DUNE: PART TWO Review

We tend to like our space operas with well-defined heroes and villains. Whether it be Star Wars or the latest incarnation of Power Rangers, the line between nobility and corruption is made clear whether it be through direct action or the color scheme of the costumes. Hell, even in something as sophisticated as Denis Villeneuve's two Dune adaptations the heroes are largely surrounded by pure, white sands while the villains literally dip themselves in black goop (neither this review nor the Dune movies are sponsored by Gwyneth Paltrow -- as far as I know). What is immediately striking about Dune: Part Two is how it continuously questions its own mythology. While the whole of Dune is essentially a story of heroes and villains in a race for ultimate power and control through the ultimate commodity, what it is actually about (the films, anyway) are the power, control, influence, and questions the presence of a messiah manifest. In Villeneuve's first Dune film Timothée Chalamet's Paul Atreides was a boy born into a destiny beyond his understanding. What makes Part Two the more complex, interesting, and arguably more epic of the two films is both Paul's understanding of and ultimate embrace of this destiny that has been prescribed to him his entire life. 

In the first film, Paul's father (Oscar Isaac) tells him, "A great man doesn't seek to lead; he is called to it." In Part Two, we see that calling play out as Paul is guided in his decisions - through both dream-like visions as well as his mother (Rebecca Ferguson) parlaying a prophecy into as much of a reality as she can - to the point there is hesitation in Paul's actions, a sincerity as Zendaya's Chani sees it, that makes him question whether seeing this prophecy through or putting a stop to it altogether is the better decision for the universe as a whole. There is of course, much more going on around Paul, the Fremen people, and the planet of Arrakis on which they reside that factor into Paul's deliberations, but for as much time as Dune: Part One spent on building the mythology of Frank Herbert's universe it only seemed natural that Part Two might then define what makes this mythology, these characters, and these worlds worth investing in. Rather, Villeneuve and screenwriter Jon Spaihts (Prometheus) spend much of the runtime of this continuation within the ethical questions Paul seeks to (re)solve - questions that could also be applied to the religion and politics of this universe that naturally mirror our own. The result being that by investigating these questions and conflicts the characterizations and significance of what could easily be perceived as pure nonsense do, in fact, become meaningful as if the attention and care paid to the depth allows for the breadth to sustain itself.

RED SPARROW Review

Red Sparrow is at once a movie that feels so calculated and well put-together that it should be obvious it knows what it is and yet this thing can't help but to feel all over the place. It knows what it wants to be, but doesn't accomplish as much. It has style for days and the feel of an epic spy saga, but the events that actually occur within these constructs couldn't feel more mediocre or forced. This is terribly disappointing considering the talent and money behind such a large, original production, but something about director Francis Lawrence's (I Am Legend, The Hunger Games franchise) latest never clicks in the way it should. Red Sparrow is one of those films that asks you to settle into it; where the viewer becomes so entrenched in the proceedings it should feel as if the viewer is still in the world of the film when walking out of the theater, but Red Sparrow never hits a stride in such a way that the audience is able to make this transition from spectator to participant. Instead, Red Sparrow quickly shows all of its cards by letting us know this thing is going to be as bleak and brutal as one can possibly imagine and then some. Red Sparrow is a film that takes advantage of its star's status and places Jennifer Lawrence in this role where she is trained to use her sexuality in ways that are to the advantage of the men controlling her (timely, eh?). Lawrence's Dominika as well as the movie itself consistently relay that she's doing what she's doing to regain this feeling of being special that she's recently lost, but this quest holds no weight due to the fact she's the star of the film and we more or less can guess this aspiration is going to be fulfilled even when the odds are stacked against her. All of this is to say that Red Sparrow may as well be known as the movie where J-Law learns to expertly cover up domestic abuse with top-of-the-line make-up rather than the one where she kicks ass and takes names because, as was noted earlier, there is very little that occurs here that lives up to the style and scope on which it is operating. Likely the biggest mark against Red Sparrow though, is the fact this opinion is coming from someone who generally basks in the dark and gritty tone of movies that like to take themselves seriously. Red Sparrow takes itself seriously, no doubt, and it has spurts of tension that compel as well as several locations and shot compositions that are downright breathtaking, but in the end the final product tries so hard to twist social expectations that it ends up feeling like cheap shock rather than frightening truth.

Official Trailer for RED SPARROW Starring Jennifer Lawrence

Like last March when we saw a series of major studio tentpoles open every week as if it were the summer movie season this March will be no different and kicking off major movie March this year is director Francis Lawrence's Red Sparrow. The director, who ushered Jennifer Lawrence through the majority of her Hunger Games stint has taken Justin Haythe's adaptation of the 2013 Jason Matthews novel and granted the actor what could be the beginning of a new franchise, albeit a more grown up one. I generally tend to like Lawrence as a director as I remember the guy fondly from MTV's Making the Video days when he orchestrated some of the more popular music videos of my formative years. Since breaking into feature filmmaking though, the guy has been able to craft generally original albeit big-budget films that range in genre from something like I Am Legend to that of the sorely underrated Water for Elephants. With Red Sparrow, Lawrence seems to have a very specific type of style and visual language as the film looks to be exactly that: one of pure style with the grace of the equation being brought via Jen Lawrence's performance. It should be noted also that this seems to be a very different type of performance than we've seen from Lawrence in the past. Not only is she doing an accent, but she is seemingly playing the victim turned hell fire in a way that is more bleak and more furious than anything she has been allowed to execute in the past. I love the color palette of this thing and the overall feel as well as the rather stellar, but understated supporting cast they have put together for this thing. I haven't red Matthews novel on which the story is based and focuses on Lawrence's Ballerina Dominika Egorova being recruited to a Russian intelligence service where she is forced to use her body as a weapon, but even if this stylistic excursion ends up being little more than a solid little spy thriller I don't think I'll be too upset as Lawrence tends to do more reliable than he does exceptional and sometimes, reliable is just what you need. Also, it doesn't hurt that we'll get A Wrinkle in Time the week after, or Tomb Raider the week after that, or Pacific Rim: Uprising the week after that, and then Ready Player One the week after that. So yeah, here's to March. Red Sparrow also stars Joel Edgerton, Matthias Schoenaerts, Charlotte Rampling, Mary-Louise Parker Jeremy Irons, and opens on March 2, 2018.

ASSASSIN'S CREED Review

I won't pretend to know anything about the Assassin's Creed video game series or, for that matter, much about video games in general given the last one I played was probably Crash Bandicoot on the original PlayStation circa 2001. This is to the point that I'm typically indifferent to the idea of video game to film adaptations especially given most tend to be financial failures with the few I've seen being rather forgettable as well. It is with this Assassin's Creed adaptation though that my interest was piqued as not only had it attracted Michael Fassbender to star in another potential franchise, but that it also gave Fassbender cause to recruit his Macbeth director, Justin Kurzel as well as cinematographer Adam Arkapaw, it felt as if there might be a chance to break the mold. Despite the fact Kurzel somewhat shortchanged Shakespeare's story he indisputably made a visually stunning representation of The Bard's play and with Assassin's Creed coming from a medium very much based on the visual storytelling element it seemed as if this was a logical choice and that both Kurzel and Fassbender were very much intent on keeping the same visual style intact. That's what Kurzel does best, that's why Fassbender imagined he would make a good fit. They do, but the fact the visuals the film offers via its flashbacks to Spain in 1492 aren't the highlights of the film speak to how much better this is, but still how much better it could have been. Granted, the sequences in Spain are certainly the most breathtaking in terms of visuals and contain well-paced and seemingly well executed action sequences, but they aren't developed nearly as much character-wise as the other sections of the film. This is all to say there is an interesting premise here. Like I said, going into the film I had no idea what the objective of the game was or even who or what the titular assassins or their creed might be, but as we get to better know Fassbender's Callum Lynch (a character apparently made up specifically for the movie) we come to better terms with this world that three screenwriters have seemingly cobbled together from what I assume are the most interesting parts of the game. Faithful or not though, Assassin's Creed, the film, is an average enough action flick that has a core idea it certainly could have done more with and in more interesting ways, but takes shortcuts around the deeper questions posed by its central premise while hoping to garner enough return so as to potentially explore such questions and ideas in a sequel that will likely never happen.

2016 Oscar Nomination Predictions

With the Golden Globes now out of the way and the winners more or less settled as to who might be primed for Oscar glory from such wins it is a perfect time to predict who the Academy of Motion Pictures and Sciences will honor with nominations this Thursday. Yes, nominations for the 88th annual Academy Awards will be announced this Thursday, January 14th at 5:30 a.m. PST (13:30 UTC) (8:30 a.m. EST) at the Samuel Goldwyn Theater and we are here today to simply predict who might fall into the major categories. While I certainly plan to post my predictions for who I think might win in these respective categories prior to the awards ceremony on February 28th, that is not the competition we will be debating today. Today, it is more about which nine or ten movies will make the cut in the best picture category, will Michael Keaton get a best actor nom or will he possibly compete against Mark Ruffalo in the supporting actor category for Spotlight and so on and so forth. There is a lot of strong competition going on this year as last nights Globe winners highlighted the potential of both The Revenant and The Martian while previous front-runners, Spotlight and The Big Short were shut out. That doesn't mean too much when compared to where the Oscars will take things (though I think Brie Larson's win for Room and Sylvester Stallone's win for Creed both bode well for their Oscar chances), but the more interesting races will be that of if the Picture/Director categories will be a split or if Alejandro González Iñárritu actually stands a chance of repeating his best picture/best director win from last year. It is easier to predict the acting categories based on last nights Globe wins-I could easily see all four of the drama winners repeating at the Oscars next month, but where things get interesting are in the more technical categories as well as the biggest award of the night, best picture. Enough about the dynamics of the possibilities though, let us get on with the predictions...

45 YEARS Review

45 Years is the type of film that likes to hold a single, static shot for longer than one might anticipate while simply asking you to bask in it-to soak every moment of it up. It's contradictory to my spastic American mind to take such calming nuances as intentional, but in reality this technique is enlisted to allow audience members to really drink in the subtle, but hugely devastating ideas the film meddles in. It should be noted, I guess, that the main ideas of the film are not inherently devastating, but that more the conditions that can sometimes come along with the institution of marriage are such that we don't consider them until they happen. For a bond that should be built on such trust and assured confidence it is often times shaken by the most delicate of details. In the case of Kate (Charlotte Rampling) and Geoff Mercer (Tom Courtenay) it is little more than what was once an afterthought to Kate, but decides to come back with a vengeance and reveal it may have been much more to her husband all these years. There is no act that was performed on Geoff's part that violates the sanctity of their marriage, but more something completely out of both parties control that informed the way one half would feel forever and the powerlessness of the other to ever allow him to forget it. In a word-it's heartbreaking. One might even call it cruel, the way fate aligned to bring this couple into each other's lives at the time in which it did, forever setting them on this path where they were more or less destined to fail. This fracture is barely visible in the beginning, though. As we come to know the Mercer's as they prepare for a weekend party that will celebrate their forty-fifth wedding anniversary (hence the title) they live a quiet life in the open countryside of England seemingly enjoying the latter years of their lives. It is the resurgence of old memories and "what might have been" possibilities that throws their relationship into a whirlwind of doubt and vulnerability that at least Kate never saw coming.