THE BOOK OF CLARENCE Review

An ambitious (audacious?) yet disjointed film that seems to attempt more than it intends leaving little to latch onto, but much to consider. A conundrum of both a film and experience. Coming out of writer/director/composer Jeymes Samuel's 2021 feature debut, The Harder They Fall, it was more than evident the multi-hyphenate had a distinct mission, but almost more importantly: a distinct style to match it. With as much noted it was easy to walk into Samuel's follow-up, The Book of Clarence, with a certain expectation of what it might be. As The Harder They Fall made it clear white people were not alone in the westward expansion following the Civil War, The Book of Clarence would seem to run with the fact they were essentially non-existent in Nazareth in the time of Jesus (or the Messiah, as he was probably more often referred to during his life). The correcting of the consistent portrayal of Jesus as a white, European man throughout history would then seem to be the anchor of Samuel's religious satire especially given this depiction has come under scrutiny as of late with the legacy of racism in society being more critically discussed. While this is certainly on the itinerary though, so are about twenty other items that seem to have sprung from Samuel's original intent through the process of putting this initial idea to paper. We can see the bones of Samuel's original idea in renovating the Biblical epic, but as our titular Clarence (LaKeith Stanfield) becomes swept up in and ultimately accepts the idea that Jesus may in fact be the real Messiah so too does the movie in becoming an actual Biblical epic. 

At just over two hours it doesn't quite go all the way to fit that bill, but though there are moments of biting irreverence these are always directed more toward how the familiar events of the Bible have come to be perceived rather than toward the events themselves or so seems to be the case, I could certainly have misinterpreted. The cause for such uncertainty comes with how reverential Samuel ends up treating the cornerstones of his protagonist's journey. These tonal transformations make it difficult to identify a genuine response to the material, but the film doesn't leave you with nothing. In fact, more than anything The Book of Clarence will leave many confused as to what meaning we're meant to take from this double-edged parable which - I guess - could be seen as appropriate given the conflicting nature of faith for those who question it. There is a line in the film that states, "Any man who follows rules blindly is easily overcome," which is a direct challenge to one of if not the mainstays of what "faith" is meant to illustrate. This point of view is further emphasized when, in the final act of the film, Stanfield's false Messiah calls for enlightenment over punishment. Both sentiments would seem to move the thematic needle towards the challenging of ideas and the broadening of intelligence for the sake of insight and progress as favorable and more sensical than divine knowledge and irrational acceptance, yet the film still concludes with a message that remains largely pro-faith. Hence, the confusion and conflict.

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.

INFERNO Review

In a world where even Tom Hanks has a franchise it's something of a shame America's favorite actor isn't in a better one than this. That said, the now trilogy based around symbologist Robert Langdon (Hanks) and based on the wildly popular series of novels from author Dan Brown are movies of pure junk food status and aspire to be nothing more than appeasing puzzles audiences unravel along with Langdon and whomever his next adventure decides to pair him with. Though the novels are said to very much be of the same variety as far as quality is concerned (I haven't personally read any of them) it is easy to see why there are such pleasures to be taken from the high caloric intake these movies serve up despite the lack of any real weight or nutritional value. Mystery adventures such as Inferno and its predecessors should be taken at face value and little more. There is an obvious factor to an actor of Hanks caliber taking on such a role if he were going to choose an ongoing series of films to be a part of in that Langdon is always the smartest guy in the room and Brown's novels along with the film adaptations spout facts upon historical facts in order to present the facade of intelligence and inventiveness, but while there is certainly an amount of creative ingenuity that comes along with writing any piece of fiction much less one that concerns ancient architecture, Renaissance artists, and their personal lives-each containing clues that further both the main mystery and the arc of its protagonist-there is also something inherently ridiculous to the quest Langdon and his peers are asked to go on. Making huge leaps to vague conclusions time and time again and encountering more secret passageways in old museums than there are plot twists, Inferno falls perfectly in line with the two previous films in the series if not more with 2009's Angels & Demons which saw director Ron Howard and his team taking things a lot less seriously than they did with the still daunting and tepidly paced The Da Vinci Code from 2006. Still, as its seven years on from the last sequel Inferno can't help but to feel a little less inspired and a little more under baked as it's obvious the only reason Hanks and Howard returned to this world and this character was for secure box office returns and likely the chance to make something they're a little more invested in. Whatever the case may be, Inferno is serviceable if not rather forgettable in its brisk pacing and handsome presentation. In other words, Inferno is little more than empty calories, but often times enjoyable calories nonetheless.

First Trailer for INFERNO Starring Tom Hanks

For some reason, I'm rather excited about the idea of another Dan Brown adaptation courtesy of Ron Howard and Tom Hanks. By the time this latest film premieres it will have been over a decade since The Da Vinci Code hit theaters and while I found that film incredibly challenging to get through in its long stretches of being little more than boring it felt like an event of sorts and that it ended up making $217 million domestically and $758 million globally there is no surprise it spawned more adaptations of Brown's work. Though 2009's Angels & Demons didn't do as much business it still fared well and is easily the more entertaining of the two films. With many notes acquired I'd be surprised if Inferno doesn't turn out to be a fun, unfiltered mystery/thriller that plays into all our favorite guilty pleasures that seem to make up the easily digestible narratives of Brown's work. That said, I still haven't read any of Brown's novels and don't plan on changing that soon so I have no idea how good or potentially fun this adaptation stands the chance of being, but I enjoy conspiracies and Tom Hanks enough to be excited for this thing. David Koepp returns after adapting Brown's Angels & Demons to do the same here and replacing the obligatory female sidekick previously played by the likes of Audrey Tautou and Ayelet Zurer is Felecity Jones who, in this story, helps Hanks' Robert Langdon race against the clock to foil a deadly global plot. The catch is, the beginning of the film finds Langdon waking up in a European hospital with amnesia. How will this play into the plot? Who knows. Hopefully it simply serves to make the mystery as intriguing as possible as that was the biggest downfall with the series originator. Of course, the biggest mystery will be if there is still an audience for this series seven years after the last film and three years after the book was published. We shall find out when Inferno, also starring Ben Foster, Omar Sy, and Irrfan Khan, opens on October 28th, 2016.

BURNT Review

Burnt will certainly make you hungry. Whether it is for food or the better movie this had the potential to be will have to be decided by you when you come around to the "too neatly wrapped" ending it doesn't really deserve. For my money, Burnt is a movie that is fine enough because it features another committed performance from Bradley Cooper doing what he does best and that is him digging into the psyche of his character. What makes Burnt a not so stellar vehicle for the guys talent is the fact it is a story we've seen numerous times before. As soon as the set-up is delivered and we're keen to the conditions of all the major players it is clear where this thing is heading. Still, the credentials the movie sports are more than solid: Steven Knight (Locke) penned the screenplay (he also wrote last years under-appreciated The Hundred-Foot Journey to which Burnt feels like a lesser version), John Wells (The Company Men, August: Osage County) is at the helm (though it was once supposed to be directed by David Fincher-which really makes me want to see a Fincher/Cooper collaboration) and besides Cooper we have a pedigreed cast that includes Sienna Miller (American Sniper), Daniel Brühl (Inglorious Basterds), Alicia Vikander (Ex Machina), Omar Sy (The Intouchables) and Emma Thompson not to mention a quick cameo from Uma Thurman. So, with so much going for it why does Burnt feel so stale? It's actually somewhat difficult to pinpoint as it's not as simple as blaming it on any one aspect. The film, as shot by Adriano Goldman (Cary Fukunaga's Jane Eyre), is gorgeous to look at-numerous shiny surfaces contradicted by dark shades of facial hair and the bags under Cooper's eyes with the lovely London setting all adding something of a spice to the proceedings. The dialogue is direct, the intensity of Cooper's Jones when he gets worked up in the kitchen, while Gordon Ramsey-esque, is believable and yet it is the obligations the film feels it needs to make these characters hit that pull it into mediocrity. It's not the single downfall, but it becomes the most glaring the closer we get to the conclusion.

First Trailer for BURNT Starring Bradley Cooper

The Weinstein Co. has finally decided to release the full trailer for the latest Bradley Cooper-starrer that initially premiered Monday morning on the Today show. The film, which was originally titled Chef and then changed for obvious reasons to Adam Jones is now going by Burnt, and follows the career of a rebel chef who is determined to redeem himself by spearheading a top restaurant in London that can gain him his third Michelin star. While I'm curious as to if this will be the vehicle Cooper gets his fourth consecutive Oscar nomination for, but at this stage the film seems a bit too much on the fluffy side to be considered awards material. That isn't to say the film won't be good or that Cooper won't deserve a nomination (he'll also appear in Joy which reunites him for a third time with David O. Russell and Jennifer Lawrence), but it inherently feels less like something the Academy won't find worthy of such recognition. Regardless, the fact remains that Cooper has become one of the industry's top leading men (I'm not holding Aloha against him) who does consistently strong work and puts in serious effort that makes it clear he truly loves the craft. While Burnt will revolve around Cooper's chef whose ability to create explosions of taste is undermined by his badboy rants and diva behavior director John Wells (The Company Men, August: Osage County) has also rounded up a rather stellar supporting cast that includes Sienna Miller, Omar Sy, Daniel Brühl, Uma Thurman, Matthew Rhys, Emma Thompson, Alicia Vikander, Jamie Dornan and Lily James. Burnt opens on October 23rd against Jem and the Holograms, The Last Witch Hunter, the latest Paranormal Activity and Rock the Kasbah.

JURASSIC WORLD Review

Come what may, the initial experience one has with Jurassic World can certainly be seen as nothing short of impressive. Considering my leveraged expectations and my unease around any Jurassic Park sequel to be able to pick up on a solid enough story that validated continuing the series I went into the fourth film in the dino-series hoping for the best, but expecting the worst. Fortunately, director Colin Trevorrow (Safety Not Guaranteed) and his team have found a fine excuse to return to the "clouded island" as this new film is set in real time, twenty-two years after the events of Steven Spielberg's original. The events of that film are acknowledged and referenced in a way that proves, despite his continuing mishaps, that Dr. John Hammond (the late Richard Attenborough) was never able to give up on his dream of creating this tourist attraction featuring living biological dinosaurs cloned from prehistoric DNA. In light of this, Trevorrow and the three other credited screenwriters on this gig, present the audience with a vision of every possibility and beyond that Hammond could have ever imagined and that Dr.'s Grant and Sattler along with the pleasingly pessimistic Dr. Malcolm denied spectators so many years ago. While The Lost World and Jurassic Park III felt more like missed opportunities than anything else, the one thing Jurassic World indisputably gets right is that it takes advantage of the opportunity set up in the first film by delivering the audience to a fully functioning Jurassic Park and not only puts on display how it could actually work, but shows that it has been running smoothly for some time. It is somewhat refreshing that Trevorrow and his script don't focus as much on the aspects of man again attempting to play God despite the main conflict here being an extension of what Dr. Hammond was doing in the first film, but rather this movie has its sights set on something a little more current, slightly dumb when first hearing the pitch and yet ultimately rewarding in realizing there has been some serious thought into where to take such a strand. Without saying much more, Jurassic World is first and foremost a fun summer thrill ride that doesn't take itself too seriously and delivers on what it knows audiences want from it.

First Trailer for JURASSIC WORLD

I'm not necessarily what you would call the biggest fan of the Jurassic Park franchise, but I enjoy them well enough. I can remember being ecstatic about finally getting to rent the third, non Spielberg directed installment, when it arrived on DVD because my parents weren't big fans of going to the movies (and with five kids, I understand why) but mainly because I was then old enough to see one of the movies I'd heard so much about and been too young to see before. I saw snippets of the original throughout the years, but never watched the trilogy as a whole until buying the blu-ray box set a few years ago. I also revisited the original when it was re-released in theaters last year and was happy to finally be able to see it on the big screen. All of that said, I wouldn't peg director Colin Trevorrow's (Safety Not Guaranteed)  Jurassic World as one of my most anticipated films of next year, but it certainly ranks as one I'm excited to see and this first look at the film is definitely promising. While it is clear the CG is still in the process of being completed, what is important is tone and the tone of the trailer is perfectly balanced between a nostalgic feel (the re-working of the signature score) while setting up a natural progression (the park is actually open and functioning) while the humans at play can't help but to push things further to feel more in control, trying to play God again, and in return getting themselves into trouble. Visually, the film looks spectacular and just as sweeping and epic as any of its predecessors. I also enjoy the idea of a sequel that doesn't seem to exist to solely to re-make the original, butinstead actually tell a new story of where things could have realistically gone given the original premise. Jurassic World stars Chris Pratt, Bryce Dallas Howard, Nick Robinson Ty Simpkins, Vincent D’Onofrio, Irrfan Khan, Jake Johnson, Omar Sy, Judy Greer and opens on June 12, 2015.

X-MEN: DAYS OF FUTURE PAST Review

Everything about our comic book movies that we receive these days are dictated by what works in others and what has become outdated, but when it comes to the X-Men films they are the ones who set the trend of what has now been flourishing (for the most part) for nearly fifteen years. With their latest installment they continue to be able to change with the times while also sticking to their roots and using what has come in the past to influence the relationships between the characters and make the impact of the events that occur in the latest installments all the more powerful. I was a big fan of First Class three years ago as it was able to give the series a much needed fresh start after the perceived misstep of The Last Stand (which wasn't ALL that bad) and the definite blow that was X-Men Origins. Not only was the series getting a fresh start, but it was also a chance to see what has always been the core of the franchise, the relationship between Charles Xavier and Erik Lehnsherr, blossom and become the iconic battle of ideologies that guided each of the original X-Men trilogy films. In saying that the X-Men films continue to adapt to the current climate of superhero films is to reference how this latest installment, which is technically the sequel to First Class, incorporates the idea of continuity and world building. The idea to bring in everyone from past films, essentially creating an all-star roster for an embodiment of everything the past films have been leading up to is the new niche studios are pushing after the success of not only The Avengers, but the Fast & Furious films. The X-Men have always been an ensemble though so their way of putting a spin on this approach is to connect the original franchise with that of the First Class world and in doing so have created a universe where every X-Men film that has been made can co-exist in the same space (except for maybe Origins, but that bears little matter here) and in that regard Days of Future Past doesn't quite feel as spectacular or as epic in scope as it probably should, but it is still highly entertaining and more satisfying on a level that leaves us with a film that will resonate with us the more we watch it rather than becoming less impressive over time because it's nothing more than empty spectacle.

First Trailer for X-MEN: DAYS OF FUTURE PAST

Bryan Singer kicked off the super hero film wave way back in 2000 and even as the super hero genre has become its own and still thrives, arguably better than it ever has, Singer's X-Men crew have been through several ups and downs together, but have not re-grouped entirely since 2006's The Last Stand where director Brett Ratner took over and things only went downhill from there. In 2011 though director Matthew Vaughn re-invigorated the mutant franchise with his take on the origin story of the two distinct leaders of the mutant revolution: Charles Xavier (Patrick Stewart) and Erik Lensherr aka Magneto (Ian McKellan). The film was both critically and financially successful which of course means a sequel, but this isn't like any other sequel. Singer has now returned to the world he began and has combined both his cast and the First Class recruits to tell a time altering story that has Hugh Jackman's Wolverine sending his consciousness back to 1973 so that he might help a younger Charles (James McAvoy) and Erik (Michael Fassbender). The suspected villain in all of this is Boliver Trask (Peter Dinklage) who may or may not be constructing large robots that look eerily similar to sentinels. The trailer delivers more than I expected, but with a quieter, darker tone than I've seen in any of the previous X-Men films. I absolutely loved the first X-Men and X2 is still arguably one of the best super hero films ever made which only garners more excitement to see what Singer has done with a cast and scale as large as this one. X-Men: Days of Future Past also stars Jennifer Lawrence, Nicholas Hoult, Anna Paquin, Ellen Page, Shawn Ashmore, Omar Sy, Halle Berry and opens in 3D May 23, 2014.

THE INTOUCHABLES Home Video Review

There is always the feeling that watching a foreign film is something of a burden and not necessarily because you have to read the dialogue, but because it can be stressful to make sure you catch every bit of dialogue and that you can read fast enough before the subtitles are removed or changed. It is a tension filled viewing experience that creates more a sigh of relief when the film comes to an end rather than a fresh perspective on whether you actually enjoyed the content of the film or not. That is the mindset that I always seem to approach foreign language films with whether I want to or not and The Intouchables, a film I'd heard so much about and wanted to see for a long time now fit that description all the same as I finally had the chance to settle in and watch it. As soon as the film began though, that feeling of slight tension was eased as even in those opening moments the film was not only much more light-hearted than I imagined it would be, but it also didn't contain any dialogue to keep up with for those first few minutes and instead immediately introduced us to the characters and gave us a quick glimpse of who they were without saying a word. Based on a true story of Philippe Pozzo di Borgo and his caregiver Abdel Sellou that was discovered by directors Olivier Nakache and Éric Toledano upon seeing the pair in a documentary, A la vie, à la mort. The film is the second biggest box office hit in France and became a rather big deal in its native country in 2011 while hitting the states in the summer months last year and creating a good amount of waves here as well, the film is a charming look at an odd couple, the clashing of two worlds and the cultural differences that define us but sometimes bring us together. It is essentially a buddy comedy, but it has heart and I dare you to try and not enjoy yourself as you watch it.