THE FALL GUY Review

Not to put anyone off The Fall Guy, but it does feature massive spoilers for a thirty-three-year-old movie titled Thelma & Louise. Warning aside, it is The Fall Guy’s appreciation, admiration, and recognition of such films as that Ridley Scott crime romp along with countless others like First Blood, the Fast franchise, and any number of Julia Roberts romantic comedies that make stuntman turned filmmaker David Leitch's latest so endearing to avid movie fans like myself. The flipside of that coin is that The Fall Guy is also very much one of those types of movies, whether it be an over the top action adventure flick or a bombastic rom com, for modern audiences now breaking free of the serialized blockbusters we’ve become accustomed to over the last generation and who are now being ingratiated into true summer blockbuster territory. It may spoil Thelma & Louise but what it really wants is for you to either seek these movies out or re-visit them in hopes of discovering or renewing a sense of inspiration. As Ryan Gosling's Colt Seavers would say, The Fall Guy is very much a “thumbs up” version of this kind of moviemaking; a fun, ostentatious (in the best way), and wholly entertaining palette cleanser. 

What makes The Fall Guy even more of a return to those summer blockbusters of yesteryear beyond the somewhat novel concept (it’s partially based on the 80s TV show starring Lee Majors and Heather Thomas who both make cameos in a mid-credit scene here) is the fact the film is being sold as much if not more on its stars than its premise. Riding high off the pink nuclear fumes of last summer’s “Barbenheimer” Universal paired Oppenheimer’s Emily Blunt with Ken himself and in many ways, this feels like a culmination of this current phase for both of these actors' careers. Gosling is THE marquee star of the moment yet upends that persona by playing a “forgettable” stunt man (brilliant!) whereas Blunt is not only game to be the love interest, but is very intentional about positioning her Jody Moreno as a woman at the helm of this massive production who not only has a vision and a voice, but is able to steer the ship in a successful fashion all while working with Colt to better understand their relationship status. That relationship status is the heart of the film as Colt seeks to atone for past mistakes but the action he's chasing outside his professional life doesn't supplant the film's main objective: blowing things up and beating the shit out of people.

PAIN HUSTLERS Review

Between dramatized series' like Dopesick and Painkiller to last year's unanimously praised documentary All The Beauty And The Bloodshed the whole world of the pharmaceutical scam and opioid crisis in America has been well-documented over the last few years. Director David Yates seemed to be in luck despite this barrage of similarly-themed content though, as I've only seen the Nan Goldin doc meaning this fictionalized telling of Evan Hughes' 2018 investigative feature of the same name was essentially fresh territory for me. That said, it's unfortunate Pain Hustlers or the first feature from Yates that has not been authored by J.K. Rowling since 2014's Tarzan and the first non-IP film he's made since 2005 is something he only seems tangentially connected to. That is to say that Yates, a Brit through and through, might have had a vision for how to tell this story when he read Hughes' piece, but more he likely found this distinctly American story just that therefore implying the type of vision he then defaulted to.

That default is naturally Scorsese-light as Pain Hustlers echoes recent output like The Wolf of Wall Street and similar films that came along in its wake a la The Big Short, War Dogs, and most recently Dumb Money. Each of these films center around unqualified individuals stumbling into incredible (if not always legal) situations that garner them untold amounts of money who then have to balance their greed with their inexperience before getting caught. As a piece of entertainment this moves quickly and offers enough broad insight coupled with reaches for genuine emotion to track as something worthy of your time while being informative either as a whole or about certain aspects of this crisis not yet exposed. As a novice on the subject, I found the idea at its core - the exploitation of helping people for profit rather than the greater good - naturally compelling and the details of it fascinating which made me wonder why, by the close of the film, I had no real reaction to what I'd just experienced.

OPPENHEIMER Review

Given Christopher Nolan accomplishes as much in-camera as possible there is very little left to the imagination in Oppenheimer. From the bomb to the billions of stars and even boobs, Nolan gives us everything that made J. Robert Oppenheimer (the J apparently stands for nothing) tick. Was he a neurotic loner who was also a womanizer? A cold-hearted physicist as well as a bleeding-heart liberal? That seems to be the case and maybe the best case for why Nolan’s historical biopic about the “father of the atomic bomb” is so successful: it seamlessly integrates these contradictions into the narrative surrounding the moment that set the course of humanity on a different trajectory. Nolan's trademarks are well-suited to the story of a(nother) tortured genius who faces the greatest moral dilemma - possibly in history - and must come to terms with both his ambition, understanding his actions, and eventually wrangling with his legacy as he sees it being maligned and he himself being exiled by those with real power. 

Though technically a biopic, Oppenheimer doesn't necessarily carry a weight of obligation to feel like a fully formed portrait of the titular man, but rather Nolan's focus and more importantly his technique add more thematic and worldly weight to the proceedings rather than simply amounting to a highlight reel of Oppenheimer's most notable moments. This is also a more roundabout way of saying Nolan moves through much of his subject's life at a breakneck speed, especially in the beginning as Oppenheimer goes from student to well-renowned physicist in a handful of scenes, with very little handholding, while still elegantly establishing what inspires, drives, and irritates his main character propelling us into the second - most electric - hour of the film.

First Trailer for A QUIET PLACE PART II

Happy New Years! To celebrate, as promised, Paramount has released the full trailer for John Krasinski’s upcoming sequel, A Quiet Place Part II. The what-is-suspected-to-be unnecessary sequel picks up right after the events of the first film and follows the Abbott family as they venture into the unknown and discover that there are more than alien monsters threatening their lives. I act cynical, but have enough goodwill for both Krasinski and his wife/star Emily Blunt that I'm rooting for them to pull this off. As for the trailer itself, Krasinski immediately shows off that he still has the goods with what looks to be a single take trip through the small town where the Abbott family lived on the day this alien invasion began as the shot concludes with as harrowing a moment as could seemingly be conjured. From here, we are brought into the moments immediately following the events of the first film AKA the moments when Blunt's now widowed Evelyn is attempting an escape from their once safe quarters with her two older children (the returning Millicent Simmonds and Noah Jupe) and new infant which seems to instantly prove more difficult than expected. It's difficult to tell where exactly Krasinski is taking these characters in this new film (he is solely credited as the screenwriter with others only receiving character credits) though this teaser would suggest that the other humans outside of the world of the first film will be just as much the enemy of our heroes as the aliens are. I'm also somewhat cautious to be too "in the bag" for this sequel due simply to the fact that the first film came out of nowhere and was successful largely due to the hook of its elevator pitch yet this first trailer for the second film shatters the core of that pitch by having more dialogue in its two minutes than the entirety of the first film featured; the fear being this film will inevitably become a riff on something akin to The Walking Dead or Spielberg's War of the Worlds than it will be an equally clever take on the same premise of the first film. Again, I'm rooting for it, but I would be lying if I said there wasn't some serious hesitation towards the film especially considering A Quiet Place was one of my favorite films of 2018. All shall be revealed shortly as A Quiet Place Part II opens on March 20, 2020 and also features supporting turns from the likes of Cillian Murphy and Djimon Hounsou.

TOP 10 OF 2018

As opposed to last year, 2018 has made it difficult for me to narrow things down to a finite ten films that I thought worthy of making my list. These kinds of lists, no matter how superfluous, would always fare better were they put together in a couple years time rather than in a rush in the last few days of the year as one is attempting to cram in all the end-of-year awards contenders being released simultaneously as well as catching up on everything that might have been missed throughout the year, but that is supposed to be really good and you don't know why you didn't watch some of these sooner. Alas, some will slip through the cracks and while I made as valiant an effort as I possibly could (I even saw Holmes & Watson yesterday-more out of an undying loyalty to Ferrell than the potential of it making my list, of course) I still managed to miss more than I would have liked to. Furthermore, there have been films with exceptional moments that might feel like glaring omissions from my favorites list given you've likely heard a lot about them over the course of the last few months that will make many others; examples include films such as Green Book, Spider-Man: Into the Spider-Verse, and The Favourite. I couldn't agree more that each of those films possess inspired moments that transcend the art form, but as a whole were they films that made an impression on me that will last, if not forever, but at least a few weeks after seeing them? Not at this point, no, though I'm suspect this might change with at least two of these.

On the other hand, there are a handful of narrative features competing for spots on my list that, on any given day, might have been in one of those top ten spots; HBO's The Tale, the Joaquin Phoenix-starrer You Were Never Really Here, Steve McQueen's Widows, what could possibly be Robert Redford's swan song in The Old Man and the Gun, as well we Bo Burnham's feature debut in Eighth Grade would round out my top fifteen at this point, but if I included documentaries on this list it would be a completely different story. The Zen Diaries of Garry Shandling, Three Identical Strangers, Whitney, Free Solo, not to mention Won't You Be My Neighbor? were all fantastic documentaries released this year where at least three of those would have made my top ten, but given the differences in the approach to filmmaking it only seems fair to highlight them outside of a traditional top ten list. Of course, going back over the year there are many regrets around films like Blindspotting, The Hate U Give, Searching, Bad Times at the El Royale, Halloween, Instant Family, Vice, Shoplifters, Love, Simon, and Hearts Beat Loud that I wish there were space for as I enjoyed each and every one of them to the extent I would genuinely label them as "great". All things considered though, please know I go into every film truly hoping to see one of the best movies of the year and the ones that follow are the ones that surprised me with their quality or surpassed every expectation I held for them. Enjoy!

MARY POPPINS RETURNS Review

My wife and I took our four-year-old daughter to see this despite her having seemingly no interest in the trailers or TV spots that have been on heavy rotation-especially over the past week or so. Admittedly, this was partly for the reason both of us wanted to see this fifty-four-year-later sequel to Mary Poppins and didn't want to have to go through the hassle of finding a babysitter the weekend before Christmas, but it was mostly due to the fact that despite the lack of interest in the promotional materials that sometimes you just have to trust your parents know better than you and, lucky for us, our little four-year-old girl decided to indulge us on this particular matter (the slush and popcorn might have factored in, but I digress). The point being, that once director Rob Marshall's (Chicago, Into the Woods) Mary Poppins Returns began and Emily Blunt's incarnation of the practically perfect nanny showed up and began teaching the new generation of Banks children (as well as reminding their parents) that while imagination may not always be approved of, that it's more than necessary to make life fun and largely bearable, the little one was more than hooked by the magic of the titular character. And so, while Mary Poppins Returns is admittedly more of a re-hash or re-imagining of that first, 1964 film than I would have either thought or hoped it to be it is also a reminder of how powerful and delightful the imagination can truly be. Though my personal experience with the film may not be as heartening as those who take their teenagers to the theater and see their faces revert to a state of child-like wonder; to experience the kind of magic and possibilities Mary Poppins brings to the table and exerts with pure enthusiasm strike our daughter in such a clear and distinct way-especially during the numerous musical numbers-was quite something. The Julie Andrews picture was always one of those movies that was always on whenever we needed it to be growing up and taking on the burden of crafting a follow-up to that respected classic (the only live-action film Disney saw garner a Best Picture nod in his day) there was a degree of respect built-in for even attempting as much and while Mary Poppins Returns could have certainly done a little more to stand on its own it is so excessively charming, appropriately cute, and full of original songs and creative executions that it's hard to argue the film is anything but perfectly pleasant in every way.

Official Trailer for MARY POPPINS RETURNS Starring Emily Blunt

Disney has released the full trailer for their sequel to Mary Poppins, a film made in 1964, that Disney has already touched with their current trend of re-makes and re-imaginings with 2013's Saving Mr. Banks which followed P.L. Travers reluctantly meeting with Walt Disney who wanted to adapt her books based around the titular character for the big screen. While Saving Mr. Banks was more in line with this summer's Christopher Robin it seems as if Mary Poppins Returns will be more in line with the live action re-makes of Disney's animated classics, but labeled as a sequel to one of their early, more enduring live-action movies. Of course, as can be glimpsed in this trailer, Mary Poppins Returns looks to essentially be a re-hash of what that original offered, but dammit if this thing doesn't look infinitely charming and all-around wonderful. Emily Blunt takes over the reigns from Julie Andrews (who I have to imagine will show up in some capacity) as the enigmatic nanny returns to Depression-era London where a now-grown Jane (Emily Mortimer) and Michael Banks (Ben Whishaw), along with Michael's three children, are in the midst of dealing with a personal loss. It is through Mary Poppins' unique magical skills, and the aid of her friend Jack (Lin Manuel Miranda), that she once again will help the Banks family rediscover the joy and wonder missing in their lives and no doubt teach them a few lessons along the way. So yeah, this will more or less follow the same structure of that original film, but given Travers had a series of books concerning the character one might hope screenwriter Dave Magee (Life of Pi, Finding Neverland) pulled from such a resource to add in new elements that went unused in the original. And while the trailer certainly paints a delightful experience of a movie that will make all the money this holiday season the one gray area that clouds the project is director Rob Marhall. Marshall, who seems to be something of Disney's go-to-guy as of late broke onto the scene in a big way with 2002's feature film version of Chicago and followed it up with the critically acclaimed Memoirs of a Geisha in 2005 has had a rough run as of late turned in the worst Pirates of the Caribbean movie, what is maybe the worst Daniel Day-Lewis movie, and then the somewhat successful Into the Woods four years ago. I'm hoping His latest is more Chicago, less Woods, but time will tell. Mary Poppins Returns also stars Meryl Streep, Colin Firth, Angela Lansbury, Julie Walters, David Warner, Dick Van Dyke, and opens on Christmas Day.

A QUIET PLACE Review

There is a lot to say about A Quiet Place, the third directorial effort from John Krasinski (The Office) starring real-life wife Emily Blunt in their first on-screen collaboration (and as a married couple no less), but more than anything this is a movie that encapsulates the equal amount of unexpected fear as compared to the expected amount of joy that comes along with becoming and being a parent. It is something society doesn't often prepare you for and that you don't hear much about when embarking on this particular chapter in your life. People tell you how it will change your life, certainly, and how it will do so for the better as well as how tough things will be at different times for different reasons, but no one ever seems to warn expectant parents just how much fear will encompass their lives and in what are otherwise seemingly normal of situations. This isn't what A Quiet Place is about outright, but as the father to a three year-old daughter that is what A Quiet Place is most explicitly about to me. It is a summation and tense execution of what it feels like to solely be responsible for the lives of those that are dependent upon you whether they see it that way or not; they simply expect you to be there for them because that has always been your role without a second thought to the worry and fear that role might encompass and carry. A child's perspective is difficult to re-adjust to the point they understand the full spectrum of various emotions we as human beings are capable of experiencing, but there is something inherent when becoming a parent where your brain automatically switches to all-of-a-sudden be weary of any potential dangers to your child while at the same time coming to the realization your strengths and abilities might not be enough to protect them from whatever the world throws at them. Granted, A Quiet Place is this times fifty-seven and represents the worst-case scenario of what are most of the time internalized fears, but that is what makes the film so effective and ultimately, so moving. At the center of the story is a family unit that has been fractured by grief in the midst of having to adjust to this new way of life thanks to an extra-terrestrial threat whose origins remain a mystery sans some quick glances at a few newspaper clippings, but the context doesn't matter as much as the concepts that bound forth from its simple, but intriguing premise. Through all of this, Krasinski hones in on what makes the premise work so well, that being the grief, necessary coping, and inherent fear that inevitably comes with making ourselves vulnerable enough to care so much about others. Realizing these emotions and this feeling of need to protect and shelter those you are responsible for even when you have no idea how you might accomplish as much into a tight, ninety-minute actualization that will have you holding your breath and remaining as still as the reflections we see on screen.

THE GIRL ON THE TRAIN Review

The Girl on the Train, the film adaptation of Paula Hawkins best-selling novel, is directed by Tate Taylor (The Help, Get On Up) and features a solid cast of talent led by the remarkable Emily Blunt, but ultimately serves as a reminder that even the most creative juices can be filtered through the system and down into the most generic of thrillers when there is no more motivation to a story than to relay melodrama. My apologies for the run-on, but like the movie it is describing there is a lot going on in The Girl on the Train with none of it seeming to amount to much at all. Even as the film comes to its "shocking" conclusion there is little to take away from the film other than the fact that we now know "whodunit" never mind the fact we don't really know why they did it or what more might be going on below the surface because that is as deep as The Girl on the Train gets: surface-level. That isn't to say there aren't glimmers of more interesting caveats to the film as it's clear the intent of the premise was to allow the material to explore how we perceive the lives of others yet only assign them a handful of details to remember them by when they, in reality, have just as full a life as one's own self. Taylor and screenwriter Erin Cressida Wilson (Secretary, Men, Women, & Children) don't have much of an interest in these aspects of the story though as they seem more concerned with cramming in as much of the source material into their one hundred and twelve minute feature version without bothering to flesh any of that material out. Novels are, by nature, too layered and more inherently nuanced than films to be adapted directly and so the key when taking on a project such as this is to latch onto one idea or theme that the book contains and view the entirety of the story through that prism so as while maybe not capturing every moment from the beloved book one actually stands a better chance at capturing the spirit-which, both fans of the novel as well as the uninitiated (count me among them) will undoubtedly thank you for in the long run. This will not only add more compelling and fascinating aspects to the film with each viewing, but it will help viewers to better understand the fractured psyches through which this story is conveyed. As for the product Taylor and his team have delivered-there will be no replay value to this film. Once the mystery is gone it only becomes more glaring how poor the execution is.

THE HUNTSMAN: WINTER'S WAR Review

The biggest fight this unnecessary sequel was always going to battle was the one for purpose. In 2012's Snow White and the Huntsman there was much to admire in terms of visually stunning design and creativity for the functionality of much of those designs, but both the story and the characters felt thin, cobbled together from different mythologies, and thrown together in hopes of becoming a new take on an old tale. With The Huntsman: Winter's War the film once again faces something of an identity crisis-wanting to be a number of things, but never focusing on one single aspect enough to actually be about something. As the first film was an attempt to capitalize not only on the idea of turning well-known fairy tales into live-action adventures, but on swinging the Hollywood pendulum towards more female-centric action vehicles the focus is still very much on the ladies. This is all well and good until you realize that once again this Huntsman film is simply pulling from other stories to try and cobble together a legend of its own to no avail-giving extremely talented actresses nothing to work with. While not a direct sequel or even a full prequel, Winter's War is a spin-off of sorts that encapsulates all of the previous film and intends to add a broader scope and depth to the proceedings. In doing this we are offered a take on recent female Disney characters such as Elsa's Ice Queen from Frozen in the form of Queen Freya (Emily Blunt) and Merida from Pixar's Brave in the form of Sara (Jessica Chastain). Done in the hope that telling a darker, more action packed story would appeal not only to the kids who enjoyed those movies, but to the adults who've likely seen them on repeat and might find it interesting to see variations on such characters in live action form it's a fine enough strategy. At the very least this strategy provides some kind of template for the film to build strong female characters upon, but as a final product the film does nothing interesting with the majority of its characters in a story so scattered and with one too many lulls that even the beauty of both the visuals and actors isn't enough to distract from the weariness of it all.

First Trailer for THE GIRL ON THE TRAIN Starring Emily Blunt

I've yet to read Paula Hawkins psychological thriller, The Girl on the Train, that was released at the beginning of last year, but based on the teaser trailer for the film adaptation I'll be adding it to my queue immediately. With Emily Blunt in the titular role the story concerns Blunt's divorcee who uses her daily commute to fantasize about the seemingly perfect life of the couple she sees every day when the train stops at a signal. It is when she sees something shocking during the train’s routine stop on an otherwise normal day that she is thrust into a web of intrigue and goes from being a casual observer to an active part of the puzzle. Hawkins' book has naturally been compared to Gillian Flynn's Gone Girl which had its own blockbuster adaptation two years ago, but both novels drew comparisons to the work of Alfred Hitchcock and it's not hard to see why. With Hawkins work being adapted by Secretary screenwriter Erin Cressida Wilson and The Help and Get On Up director Tate Taylor helming the project I have no reason to think this project won't fulfill all of its obvious potential. While this is certainly something of a different type of film for Taylor I have enjoyed both of his previous films thoroughly with Get On Up specifically being an interesting and evocative take on the music biopic. If Taylor has any more such innovations in his back pocket I look forward to seeing how he applies them to this suburban mystery/thriller that, in lesser hands, might be something one catches on Lifetime on a Sunday afternoon. That said, the visual aesthetic certainly seems to favor those types of TV movies whereas David Fincher's very particular visual style helped elevate Gone Girl from simply being a conventional genre movie to that of something genuinely cinematic. I can only hope cinematographer Charlotte Bruus Christensen (The Hunt, Far From the Madding Crowd) lends this adaptation a flair of its own as it certainly has the star power and apparently the story to go far. The Girl on the Train also stars Rebecca Ferguson, Justin Theroux, Edgar Ramirez, Allison Janney, and Lisa Kudrow, Luke Evans, Hayley Bennett, and opens on October 7th, 2016. 

First Trailer for THE HUNTSMAN WINTER'S WAR

2012's Snow White and the Huntsman was a fairly modest hit, but didn't even recuperate it's budget stateside as it relied on the international box office to reach it's $400 million worldwide total that has seemingly justified the existence of this prequel/spin-off that will center on the second tier character of the Kristen Stewart starrer. A mouthful, I realize, but it has taken much to get to this would-be sequel to the screen. While I initially found it strange that Universal would take this opportunity to turn a Snow White film into anything but a Snow White franchise (especially given the success Disney is having with their live action fairy tales) the studio has essentially cut Stewart from the mix and added two of the more popular female actors working today. While Charlize Theron will return, making the story that Winter's War tells an obvious prequel or coinciding with the previous films events-type continuation, first time feature director Cedric Nicolas-Troyan (who served as second unit director on Snow White and the Huntsman) has also added Jessica Chastain and Emily Blunt to the mix. Having both starred in action-heavy films in the recent past both Chastain and Blunt are more than capable of hanging with the likes of Chris Hemsworth. Hemsworth, who is nicely shaping his resume outside of his Thor roles, looks as if he will bring more of the same here if not his typical balance of charm and intimidation. I enjoyed the aesthetic of the first film more than anything and if nothing else it seems Nicolas-Troyan has been able to keep that visual style intact. While I'm not necessarily excited for the film, I'm intrigued as to where this could possibly take us. The Huntsman Winter's War also stars Nick Frost, Sam Claflin, Rob Brydon and opens on April 22, 2016.

TIFF 2015: SICARIO Review

There is something exceptionally startling about director Denis Villeneuve's approach to his rather subtle character examinations. Neither Prisoners or Enemy did anything to necessarily expand our minds to the way we work as humans, but they called often dismissed thoughts and qualities to the surface. With his latest, Sicario, the director is once again examining the human condition under the most stringent of circumstances and once again he puts our nerves through the ringer. Having more than enjoyed both of Villeneuve's previous studio efforts (I've yet to see Incendies, but clearly need to) and anticipating his latest if not based on his previous work, but for the trio of stellar actors he recruited to execute this feature I walked away from Sicario with a stunned respect for how what was being said was in fact stated. Brutal beyond measure, unflinching to a fault and featuring an extremely serious tone balanced by a slight comedic performance from Josh Brolin, Vileneuve has crafted a film that is not wholly concerned with plot as much as it is the examination of the complexities of these people who are trapped in a world convoluted beyond their comprehension that only continues to go around in circles. Sicario is by no means a masterpiece of the genre as it does tend to lose some of it's steam in it's middle section, but it more than makes up for it with a chilling conclusion and a tension throughout that is something akin to unshakable.

First Trailer for Denis Villeneuve’s SICARIO

It must be Thursday as the trailers continue to show up though I'm not sure why Lionsgate decided to release the first trailer for the latest from Denis Villeneuve (Prisoners, Enemy) today. Given there's not much to attach it to this weekend I'm guessing we'll see it before Terminator Genisys in a few weeks in hopes of getting people into the film this fall given the action aspect, but given this is coming from Villeneuve I expect it to be a lot more than the standard drug cartel/action flick. Coming off its well-received premiere at the Cannes Film Festival it was not only Villeneuve's direction that garnered praise, but the exceptional cast as well as the cinematography of Roger Deakins and the script from Taylor Sheridan (Sons of Anarchy). The trailer presents a tense and lawless world that slings Emily Blunt's novice police officer from Tucson across the border to Mexico where violent warfare is constantly erupting. With a pair of mercenaries by her side Blunt's character is enlisted to try and help track down a cartel high on the totem pole and hopefully add a win to the FBI's war on drugs. Josh Brolin and Benicio Del Toro co-star as the mercenaries and members of a government task force with Del Toro seeming to have a deservedly showy role here. Sicario will open on September 18th in limited release before expanding wide on September 25th which is similar to the Prisoners release date two years ago. With the nationwide expansion date the film will open opposite the Nancy Meyers comedy The Intern, Hotel Transylvania 2 and the Kate Beckinsale-fronted horror film The Disappointments Room. Hit the jump to check out the trailer.

INTO THE WOODS Review

Director Rob Marshall (Chicago) returns to the musical with a film adaptation of Into the Woods, Stephen Sondheim's 1986 concoction that intertwines the plots of several Brothers Grimm fairy tales. Given this was produced by Disney though, many will surely think of it as another way for the mouse house to repackage their most classic of animated tales and turn them into a new holiday hit. Those same people will likely be somewhat surprised when some of the more violent twists of the Grimm tales come to light in the film. All of that said, Marshall's version of Into the Woods feels like a missed opportunity more than anything. I haven't seen the Sondheim play that serves as the source material, but I imagine there is much more to it than what has been put to the screen here. This film version never delves too deep into the familiar tales the main characters are taken from (which is fine) but it also doesn't have enough material in its original aspects to fill out the running time of a feature and so the last almost hour ends up feeling completely tacked on. This is a shame, really, because as far as musicals are concerned I was really digging what they were doing story-wise and Marshall has a keen eye for how to shoot people singing dialogue while making it exhilirating. What I don't understand is why they weren't able to somehow extend the story into one cohesive narrative rather than seeming to wrap up all the storylines nicely only to unravel them over the next fifty minutes so we end up with a less than satisfying conclusion that, more than anything, undermines all they'd worked so hard to set-up in the first place. And while this certainly takes a fair amount of enjoyment out of an experience you expect to be filled with familiar character tropes and choreographed numbers there is still plenty to feast your eyes and ears upon. Into the Woods may not be everyone's cup of tea and it may not even prove to be appealing to those who compare it to the stage show, but what it offers and what detracts just about even each other out to the point we care about what's happening while we're watching it, but won't remember a thing the next day.

Teaser Trailer for INTO THE WOODS

I'm not overly familiar with the original stage play that has inspired director Rob Marshall's (Chicago) latest film, but it certainly sounds intriguing. The play debuted in 1986 and features a story based on Bruno Bettelheim's The Uses of Enchantment with music and lyrics by Stephen Sondheim and centers on a childless baker and his wife on their quest to begin a family. On this quest they are taken through the plots of several Brothers Grimm fairy tales that explores the consequences of the characters' wishes and adventures. I have seen a lot of comments that have called this out for looking like Once Upon A Time with musical numbers which clearly isn't true as this came along way before the NBC show, but as NBC is owned by Disney, Disney has a certain stake in the whole fairy tale stories and those seem to be a hot property as of late it makes sense for a film adaptation of this to appear now. I have no relationship with Once Upon A Time as I tried to watch a few episodes on Netflix and couldn't get into it, but I am rather intrigued by this first teaser. The cast is expansive, the photography looks breathtaking and the original play won several Tony Awards when it premiered including Best Score, Best Book and Best Actress for a role that is being played by Emily Blunt in the film. So, there is good reason to be excited. As for director Marshall, the guy made Chicago twelve years ago and has followed it up with Memoirs of a Geisha, Nine and the fourth Pirates of the Caribbean, none of which I minded (though Nine was a total letdown), but were all rather boring if I remember correctly. Hopefully Marshall has his act together this time and will be able to combine his musical stylings and big budget reigns to bring us something truly magical this Christmas. Into the Woods also stars Meryl Streep, James Corden, Anna Kendrick, Chris Pine, Johnny Depp, Lilla Crawford, Daniel Huttlestone, Tracey Ullman, and Christine Baranski. Check out the teaser and several new pictures after the jump.

EDGE OF TOMORROW Review

There will come a day when Tom Cruise not only doesn't make action blockbusters like this, but when he won't be able to and when that day comes we will miss it. We won't miss these films strictly out of a sense of nostalgia, but because Cruise is the last of a dying breed; one of the only true movie stars left who, despite his image being tainted over the years, can demand the kind of budget and talent it takes to put together an original effort worth standing behind. He has displayed such influence throughout his career, spearheading projects like The Last Samurai that would have never been made on the scope they were without the involvement of Cruise. So, even though the artistic edges of his earlier work may have faded in the wake of his public life being more important than his acting ability he is still able to make movies he seems interested in, but that are more or less of a certain genre that has better odds of making a solid return than maybe a historical drama. With Edge of Tomorrow, or All You Need is Kill as it was originally, less-generically titled (interestingly enough, I don't remember seeing a title card) Cruise has again stepped into the world of science fiction as he seems to enjoy these kinds of worlds and the different rules in each of them he can explore. What makes Cruise the still magnetic force and pure movie star that he always will be though is how he digs into the motivations of the character and makes what could easily be looked down on as silly or nonsensical into a valid threat, a valid journey, a valid plan. To a certain degree audiences expect films of the sci-fi genre to feel gimmicky or sound corny yet here that is made all the more real, all the more immediate by not only the surprisingly rational dialogue, but by the fervor in which Cruise delivers it. Yes, Cruise is chief among his co-workers as a man who can still open a film and get people interested simply by having his name over the title. Still, what struck me more as I watched a nearly 52 year-old Cruise ride a motorcycle on the outskirts of some ravished city that highly referenced any number of Cruise films was that one day we will long to simply go to the movies and have the ability to watch a Tom Cruise blockbuster. Unfortunately, those kinds of opportunities will not always be here and so we should appreciate these occurrences especially when they are as entertaining and and thrilling as Edge of Tomorrow.

First Trailer for EDGE OF TOMORROW

Have you ever seen the trailer for a film and found it completely acceptable without being particularly motivated to really want to see the movie it's promoting? As happened earlier this year with the other Tom Cruise sci-fi vehicle, Oblivion, his latest, Edge of Tomorrow, looks to be completely acceptable and competent in its execution, but will ultimately serve as a forgettable piece of popcorn entertainment. I hate to make that assumption from a mere two and a half minutes of footage, but while director Doug Liman (The Bourne Identity, Mr. & Mrs. Smith) seems to have created a visually gripping science fiction epic the story seems to hinge on the same premise that made Groundhog Day and even Source Code interesting. Can it be repeated? I don't know if it's simply the generic name or the lack of any real moment that defined why I need to see this film being present in the trailer, but I hope this feeling of some aspect being absent is completely shattered when I see the final film. I did like the tone of the trailer and much of that has to do with the choice of song and how it plays up the grounded and gritty aspects of the art direction while implying the weight of the circumstances these characters are placed in. There is potential here, I can easily admit that as Cruise seems to have turned his movie-star skills up to an eleven for this role and has hopefully turned in both a physically and emotionally invested performance (I think if the trailer makes one thing clear it is the physical investment is covered). He is also joined by a tough-looking Emily Blunt who is playing anything but the damsel in distress and instead seems to have the upper hand on Cruise's character in helping him figure out the rules of his situation and how to make it all worth the effort. Based on the Japanese light novel All You Need Is Kill the film also stars Bill Paxton, Laura Pulver, Jeremy Piven and opens on June 6, 2014.

LOOPER Review

It is an understatement to say I was excited for Looper. As a fan of the science fiction genre it is always nice to see what seems to be a smart, legitimate sci-fi flick get good treatment from the studio system. It is clear these aren't always appealing to a mass audience but when they are made right, and with visionary directors at the charge of them they can easily be the most captivating of journeys on film. While my preference goes toward things that venture further into the cosmos, Looper is a piece of time travel bonanza that is escalated by so many different elements that are so much better than you expect them to be that the entire film rises from its own genre trappings and becomes something entirely fresh. Fresh is one of the hardest words to come by when we think of the future these days. Our ideas of what it should be, what it will look like, what it should contain have all been shaped by movies that have come before. As we now live in a future that was imagined by moviemakers twenty years ago, it only makes the task of developing an authentic, non-CG created world set even further in the future all the more challenging. Writer and director Rian Johnson has risen to that challenge, realizing that  the world develops but not with the major overhaul that most future-set films would like to imply. The world in 2044 is still very much one we recognize and can see the place we live in now transitioning to. It is all in the little details that add credibility to the films filthy landscape. Moving past that, Johnson also gives his characters quick, intelligent dialogue to ring off at one another while not getting overly wrapped up in the semantics of the consequences that will naturally come along when we begin tampering with things that should never have been touched with such hands in the first place.

Joe (Joseph Gordon-Levitt) is a hired gun who kills
men sent back from the future.

While the set up of the film may sound a bit standard: time travel exists. A guy meets himself from the future. No big deal right? Seen it before, probably know where it's going. That is what makes Looper great. Though we've seen these tricks before, and in much worse fashion, Johnson has fleshed out a film where the set up incorporates time travel but doesn't allow it to drive the narrative. As an audience we are introduced to Joe in 2044 (Joseph Gordon-Levitt) a young, hired gun whose job it is as a "looper" to instantly kill anyone the mob decides to send back in time to him. You see, time travel does not yet exist in 2044 either, but it does in the future. It was immediately outlawed and is only available for use on the black market. The mobs use it to dispose of guys they need taken care of and sending a man back in time to die immediately erases him from the future leaving no body for evidence. As young Joe, Gordon-Levitt wears a mug that allows us to believe he could age into Bruce Willis. He also incorporates a nice gravel into his youthful voice that hints at the extent the actor likely went in order to help us genuinely see the evolution of a man. Naturally, things are destined to fall apart. One can only expect this to happen when mere men attempt to take on the power of Gods. When a new mob boss in the future decides to start "closing loops" i.e. sending the older version of the looper back in time to kill himself; things get messy and future Joe (Willis) no longer likes the deal he made as a young man. The loopers receive a hefty reward for closing their loop and are relieved of their duties, but are burdened by what they know is coming. Even with the trailer you may think you know exactly where the film is heading but there are several different layers to the film that as it unfolds reveals to its audience that this is more epic moral tale than a futuristic effects fest.

Joe is taken off guard when his older self (Bruce Willis)
is the one he has to kill.

Director Johnson's first feature was the well-reviewed and often underrated Brick while his second, The Brothers Bloom, was certainly underrated and I enjoyed it much more than everyone else around me seemed to. What always stood out about the two though was the fact of how different they were and as he adds Looper to his canon it is clear the diversity informs the intelligence of his scripts and their defiance to be confined to what would otherwise feel like a standard romp through script writing 101. While the design of the film is appealing and captures a perfect overall tone to the film the soundtrack feels a bit off if not flat out cheesy at some points. Other times, it's great and when a smooth jazz number slides perfectly against the tough images we're seeing on screen a sense of cool oozes off the actors. It is in more typical, action-oriented scenes that the orchestral music doesn't give a good build-up or feels as if a single loop (no pun intended) was thrown in out of nowhere to emphasize the moment. The action scenes themselves can also at times feel a bit clunky in their direction. These are minor complaints though as from the opening shot, even the opening title, we are hooked by what is unfolding on screen because the movie has style and smarts. Not to mention, the performances are great from everyone involved. Not only does Gordon-Levitt cement his status as a force to be reckoned he proves he can pretty much do anything. He makes Joe a man we don't necessarily like, but who we still understand and come to sympathize with. Willis will likely go overlooked in the smaller, less flashier role here but he does some great subdued work here. After phoning in performances in The Expendables 2 and the horrible Cold Light of Day Willis fully realizes what began as a great year with his moving turn in Moonrise Kingdom. In Looper, he plays the older, wiser version of a man who we think we already know and when it turns out we don't, the ride becomes even more exhilarating.

Sara (Emily Blunt) has a secret on her secluded farm
she is intent on keeping.

In an aspect that has been largely ignored in the marketing campaign Emily Blunt also shows up here to provide some of her best work of the year and there has been a lot of it. Though I have yet to see Your Sister's Sister others like Salmon Fishing in the Yemen and Five Year Engagement were good enough if not slightly underwhelming. Here, though Blunt pulls off a flawless American accent and stands as a pillar for what the state of society is in this time period. She is beaten down, desperate, and has likely thought about giving up and giving in multiple times yet she keeps on going looking towards a beacon of hope that might make tomorrow better than today. She is an inspiring character and for as central as the story is to Joe, Blunt's Sara feels like the heart of the film. There are also smaller appearances from the likes of Paul Dano and Jeff Daniels who add a flair to the rollicking first act of the film. In the end though, what the greatness of Looper comes down to is the originality and the unusual path the script takes. It is a witty film that though it has a very serious meaning and a hard-edged exterior never seems to take itself too seriously. It is a refreshing entry in the sci-fi realm that along with Source Code and Sound of My Voice have added real credibility and new ideas to a genre that had become quite lacking. This all lends itself to a film that when you walk out of it will leave you more than satisfied. The problem it leaves you with is that in its few shortcomings it leaves you wanting more and even though you immediately want to go back and watch it again to dig deeper into the details you secretly just want it to keep going, to keep giving. But, as the main theme of the film explains so well, sometimes we have to sacrifice our own wants and needs for the greater good. Too much of a good thing is anything but, and Looper delivers just the right amount to hold us over until Johnson creates his next film.

 

LOOPER Review

It is an understatement to say I was excited for Looper. As a fan of the science fiction genre it is always nice to see what seems to be a smart, legitimate sci-fi flick get good treatment from the studio system. It is clear these aren't always appealing to a mass audience but when they are made right, and with visionary directors at the charge of them they can easily be the most captivating of journeys on film. While my preference goes toward things that venture further into the cosmos, Looper is a piece of time travel bonanza that is escalated by so many different elements that are so much better than you expect them to be that the entire film rises from its own genre trappings and becomes something entirely fresh. Fresh is one of the hardest words to come by when we think of the future these days. Our ideas of what it should be, what it will look like, what it should contain have all been shaped by movies that have come before. As we now live in a future that was imagined by moviemakers twenty years ago, it only makes the task of developing an authentic, non-CG created world set even further in the future all the more challenging. Writer and director Rian Johnson has risen to that challenge, realizing that  the world develops but not with the major overhaul that most future-set films would like to imply. The world in 2044 is still very much one we recognize and can see the place we live in now transitioning to. It is all in the little details that add credibility to the films filthy landscape. Moving past that, Johnson also gives his characters quick, intelligent dialogue to ring off at one another while not getting overly wrapped up in the semantics of the consequences that will naturally come along when we begin tampering with things that should never have been touched with such hands in the first place.