First Trailer for NO TIME TO DIE Starring Daniel Craig

Daniel Craig is back for presumably the final time as Agent 007 in MGM and Universal's No Time to Die, the 25th film in the long-running British action-spy franchise. While this production has experienced more than its fair share of turmoil, with original director Danny Boyle leaving over unspecified “creative differences,” Craig injuring himself during a stunt and another crew member sustaining injuries during an explosion at Pinewood Studios, this first trailer would show no signs of such trouble to the general moviegoer as it looks both visually and thematically arresting. Directed by Cary Fukunaga (True Detective) from a script by Neal Purvis, Robert Wade, Scott Z. Burns, Phoebe Waller-Bridge as well as Fukunaga himself, the film sees Bond having left active service for a couple of years while attempting to enjoy a tranquil life in Jamaica. This peace is short-lived though, when old friend Felix Leiter (Jeffrey Wright) from the CIA turns up asking for help. The mission is to rescue a kidnapped scientist, but of course this naturally turns out to be far more treacherous than expected, leading Bond onto the trail of a mysterious villain armed with dangerous new technology.    Rami Malek, fresh off his Oscar win for Bohemian Rhapsody, will embody the new Bond villain while Lashana Lynch is a new MI6 agent that has seemingly risen to the top of filling the void left by Bond.  And while that synopsis may sound rather routine as far as James Bond films go once it begins to play out in the trailer-especially given the narrative connections the Craig films have maintained-it is difficult to deny the charm and intrigue of the world as No Time to Die, at first glance, seems to have tapped into how to perfectly balance the classic tropes and trademarks of a Bond film while also moving the franchise ever so elegantly into present day. No Time to Die also stars Léa Seydoux, Ana de Armas, Ben Whishaw, Ralph Fiennes, Christoph Waltz and arrives in theaters on April 8, 2020.

KNIVES OUT Review

"The exception that proves the rule."

The movies are nothing alike in terms of what they're about, how they're directed, tone, nothing. There's nothing similar about these movies at all really except for that, from the moment they begin, there is a sense of supreme assuredness in where they're going and how they're meant to get there. This feeling arises at the beginning of a fair amount of movies because there are so many that begin with such promise yet so many of them tend to lose themselves along the way or lose momentum or more often than not encounter the issue of knowing where they want to go without being sure of the best, most effective way to get there. Nearly three years ago now, when Jordan Peele's Get Out began to play in front of me for the first time on that cold Thursday in late February, I was granted the sense of this supreme assuredness that continued throughout the entirety of the runtime and through to that perfect conclusion. It wasn't difficult to see every aspect had been labored over and planned to a to T; as if not only the script, but the way in which each shot was constructed and how each line was delivered held a certain weight and intention. Every element had seemingly been executed with precise detail so as to convey this strong, specific point of view. In short, Get Out was a movie where every piece held a purpose all of which led to a culmination that fully displayed the power of the narrative, the charisma of the characters and the masterful way in which the filmmaker used the genre he was operating in to make his complex ideas accessible. This is all said not in an attempt to remind readers of how satisfying Get Out is, but to say all of this is very much true of Rian Johnson’s Knives Out as well.

BLADE RUNNER 2049 Review

The plan for Blade Runner 2049, the thirty-five year later sequel to director Ridley Scott's 1982 now classic Blade Runner, was to watch Scott's "final cut" of the film prior to seeing director Denis Villeneuve's (Prisoners, Sicario, Arrival) follow-up. The original Blade Runner is one of those movies that I was always told I needed to watch and indeed started countless times, but never actually made it all the way through. Whether it was due to a lack of intrigue, bad timing, or something of the like I somehow ended up feeling rather familiar with the world Scott created from this Philip K. Dick short story without ever really becoming aware of the narrative it was relaying. Alas, there wasn't time to squeeze in a viewing of the original film prior to my wife and I's planned date night this past Saturday (things happen when you have an almost three year-old and Friday night, Blade Runner didn't happen) and so, with little knowledge of exactly what to expect from Blade Runner 2049 other than a visually stunning experience (cinematographer Roger Deakins is once again responsible for what we see here) this second, seemingly more intrusive story into the world of replicants and their version of the future happened. So, did I understand everything that happened? I think so. Did I appreciate everything as much as the guy behind me who said "wow" out loud no less than seventeen times throughout the two hour and forty-five minute runtime? Probably not. Still, Blade Runner 2049 is a movie that is able to stand on its own to a degree, but certainly benefits from having the knowledge of what occurred in the prior installment. Having gone back since seeing 2049 and watched the final cut of the original film I feel as if I've had a unique enough experience with the larger story being told that my individual experience with the film is something of a reverse of the rose-tinted glasses idiom in that the original film is not one that has been unduly idolized because of its stance in pop culture before I had the opportunity to make up my own mind about it, but rather my perspective on the original is of more significance because I know where these characters go and I know what the actions took in that initial film lead to. This inverse experience while, not necessarily recommended, tends to only make 2049 that much more mystical-that much more epic and that much more meaningful.

New Trailer for BLADE RUNNER 2049 Starring Ryan Gosling

Time for another round of quick confessions: I've never actually finished Ridley Scott's 1982 sci-fi epic that is Blade Runner. I will, of course, watch it again before seeing the sequel later this year, but the original is one of those I've always been told I need to watch and have started countless times, but never actually sat all the way through until the end. And so, with little knowledge of exactly what to expect from this movie other than a visually stunning experience (cinematographer Roger Deakins is once again responsible for what we see here) this second, more well-rounded look at director Denis Villeneuve's (Prisoners, Sicario, Arrival) thirty-year later sequel plays so well that general audiences should, at the very least, be intrigued while I imagine fans of the original will be going nuts over this one. If I'm to understand history correctly it would seem the original Blade Runner wasn't a runaway hit out of the gate critically or commercially, but more that it has over time become this cult classic that is now regarded as another masterwork by Ridley Scott. Still, despite my lack of any connection whatsoever to the previous film or even to Philip K. Dick's original source material, I'm a fan of all involved and have yet to dislike a film Villeneuve has made. Given the original was hailed for its production design and selected for preservation in the United States National Film Registry by the Library of Congress in 1993 this sequel has a lot to live up to. Such honors mean the original film is considered "culturally, historically, or aesthetically significant" and so I can't imagine Villeneuve took such a task lightly. With Deakins' eye, Villeneuve's direction, and a screenplay from original Blade Runner scribe Hampton Fancher and Logan co-writer Michael Green I'm hoping the film delivers in all the ways fans have been waiting for while also initiating a few newcomers along the way. The first line-up of Toronto International Film Festival selections should be announced some time next week and I wouldn't be surprised if this isn't the opening night film given Villeneuve's last four films have all had runs at TIFF. Blade Runner 2049 stars Robin Wright, Barkhad Abdi, Dave Bautista, Ana de Armas, Sylvia Hoeks, Lennie James, Mackenzie Davis, Jared Leto, Ryan Gosling, Harrison Ford, and opens on October 6th, 2017.

Official Trailer for BLADE RUNNER 2049

Time for another round of quick confessions: I've never actually finished Ridley Scott's 1982 sci-fi epic that is Blade Runner. I will, of course, see it before seeing the sequel later this year, but the original is one of those I've always been told I need to watch and have started countless times, but never actually sat all the way through until the end. And so, with little knowledge of exactly what to expect from this trailer other than a visually stunning clip (cinematographer Roger Deakins is once again responsible for what we see here) this first, full look at director Denis Villeneuve's (Prisoners, Sicario, Arrival) thirty-year later sequel plays well enough that general audiences might at least be intrigued while I imagine fans of the original will undoubtedly be sold. If I'm to understand history correctly it would seem the original Blade Runner wasn't a runaway hit out of the gate either critically or commercially-that it has only been over time that audiences have grown to appreciate the film and its layers and complexities after seeing several different versions of the film, the last of which was released a decade ago and was touted as "The Final Cut" AKA the only one where Scott had absolute artistic freedom. So, I guess that is the version I'll be checking out when I finally get around to in fact doing that. Still, despite my lack of any connection whatsoever to the previous film or even to Philip K. Dick's original source material, I'm a fan of all involved and have yet to dislike a film Villeneuve has made. Given the original was hailed for its production design and selected for preservation in the United States National Film Registry by the Library of Congress in 1993 this sequel has a lot to live up to. Such honors mean the original film is considered "culturally, historically, or aesthetically significant" and so I can't imagine Villeneuve took such a task lightly. With Deakins' eye, Villeneuve's direction, and a screenplay from original Blade Runner scribe Hampton Fancher and Logan co-writer Michael Green I'm hoping the film delivers in all the ways fans have been waiting for while also initiating a few newcomers along the way. Blade Runner 2049 stars Robin Wright, Barkhad Abdi, Dave Bautista, Ana de Armas, Sylvia Hoeks, Lennie James, Mackenzie Davis, Jared Leto, Ryan Gosling, Harrison Ford, and opens on October 6th, 2017.

HANDS OF STONE Review

More than anything Hands of Stone is frustrating because there is clearly a large scale to the film and real ambition from both writer/director Jonathan Jakubowicz and the entire cast, but as is true with many a biopics Hands of Stone tries to do and tell its audience too much in too short a time span inadvertently making the film more about a series of events than the characters participating in those events. In theory this is supposed to be a movie about the relationship between Panamanian boxer Roberto Durán (Edgar Ramírez) and legendary trainer Ray Arcel (Robert De Niro) and while this goal is communicated well enough and understood there are so many extraneous things going on around the two central characters the film becomes distracted by its own plot strands. The word I'm looking for is "scattershot." Hands of Stone is a broad strokes approach to the biopic, but in being so it communicates such key elements in haphazard ways thus forcing the audience to not invest as much as they should or even want to. Granted, the film does certain things right as this viewer in particular had no prior knowledge of Durán or his story yet I was immediately interested in the real life events the film was depicting. That is all to say the film is a little all over the place. This especially becomes true after the film effortlessly builds to Durán's first bout with Sugar Ray Leonard (Usher Raymond) and completes that fight within the first hour of the film. While the film could have certainly told us all we needed to know about Durán through the lens of his Sugar Ray fights and all of the drama those entailed Hands of Stone instead feels the need to go further by not only telling us Durán's story as a boxer, but his story as a Panamanian activist, Arcel's story that deals with the New York City mob and a long-lost daughter even going as far to include Leonard's perspective on certain things. Add in the familial drama that Durán creates and deals in with wife Felicidad Iglesias (Ana de Armas) and their five children and there is enough material here for an HBO miniseries. Unfortunately, Hands of Stone is a feature film that clocks in under two hours and while it carries real momentum in the first hour leading up to that first showdown with Sugar Ray that energy is largely lost in the second half of the film leaving us with a movie that might have been something really special and unique did it not try so desperately to adhere to the worn-out sports drama template.

WAR DOGS Review

As the wise one, The Notorious B.I.G., prophesied long ago, "the more money we come across the more problems we see." Though Efraim Diveroli (Jonah Hill) lived his life by the codes taught to him in 1983's Scarface it was this piece of knowledge spit in the 1997 hit of the same name by B.I.G. himself that ended up resonating most in Diveroli's life. Diveroli comes to learn this wasn't just a catchy phrase spurned by a rags to riches hip hop artist, but that those words carried real weight in the fact that the more wealth one begins to attain that jealousy and envy are things that simply come with the territory. In War Dogs, director Todd Phillips (Old School, The Hangover) along with co-writers Jason Smilovic (Lucky Number Slevin) and Stephen Chin have taken the incredibly outrageous true story of Diveroli and his childhood best friend David Packouz (Miles Teller) and turned it into something of a strange hybrid of a war drama and comedy where the drama and comedy is inherent to the situation when one has two stoners who become big-time weapons traders. As troublesome as it may be, it is indeed a true story lifted from the article originally published in Rolling Stone by Guy Lawson. It is at one point a case study in all that is wrong with government procurement systems done in satirical fashion as it also criticizes government procurement systems by exploiting how easily two twenty-somethings from Miami secured millions of dollars' worth of weapons contracts from not only the Pentagon, but to arm America's allies in Afghanistan. While Phillips and his co-writers are certainly quick to ridicule and expose this process for how asinine it would seem to give such power to any such individual who wants to sell guns and ammo the writer/director is also quick to supply a throughline of the benefits provided these two young men and the lessons and knowledge they no doubt retained even if much of their time was spent snorting cocaine and hanging out in clubs when they should have been in the office conducting business given it was midday in most of the countries where their clients were located. Phillips simultaneously wants to celebrate that such individuals were able to pull off something as massive as they did, no matter how circumstantial it ultimately was, while at the same time exposing the government for how loosely and even thoughtlessly it spends the tax payer's money. Still, War Dogs isn't a highly political film and it certainly doesn't have its head in the clouds about ideas or themes it could potentially relay from the insane situation it chronicles, but by more or less delivering a straightforward account of the story and allowing the characters and situations to speak for themselves the larger implications are automatically present.

First Trailer for WAR DOGS Starring Jonah Hill

I put Todd Phillips latest flick, originally titled Arms and the Dude, on my most anticipated of the year list so you can bet it is one of my most anticipated movies this summer. I find Phillips to be a fascinating director. The guy has exclusively made broad comedies since Road Trip in 2000, but it was with The Hangover in 2009 that he became something of an institution and by the time he'd finished crafting the third, darker, ultimately rebellious chapter in that men behaving badly franchise that he was a comedy auteur. Phillips has a persona that screams he thinks he's cooler than you and all of the best characters in his movies seem to replicate that state of mind. All of this only made whatever Phillips would decide to do next all the more interesting. This year, that question will be answered with what is now titled War Dogs starring Jonah Hill and Miles Teller. The film tells the story of two young men, David Packouz (Teller) and Efraim Diveroli (Hill), who won a $300 million contract from the Pentagon to arm America's allies in Afghanistan. As this first trailer shows this feels like something akin to Michael Bay's Pain & Gain and I loved that crazy ass movie so I expect to enjoy this one all the more given I tend to like Phillips films more. Originally slated to star Shia LaBeouf and Jesse Eisenberg (which would have certainly been interesting) I'm maybe more excited at the prospect of Phillips working with a comedic talent like Hill for the first time and Teller getting the chance to spread his obvious comedic talents that have been hiding in the wings since That Awkward Moment two years ago. And of course, there is the obvious fact that both Teller and Hill have a penchant for playing assholes really well which will no doubt come in handy given this is a Todd Phillips movie. War Dogs also stars Bradley Cooper, Ana De Armas, Jeff Pierre, Barry Livingston, Shaun Toub, JB Blanc, Brenda Koo and opens August 19th, 2016.

KNOCK KNOCK Review

Expectations are never high for anything from the notorious Eli Roth. Roth, whose most recent picture I was witness to only a few weeks ago in The Green Inferno, was a delayed bit of intrigue that turned out to be little more than a traditional gore-fest without any substance. And so, when his latest comes down the pipeline and features a rejuvenated Keanu Reeves (John Wick really helped that guys rep) you want to be interested. When you hear that the film was adapted from a 1977 film called Death Game that featured Colleen Camp (who makes a cameo appearance here) you also want to be hopeful. Still, the story is rather familiar and there isn't much of a reason to believe that Roth will necessarily bring anything new to the Fatal Attraction table. That said, there are plenty of interesting ideas at play here and by the end of the film I'd developed something of a respect for the filmmaker for at least attempting to say something about the generational differences in with which sex, sexuality and the sanctity of marriage are viewed. Like any film that touches on such subjects and has been made by someone with enough perspective to know that love can be the only genuine thing we have in this world and that sex as presented by popular culture is largely a world of fantasy there are hard facts to be dealt with and bold statements to be made. While the tide of who's side we're on is continually turning in this psychological thriller, the thing the film lacks that might make it all the more compelling is a certain slyness. It's all about the way something is said rather than what is necessarily being said and Roth has a way of being so blunt and on the nose that it undermines the poignancy of what he seems to want to say. Still, the movie plays out with such inherent intensity that it's hard to look away or not find many of the elements entertaining if not on a something of a disturbing level. The progression of the mind games that our two female leads endow Reeves character with are up to par with any seasoned antagonist, but Roth's inability to remain restrained makes for a finale that screams the movies ideas at our faces rather than chillingly delivering a question that individual audience members might be afraid to answer about themselves.