd behavior. When Dalton ends up in a coma, his grandmother recognizes what is happening and is forced to confront Joshua's past. She once again calls on Elise to save her family. The solution to the problems was supposed to be once again hypnotizing Josh and also Dalton, so that they forget about The Further. Naturally, this won't be enough to keep their memories at bay for long and that's where the story of Insidious The Red Door kicks in. 

We are nearly a decade in the future from when Dalton and Joshua were hypnotized into forgetting The Further and both, father and son, are having strange dreams and fuzzy memories. For Josh, the decade since the hypnosis he's struggled with daily tasks and has become a shell of his former self. Things are so bad that he and Renai have separated and Joshua has become distant from his three kids, including Dalton who is now getting ready to leave for college. Since Joshua and Dalton rarely talk, Joshua volunteers to drive Dalton to his new college. This only serves to further the rift between father and son. 

Find my full length review at Horror.Media 



Movie Review Insidious Chapter 2

Insidious Chapter 2 (2013) 

Directed by James Wan 

Written by Leigh Whannell 

Starring Patrick Wilson, Rose Byrne, Lin Shaye, Leigh Whannell, Ty Simpkins 

Release Date September 13th, 2023 

Published July 8th, 2023 

The first Insidious Chapter was an impressively creepy movie for a PG-13 rated horror movie. The film achieved a solid atmosphere and via tremendous production design, makeup and practical effects, the film became a smash hit. And it deserved to be a hit, James Wan and Leigh Whannell had managed to create a wholly original horror movie at a time when franchises and familiar I.P remakes were the norm in Hollywood. It was a no-brainer that there would be an Insidious sequel but what no one could expect is how much of an improvement the sequel would be over the terrific original. 

Insidious Chapter 2 picks up in the wake of the shock death of Lin Shaye's iconic and immediately beloved, Elise Rainer. The Lamber family is now living with Lorraine Lambert (Barbara Hershey), Josh's mom, in the wake of the horrors that led to their son, Dalton (Ty Simpkins), spending a year trapped in another realm called The Further. Josh (Patrick Wilson) had managed to save his son from this other realm but, as observed by Renai (Rose Byrne), Josh did not come back the same man he was. Instead, an unsteady, often volatile Josh stalks their home, only occasionally showing off the qualities that she loves about him. 

The plot of Insidious Chapter 2 kicks into gear quickly with Lorraine realizing that her son is not the man she knows. Knowing something is very wrong, Lorraine seeks out Elise's team, Specks (Leigh Whannell) and Tucker (Angus Sampson), who are now at Elise's home. They've found a key piece of evidence that shows Josh may be trapped in The Further. With Elise gone, they need a new medium and Lorraine calls on another old friend, Carl (Steve Coulter), the man who initially connected Lorraine with Elise when Josh was a child and traveling dangerously into the further. 

Via Carl we get the backstory of the person who has been stalking Josh all his life, The Black Bride, a vicious and very dangerous serial murderer. Is the Black Bride the entity who has possessed Josh? How will they find their way into The Further to find out? And how will Elise come back to help? These questions have solid answers that build brilliantly on what you already know from Insidious Chapter 1. Watching Insidious Chapter 2 it appears quite clear that James Wan and Leigh Whannell had a plan for a sequel all along as moments from the first film provide a perfect foundation for what we get in Chapter 2. 

It's almost like a fun little game, recalling things that happened in Insidious Chapter 1 and seeing how they happened via Insidious Chapter 2. The seamless integration of the two films gives a little kick to the proceedings of Chapter 2. For me, auteurs are filmmakers for whom details matter. Meticulousness is a strong trait among our best film storytellers and James Wan, along with Leigh Whannell, are an auteurist team who care deeply about the minutia of their storytelling. They recognize the joy that can from having lore and how discovering lore can bond and audience with a story. 

The Insidious movies are thick with lore but not so dense that they become incomprehensible to new audiences. It's a delicate balance, but one that Wan and Whannell achieve via studious attention to details that audiences can choose to follow closely or simply experience on a per thrill basis. You can either actively involve yourself in Insidious or simply enjoy the horror movie ride of the Insidious films without taking note of the layered and extensive lore. For me, I love the lore, I adore the attention to detail and the care with which the filmmakers take to build a community around the Insidious films. 

I also love, love, love the work of Lin Shaye. It was clear in the original Insidious that she was the star of the movie and perhaps the biggest failure of Insidious Chapter 1 was not pivoting away from her ending in that movie. Shaye was the breakout character and the filmmakers recognized that going foward when they bring her back here in Chapter 2 and go back to her in subsequent features, minus Wan but with Whannell firmly shaping the lore. 

Find my full length review at Horror.Media 



Movie Review Jurassic World

Jurassic World (2015) 

Directed by Colin Trevorrow 

Written by Rick Jaffa, Amanda Silver, Colin Trevorrow, Derek Connelly 

Starring Chris Pratt, Bryce Dallas Howard, Vincent D'onofrio, Ty Simpkins, Omar Sy, Irfan Khan

Release Date June 12th, 2015

Published July 13th, 2015 

"Jurassic World" has been called 'Sexist,' 'Anti-feminist,' and, in one review, was called '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 each aimed at the portrayal of the character of Claire, played by Bryce Dallas Howard, a career oriented, driven, Boss 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 however, threatens to legislate character traits out of characters and limit the ways in which a writer can create unique characters who stand out on their own as individuals with inherent flaws. 

One of the criticisms of Claire that I have read about Claire and her anti-feminist symbology centered on her clothes. Bare in mind, we are seeing one very unusual day in the life of the Jurassic World theme park. On any other day, Claire would spend her time in boardrooms or in her well-appointed office and not in the woods being chased by a dinosaur. The being chased by dinosaurs part is, 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 Indominous-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. My point, she was a little busy for a wardrobe change, there's a freaking dinosaur on the loose. 

I hate to engage in a clichéd argument but I will: If Claire was a man would anyone call him out for wearing a suit to work? Then, when the stuff hits the fan would that man be called out for not throwing on his boots and khakis before dealing with the situation at hand? No, a male character is allowed to have character traits, a female character however has to be a beacon to her gender, a symbol of all that is good, and just and never wrong, out of place, or in the process of learning valuable lessons like, keep a pair of running shoes and dungarees in the office in case a freaking dinosaur escapes its inescapable cage. 

If there is an anti-feminist moment in "Jurassic World" it comes in a bizarre and reductive conversation between Claire and her sister, Karen, played by Judy Greer. Karen has sent her two sons to see their aunt and tour the park and Claire, being a busy executive running a multi-million dollar theme park, shoves the kids off on an assistant for the day, much to Karen's dismay. Here Claire demonstrates an unlikable quality, otherwise known as a character flaw. 

That aside, the anti-feminist statement comes from Karen who instructs her sister that she will understand the fear that Karen feels for her children in the care of some stranger instead of their aunt, when Claire becomes a mother. When Claire states that she doesn't see herself becoming a mother, Karen shoots back pointedly stating that Claire will one day be a mother. The exchange is awkward and Karen's insistence that her sister will be a mother one day plays as if she were saying that all women should be mothers. 

It's a bad scene, indefensible even in context. With that said, one thing that is being quite unfairly neglected by those who wish to make Claire a symbol of anti-feminism or sexism is that Claire never for a moment indicates that she agrees with her sister. Even after saving her nephews from dinosaurs and seemingly becoming more loving and thoughtful in the process, Claire never indicates in dialogue or action that she's changed her mind about being a mother. Yet, in the minds of those who are attacking "Jurassic World" the fact that Claire eventually falls for Chris Pratt's hunky raptor trainer is somehow an indication that she's going to give up her ambitions in favor of being a mother. That's quite a leap of logic. 

So, a female character in a modern action blockbuster cannot meet and fall in love with anyone because it is an indication that she wants to give up her ambition and be a wife and mother? What's the other option? If, as the film establishes, Claire is a heterosexual woman with a typical sex drive then is it not perfectly alright that she's attracted to a handsome man and may in fact want to be with him. Moreover, returning to my previous point, nothing in dialogue or action indicates Claire has changed her position about having children. Yes, she's more loving toward her two nephews but that's because they've all just survived a horrific dinosaur related trauma. 

Context however, is the enemy of those who wish to make a larger point about a piece of pop culture that doesn't perfectly suit the writer/critic's world view. Claire is a character built of context. She is a character who is thrust into the most unlikely, unimaginable scenario, one that she was quite fairly, not prepared for. Taken in context, the actions of Claire the movie character make a reasonable amount of sense but that doesn't matter to those with an agenda as anything that doesn't fit that agenda is simply wrong. 

Look, my fear here is thus, that writers and critics who spend time calling out pop culture for lacking in areas that match their socio-political worldview will eventually legislate character flaws out of existence. In the future, all characters will lack anything resembling a failing out of fear that said failing will be seen as a betrayal of some of-the-moment-important socio-political world view. 

Returning to Claire for just one more point, is there not something to be said for the fact that she is a woman who is in charge of a multi-million dollar dinosaur theme park? Everyone in the park answers to her, she's the second in command behind the billionaire dilettante owner played by Irrfan Khan. She's a strong, successful woman, flawed in her seeming lack of care for the dinosaurs, blind to how her ambition affects those she cares about. Claire is not some sexist/anti-feminist caricature, she's a worts and all character who, over the course of a ridiculously scary adventure will come to realize what is truly important to her. 

That's not a symbol of anti-feminism, that's a character arc.

Movie Review Megalopolis

 Megalopolis  Directed by Francis Ford Coppola  Written by Francis Ford Coppola  Starring Adam Driver, Nathalie Emmanuel, Giancarlo Esposito...