THE CALL OF THE WILD Review

Director Chris Sanders, a man who has made his bones on animated features like Lilo & Stitch, How to Train Your Dragon and The Croods, might not seem like the first choice to adapt a novel originally published in 1903 with a story that follows a dog named Buck and contains a sentence that is described in as frank a nature as, “They closed in upon her, snarling and yelping, and she was buried, screaming with agony, beneath the bristling mass of bodies,” and yet that’s exactly where we find ourselves with this latest adaptation of the Jack London novel in 20th Century Studios’ The Call of the Wild. Though I’d never read the relatively short novel the film is based on nor had I seen either of the previous film incarnations (Clark Gable starred in a 1935 version while Rutger Hauer starred in a 1997 version) given the marketing campaign and the PG-rating I hadn’t anticipated that the source material was as brutal and unflinching as it apparently is especially when considering the fact that it’s immediately apparent that Sanders’ version of this story is one for families to enjoy and for dog/animal lovers to find the purest of entertainment in. Of course, this is mostly what I did expect from this version and so it more or less went without saying that despite much of the fuss in the run up to the release centering on the animated lead and the inherent comedy in picturing Harrison Ford acting opposite a tennis ball the fact Sanders’ background is in animation and the fact the project rung with a sense of commitment and passion for Ford more or less led to a more rewarding experience than a ridiculous one. Yes, there are still moments in which the CGI is heavily relied on and the animals look about as real as a stuffed animal, but more times than not the CGI-renderings of these wild creatures look and feel exceptionally real. This brings us to what 2020’s The Call of the Wild does well in that, despite our lead character-Buck-being a CG creation (with the help of Terry Notary), the film genuinely allows its audience to invest in Buck as a character and chart his journey as we are not only endeared to his personality, but we root for him in the sense that wherever his passions lie, we hope his strength takes him there. This, of course, is why Sanders and co. would want the freedom a CG Buck might afford them and, while likely not faithful to its source material in any true way, this Michael Green-penned adaptation conveys more a journey of growth and catharsis than it does a simple, three-act piece of family entertainment which, unlike almost everything else about the film, was completely unexpected.

THE MAN WHO INVENTED CHRISTMAS Review

The Man Who Invented Christmas may as well be one of those holiday Hallmark originals for all of the dopey, saccharine spins it puts on Charles Dickens coming up with "A Christmas Carol" and the overall quality of life in 1843, but luckily director Bharat Nalluri (Miss Pettigrew Lives For a Day) was working from a screenplay by writer/actor Susan Coyne (Mozart in the Jungle) as adapted from Les Standiford’s 2008 novel of the same name where distinctive features of those Hallmark originals (or hallmarks of those hallmarks) come to be non-existent. There is no gushing love story at the center of it, no excessive amount of perfectly pressed pants or flannel (or whatever the equivalent was in 19th century London), but rather there is this overriding feeling that came to pass throughout the entirety of the experience that was one of lovable cheese. The usual suspects of certain clichés and plot points might not all be present, but that feeling of the overwhelming power of pure holiday love and all that it can conquer, is. And while this may just be due to the fact I’m a sucker for the Hallmark channels block of holiday programming to the point I draw every holiday-themed movie back to these standards The Man Who Invented Christmas is so family friendly and earnest in its intent that it’s hard to discern between what the movie wants you to feel and what this material should make you feel. As another in a line of “story behind the story” films that have, for one reason or another, decided to catch on some thirteen years after Finding Neverland made it a hot idea to studio execs The Man Who Invented Christmas is perfectly serviceable in delivering all of the broad moments required by an audience that craves what they already know; the name Marley coming from a waiter at a restaurant where Dickens was eating for instance coupled with the tidbit that he “collected names” for his works from his everyday life. Things one could have just as easily assumed without having concrete proof of them, but this is the kind of depth and insight The Man Who Invented Christmas offers: facts that might not have been necessarily well-known, but ones that are rather obvious in that they aren’t surprising and offer little to no real drama that would justify this story about Dickens writing his career-defining novel being a story in its own right.

MARSHALL Review

One might think, given Chadwick Boseman has now played three historical characters in three rather high profile biopics, that it is not only something the actor enjoys or is good at, but that these historical figures might begin to meld together in one fashion or another as far as their screen personas are concerned. If nothing else though, Marshall proves that Boseman is as skilled an actor as he is a disguise artist given his representation of the titular character in Marshall is as different and unexpected as his incarnations of Jackie Robinson and James Brown were before. The fact Boseman doesn't really share any physical features with the late Marshall isn't distracting for, as Boseman has done in the past, he seemingly captures a spirit or an essence of that person-even if their personality wasn't widely known-and delivers in his portrayal that real personality. It's authentic and it's something you can't manufacture. Lucky for audiences, Boseman's performance and its definitive nature in clarifying Boseman's transformative abilities is not all the movie has to offer as Marshall is a number of interesting things bound together in a seamless and rather moving package that just so happens to include another phenomenal turn from an actor who has shown time and time again that there is no reason to doubt his talent or his choices. Furthermore, Marshall is as much a movie about Mr.  Thurgood Marshall, American lawyer and eventual Associate Justice of the Supreme Court, as it is about Sam Friedman (Josh Gad), an insurance lawyer from Greenwich, Connecticut who comes to form something of an uncommon bond with the famed lawyer who went from town to town for the NAACP fighting for African Americans who were on trial not for their deeds, but for their race. It is important to note that Friedman was a white Jew (this takes place in 1941, mind you) and is someone who no doubt faced prejudice in his own life to certain extents, but it is this combination of Boseman and Gad and their buddy dynamic, of the biopic and the courtroom drama, and of those whodunit aspects with the structure of a super hero origin story that sets Marshall apart from not just being another serious drama pining for awards by portraying real-life events, but a motion picture that is genuine in its attempt to portray all facets of the life of a man who strove for nothing but admirable change.  

BEAUTY AND THE BEAST Review

When I was a little kid and would take in a particular Disney animated feature multiple times within a very short window I always wondered what it might be like to see such characters and such worlds come to life. Real life. I never thought it would happen after the live action versions of 101 Dalmatians and its money-grubbing sequel underwhelmed (at least they did in my adolescent mind), but then again I also desperately hoped that one day movie studios might wise-up and begin building a shared universe where my favorite super heroes interacted on the big screen as well. As I've grown up and become a parent myself it seems Disney has decided to make all of my dreams come true while also giving their most iconic of animated classics updates so that they might reach wider audiences and new generations-including my daughter's. Over the past seven years or so now we've seen an uptick in the number of live-action films based on classic Disney properties. Whether they be from the respective studio that originated the tale in popular culture or not it seems many have noticed this as a way to garner solid returns-despite the brand recognition formula not always working (I liked you, Tarzan, but you cost too much). Though Disney began this recent trend by attempting to re-work properties such as Alice in Wonderland and the Sleeping Beauty story in the form of the Angelina Jolie vehicle that is Maleficent, it has been the last two live action adaptations in Cinderella and The Jungle Book that have yielded the best results in terms of quality (with all doing rather well financially). The point being, when it comes to these re-imaginings the best bet for both pleasing audiences and critics alike seems to be sticking with the source material and simply adding flourishes where might be necessary. This is one of the highlights of this latest incarnation of Beauty and the Beast as more logic and depth are applied to the characters and their plights despite the film as a whole being little more than a pound for pound remake of the Oscar nominated 1991 animated version. One would be hard-pressed to even call what director Bill Condon (Dreamgirls) has made here an interpretation, but while there isn't anything in particular that separates the film apart as being great in its own regard, it pays honorable enough homage to this reviewer's childhood memories that it would be difficult to argue with the thrills and excitement it delivered in selling such a fantastical story come to life.

Full Trailer for BEAUTY AND THE BEAST Starring Emma Watson

After glimpsing the teaser trailer for Disney's live-action adaptation of one of if not their most celebrated animated films this past summer it wasn't hard to sense the amount of anticipation for this thing. It's going to be huge. If you thought The Jungle Book was big. Watch out. That said, just in time for the holidays the mouse house has finally released the full-length trailer for director Bill Condon's (Dreamgirls) Beauty and the Beast and based on what we see here I'm still fairly optimistic. Condon, despite his several serviceable credits, gives me caution as he has a few other credits that don't bode so well for this incarnation of the only animated movie to ever get a Best Picture nomination at the Oscars, but taking into consideration that Perks of Being a Wallflower writer/director Stephen Chbosky assisted in penning the screenplay (along with Evan Spiliotopoulos who seems to fit the bill of generic Hollywood writer) I have something of a renewed faith. This fact, coupled with the rather unbelievable cast that look and sound great from what we see here is enough to hope that Disney can pull off with Beauty and the Beast what they were able to do with Cinderella and the aforementioned Jungle Book. The visuals are especially stunning here as Watson looks pitch-perfect in both her physical and mental approach to the titular beauty that is Belle. While I still harbor some concern for the amount of CGI that it seems Condon and his team are relying on to bring the other half of the title as well as the remaining inhabitants of the castle to life I can only hope that there is still work to be done and that the representations of the talented casts' voice work will come through as effortlessly as Jon Favreau and his animators were able to make it feel in their Disney adaptation. These live-action remakes of animated classics are certainly turning into big business for the studio, but given we've essentially seen these movies before these new versions have to be both faithful while at the same time bring something new to the table. Based on what we see here one really can't see through the nostalgia of it all to know how good or bad Condon's version might turn out, but darn it if I'm not rooting for this thing to work and for these re-imaginings to keep on comin'. Beauty and the Beast also stars Dan Stevens, Kevin Kline, Luke Evans, Josh Gad, Emma Thompson, Stanley Tucci, Ian McKellen, Gugu Mbatha-Raw, and opens on March 17th, 2017.

THE COBBLER Review AKA The Interesting Case of Adam Sandler's Career

The case of Adam Sandler is a continuing saga of fascination for me. It is hard to pinpoint what exactly his motivations are whether they be in the realm of making movies because he genuinely loves movies or simply in making money. Unfortunately, at this point in his career many wouldn't even consider his movies to be comedies anymore as it's apparent his domination over his little part of the box office has been slightly waning as he's continued to repeat himself as the same guy in Grown Ups (10%), Just Go With It (19%), Jack & Jill (a mere 3%, which only slightly better than the 0% Bucky Larson: Born to Be a Star scored which Sandler helped write and produce), That's My Boy (his only deviation in character and highest ranking tomatometer score at 20%) Grown Ups 2 (7%) and last years Blended (14%). That, in his mainstream films, Sandler has had to resort to sequels and a third reunion with Drew Barrymore let us know he's running on fumes to preserve the lifestyle he and his family have grown accustomed to. Jack & Jill was the turning point that shifted the atmosphere around his movies from always being dismissed by critics yet typically having a strong enough following of fans who showed up to watch him do his thing to an all-around frustration. It became evident the ever-reliant audience was shrinking and might one day be no more and so Sandler has turned both to the ever-profitable family film market in the form of two Hotel Transylvania films and this summers Pixels as well as trying to return to more subtle, dramatic work that might not only reaffirm to all of his haters that he can actually do good work, but that he actually cares about the craft and art of making movies. The bad news is that in his effort to subvert public expectations he has delved into two independent, inherently more artistic pictures that have consequently been ravaged by critics. On paper both Men, Women & Children and The Cobbler should be home runs in terms of critical darlings: credible directors, one relevant to todays issues and one with a rather interesting premise, both with stellar supporting casts and yet it still seems the Sand Man can do no right.

The Ones You May Have Missed

I typically put together a list of my least favorite films of the year rather than a "worst" list because I honestly try to avoid anything I think is going to be outright terrible. It is hard to consider anything the worst of the year when there could be plenty of reasons others might have found something to find interesting. For example, I found both Under the Skin and Obvious Child to be well, obvious in their intentions that were in some variation or another supposed to push boundaries. Many of the arguments in Jenny Slate's rom com centered around abortion felt moronic while Jonathan Glazer's extreme indie lacked in any type of compelling material offering me nothing interesting to decipher. That said, there are plenty of people who find both of these films completely fascinating and even among their favorites of the year. I, of course, have no problem with that and can respect their opinion, but instead of damning a couple of obvious choices as the "worst" films of the year I figured I'd put that effort into a list of a few films that I thoroughly enjoyed and thought went unappreciated throughout the year. As I still haven't seen what I'd consider a few promising titles from 2014 (Trip to Italy, Skeleton Twins, I Origins, The Disappearance of Eleanor Ribgy, Belle, Palo Alto, Listen Up Philip, Pride, Love is Strange, Starred Up) this list only comprises of five flicks that I hope aren't overly obvious. Sure, there are films like the Tilda Swinton featuring Snowpiercer and Only Lovers Left Alive that are fine, but not all they've been made out to be I think. You also have quirky excursions like Frank (which I didn't much care for) and They Came Together which I would highly suggest if you liked Wet Hot American Summer at all. There are plenty of other smaller flicks that are more than solid entertainment you can find to rent or buy at this moment including Joe, Cold in July, Stretch or even Dom Hemingway, but the next five films left something of an impression on me while largely seeming to allude others.

NIGHT AT THE MUSEUM: SECRET OF THE TOMB Review

I'm a big Frat Pack fan and always have been. The juice has long since run out on their heyday and I can admit that, but even still it is nice to see a few of them get back together every now and then even if it's for another installment of Ben Stiller's big family franchise. These films are harmless and if they're good for anything it's the excuse to see Stiller and Owen Wilson on screen together again. As much as I'd love for the likes of fellow Frat Packers to show up in this kind of movie, playing different historical figures that might place Paul Rudd as Lancelot, Will Ferrell as one of the ancient Greek statues, Jack Black as one of Attila's huns, Steve Carell and Vince Vaughn as a few of the neanderthal's while Luke Wilson would be the easiest of the bunch by adding in another cowboy to help Jedediah and Octavius (Steve Coogan), I know it will never happen, not at this point. No, at this point it would only feel like a last resort of types as even Stiller returning to this franchise five years after Battle of the Smithsonian feels a little desperate in the sense he needed something guaranteed. I can remember walking into the original (at the age of nineteen) with a sense of excitement still, not only for why Stiller might have chosen this obvious family entertainment as his next project, but for the inherently interesting premise that came along with it. It was a film fine for what it was with a fair amount to offer in return. It was obvious from the beginning what it was positioned to be and it achieved those goals, clearly, as now eight years later we are talking about the third film. Still, with this third and presumably final chapter in the story you can feel the sense of obligation to it all. There isn't a natural energy to it, but more a forced sense of fun in that it was a rush job to capitalize on the holiday season and the fact if another year went by it really would be too late to make another one. You can feel the strain of time on Stiller in particular as he can't seem to commit enough again for us to not see through his trying facade. It's not so much that it feels like movies such as this have lost there wonder, but of course the fact I have lost my wonder for movies such as this. My only hope when I see a film such as Night at the Museum: Secret of the Tomb is that it reinstills the wonder I found as a child in these make-believe adventures, but that wonder was in limited supply here.

THE GUEST Review

First things first: I pretty much loved every single aspect of director Adam Wingard's The Guest and only give it a less than perfect score because while I love and revel in it, it certainly isn't something to be regarded as exceptional. It's not exceptional because it isn't necessarily innovative, but it is still highly entertaining and well-constructed because it knowingly draws from very specific inspiration. Horror movies of the late 70's and early 80's as well as the thrillers of the same decade infuse every angle of Wingard's tale of uncertainty. He plows over every moment in the film with his unabashed soundtrack fueled by synthesizers and one note tones that dispel any notion we should take this seriously. Instead, seasoned moviegoers will acknowledge this as an exercise in form, of style and take note of how every story, even the most generic of ones, can be made fresh and interesting with a unique directorial approach. The same was true of Wingard's previous effort, last years You're Next, in that it was a self-aware, goofy riff on the home invasion thriller. With The Guest though, Wingard has stepped up his intent in not confining himself to a single genre, but rather expanding the story possibilities to afford him endless opportunities while keeping the tone in check with those films that clearly inspired his childhood ambition to be a filmmaker. As the film begins we are introduced to David (Dan Stevens of Downton Abbey) and with only the 80's inspired soundtrack to overstate his subdued line readings we are immediately entranced into the world of who this man is and what his purpose might be. His surroundings are minimal, but his presence is immediately worthy of note and Wingard knows what he has both in terms of technique and in Stevens as a performer and with that he mines them to their full potential. Again, The Guest, isn't anything that should necessarily be celebrated as a triumph or as wholly original, especially in the wake of Drive a few years ago (which this film could easily draw comparisons to) but nonetheless it is a hell of a lot of fun and well worth ones time.

A WALK AMONG THE TOMBSTONES Review

At this point it's a matter of just how much of a badass Liam Neeson can be. As I said in my review for this years Neeson opener, Non-Stop, the guy has more than solidified himself as everyone's favorite action star by doing what Sylvester Stallone and Arnold Schwarzenegger wish they could at his age and reaping the box office returns they desire. Why these aged action stars can't catch a break is probably because everyone saw them in their prime, knew what they were at the peak of their careers and lives and find it somewhat disheartening and sad, the reality of time. We never saw Neeson as a young action hero though, it took time for him to transcend the realms of serious and prestigious works to lighten up a little and deliver consistently in the B-movie genre, but that is likely a discussion for another time and another piece. Today, we talk about Neeson's latest turn as the man on the other end of the phone in A Walk Among the Tombstones. I had a strange idea of this film from the time the first trailer premiered and had yet to rectify that by the time it came time to sit down and enjoy the film. Knowing very little to nothing about the plot or types of characters involved I imagined it as a western (c'mon, that's a great title for a western) and from the few stills I'd seen hoped Neeson might be playing the scorned Sheriff who has to show the townspeople he still has what it takes or the outlaw with a moral compass that put him in a sticky predicament where he had to choose between his code and his life. That is neither here nor there though as what the film actually plays out to be is a detective story from the perspective of a retired police officer and now private detective that was once unable to resist the temptation of the drink and is now unable to resist a case where women have become the price paid for their husbands sins. It is a nasty little movie, one that doesn't break any molds or provide any new insight into the genre of film in which it resides, but it does what it is intended to do well enough while going on for fifteen minutes too long and resulting in a much less profound conclusion than it could have had it simply let the audience draw their own conclusions.

First Trailer for NIGHT AT THE MUSEUM: SECRET OF THE TOMB

It seems every other year or so Ben Stiller retreats to one of his reliable franchises as a means for a hit in between doing the "one for him" project that is hit or miss given his track record as of late. After last years mild directorial success with the quiet Christmas day opening of Walter Mitty Stiller has retreated for one last trip to the ol' museum as he heads to London. As these things go it seems the only way to unlock the mystery around the tablet that started all of this and save the magic it possesses is to travel to the British Museum. I can remember taking my youngest brother to see the original Night at the Museum during the holiday season of 2006 and being eight years removed from that film as well as five from the suitable follow-up that failed to make much of a stir I can only imagine there wasn't much of a desire for this film. That said, I also remember really enjoying the first film for what it was and Battle of the Smithsonian was more of the same with the added bonus of Amy Adams and Hank Azaria. If there will be anything remotely surprising about this third entry I imagine it will be seeing what new historical characters the film adds, but the highlight of the trailer is Rebel Wilson taking over Jonah Hill's bit from the second film. The trailer also gets some good laughs out of a caveman that resembles Stiller and the majority of the cast seems to be returning, so hopefully this can be taken as a good sign with good meaning good fun if not necessarily substantial storytelling. Night at the Museum: Secret of the Tomb also stars Robin Williams, Dan Stevens, Ben Kingsley, Ricky Gervais, Rami Malek, Steve Coogan, Owen Wilson, Patrick Gallagher, Mizuo Peck, Bill Cobbs, Dick Van Dyke, and Mickey Rooney and opens on December 19th.

THE FIFTH ESTATE Review

We go to the movies to be entertained and not necessarily for history lessons. That hasn't stopped writers and filmmakers from making countless films that chronicle historical events since the beginning of the mediums inception. Even D.W. Griffith's The Birth of a Nation which is credited as one of the first motion pictures and innovating several techniques that shaped modern filmmaking is a story revolving around the Civil War and reconstruction-era America. The majority of the time though there seems reason to bring these stories and settings to the big screen by way of there being an inspirational, harrowing, unbelievable, or simply engaging story that deserves to be told and expressed to the largest audience possible. That something engaging about the story would likely be the key element were you to talk to any writer or filmmaker and it is easy to see how writer Josh Singer who has written for several credible TV shows such as The West Wing and Law & Order, and Lie to Me and director Bill Condon (Dreamgirls, Kinsey and yes, the last two Twilight films) saw the inherent drama and, to use that word again, engaging elements of the story of Julian Assange, the Australian activist who began the website WikiLeaks which publishes secret information that has been submitted to his website as he claims to protect his sources who would otherwise be too afraid to come forward with said information. There is naturally a human element to this story as Assange is an intriguing public figure that has received plenty of press coverage over the past few years as his name and image might very well be more popular or recognizable than the reasons why this is so, but there is also a cultural aspect of Assange's story that addresses the changing of the tide on how the world receives information and this aspect, while I didn't see it coming as a part of the narrative, has a very interesting idea to it that could have been taken advantage of and conveyed in a much more interesting way while the human element is simply left to the performers trying to make the drama function while having nothing solid to work with. They are left to trying to make staring intently at a monitor and typing ferociously as intense as possible rather than backing up and dealing with the actual emotions that come with the weight of what they're typing on their laptops. It isn't so much engaging as it is facts being stated with nothing for us to be moved, shocked, or entertained by.