Starring: Daniel Kaluuya, Allison Williams and Catherine Keener
Directed By: Jordan Peele
Rated: R
Running Time: 103 minutes
Universal Pictures
Our Score: 4 out 5 Stars
Something’s not right. It’s not just the subtle and blatant racism by Rose’s (Williams) family, but it’s the growing sense of dread that the audience experiences through the eyes of Chris (Kaluuya). Every other African-American that Chris encounters wears clothes straight out of a Norman Rockwell painting and speaks in uncomfortable pleasantries. Even worse is that when talking to these African-American’s Chris feels like he’s talking with every other white person he’s encountered at the family event.
Despite the blunt, and comedic, warnings of one of his friends, Chris is visiting the relatives of his five-month girlfriend. Rose tells him that she hasn’t mentioned she’s dating a black guy to her family, but she assures him it’s perfectly OK. She even tells him that her father (Bradley Whitford) would have voted for Obama for a third time if he could have. He later shoehorns that racially motivated banter into conversation as a way to get to know her daughter’s new boyfriend, as if her father assumes all black people voted for the 44th President. The awkward remarks and comments aren’t fooling Chris though. Something’s definitely not right.
For those familiar with Jordan Peele, who’s worked in television sketch comedy for over a decade, it might come as a surprise that his directorial debut is satirical horror, that’s a lot heavier on the tension than it is the jokes. The comedy is served up as a way to divide viewer apprehension, which there’s plenty of. Peele has a keen eye for unnerving the audience with numerous close-up shots, specific musical arrangements in even more specific spots, and performances that convey a sinister plot hidden deep in suburbia.
Peele, throughout his comedic career, has dropped muted and blunt horror movies references and “Get Out” is no different. For horror aficionados, there are plenty of nods, homages and stylistic choices reminiscent of Wes Craven, Stanley Kubrick and others. But for those in on the trick of the trade, you’ll find more to “Get Out” than its director’s love of scares as the film progresses. The social and racial commentary is sprinkled throughout and just not in Rose’s eerie, grinning family.
Chris, as well as his friend who keeps in constant contact with back home, seem to be the only ones that understand racism is still a thing. It’s seen early on with a policeman taking a statement after Rose hits a deer with her vehicle. Despite her being the driver, the officer still asks for Chris’ ID. That’s a more obvious statement by the film, but there are plenty of other moments shrouded behind smiling faces and looks, demeaning questions, and using undignified nicknames when talking with Chris.
The boogeyman in “Get Out” isn’t anything supernatural, but very real. As a white man who’s sat through plenty of horror movies, rarely do I ever get two distinct impressions. One, I am the boogeyman. Two, this is what the average black man deals with. The movie even begins with a nod to the Trayvon Martin incident as a black man walks through suburbia at night, thinking out loud about what George Zimmerman is lurking just around the corner.
As politically and socially carnivorous as “Get Out” is, it’s never victimizes black people or vilifies white people. The terror is real, projecting minority’s real world fears onto a plot revolving around body horror, brainwashing and 21st century slavery. It helps that Chris doesn’t find himself in the stereotypical backwoods, but in a picturesque homestead where everyone’s educated, nice and welcoming. But as I stated at the beginning, something’s not right. If “Get Out” is any indication, Peele is not only a refreshing voice for horror, but may have just steered the genre in a completely new direction that’s wildly exciting, scary and ferocious.
Directed By: Michael Dudok de Wit
Rated: PG
Running Time: 80 minutes
Sony Pictures Classic
Our Score: 4 out of 5 Stars
Since 2013, Studio Ghibli has been without Hayao Miyazaki. The creatively diverse, ever-promising studio has seemingly been stuck in a holding pattern. When a found is no longer present, it’s understandable for a production studio to shuffle its feet while trying to find some new footing. Ghibli’s first theatrical step since Miyazaki’s departure may have come in the form of a multi-national collaboration.
“The Red Turtle” isn’t really a story, more than it’s a visual journey. In many ways, it’s a fable without dialogue, taking viewers on a curious excursion. The movie begins with an unnamed man, clinging to life in a furious sea storm. He awakens, stranded on an island that has the most basic of essentials; a small cluster of ponds to drink fresh water from, various fruits to quell his hunger, and bamboo to craft a getaway raft. The only thing preventing his escape is an expressionless red turtle.
Someone with rudimentary observational skills would view “The Red Turtle” as simplistic storytelling without purpose. But the removal of dialogue requires the viewer to take in more than they normally would. You pay more attention to the thinly drawn facial expression changes, the grunts, the various orchestral selections and the nameless man’s dreams that spill into reality. I can tell you what “The Red Turtle” means to me, but this is multi-layered movie that relays a different message for those willing to watch.
I viewed the “The Red Turtle” as a thoughtful reflection about mankind’s need to reconnect with nature in a meaningful way, less we want to wind up alone on this floating blue ball called Earth. It’s not necessarily an environmental message that I took away, but one of humanity’s casual disrespect. We merely take what we need and seem frustrated when nature responds, not with violence, but with curiosity about why we don’t stop in breathe it all in. Once the nameless man works with nature, instead of against it, he begins to be happy and see the island as a miniature slice of heaven.
But like I said, others will take away a much different and distinct opinion from the subtext. This kind of opinion is true for most films, but “The Red Turtle” is crafted in such a way that if there is a true message to be consumed, it’s cleverly hidden beneath a lot of optical substance. Without giving too much away, there are deep themes about family dynamics, the destructive habits that nature and mankind reciprocally share, the mutual survivalism every creature on Earth is enduring, and that’s just a few.
While “The Red Turtle” is a metaphorical delight, it’s pace sometimes is slower than a casual stroll, seemingly padding it’s runtime so it could be considered a feature length film. This is a story that may have benefitted from a shorter runtime, but then again it may have lacked a lot of philosophical richness that viewers would be able to sink their teeth into. “The Red Turtle” is not only a stellar animation endeavor, but a soothing delight that reflects the human soul.
Starring: Gemma Arterton, Glenn Close and Sennia Nanua
Directed By: Colm McCarthy
Rated: R
Running Time: 111 minutes
Saban Films
Our Score: 4 out of 5 Stars
If it bites like a zombie, moves like a zombie, and growls like a zombie, it’s probably a zombie. That’s not the case though in “The Girl with All the Gifts.” Their zombies haven’t necessarily died and become reanimated monsters that crave human flesh and/or brains. Instead, a fungal infection is the culprit behind the mindless, violent masses stalking this post-apocalyptic world. The spores sprout and creep into the brain, like a vine weaving its way into a home’s foundation, causing a human to lose their mental prowess and become monotonous cannibals.
While the sight of a human would usually send a stereotypical film zombie into a tizzy, the zombies in “The Girl with All the Gifts” only react to scent and sound. Also in this dystopian future, where the last remaining humans have stowed away in heavily guarded forts, there’s a third, hybrid group that co-exists. It’s made up of second-generation children, born from a human turned zombie. They’re almost like a bridge between the two, exhibiting human emotions and intellect, but excited to sink their teeth into flesh and organs at a moment’s notice.
The elementary and middle-school aged children keep their inhibitions in check, but just the mere whiff of someone’s stench sends them chomping at flesh, snarling at people and attempting to escape their restraints. The most intelligent and articulate of the group is Melanie (Nanua). She’s also the best at keeping her animalistic urges in check while her entire class acts like starved sharks when a drop of blood hits the water.
Most everyone at the military base, whether its army men with assault rifles, apprehensive school teachers or scientists, is petrified of the children; except two people. Miss Helen (Arterton) sees humanity’s salvation in them. While Miss Helen may pine for the days before the apocalypse, she thinks that these kids are more than just a potential cure, but have true value in shaping the future of the world. Dr. Caldwell (Close) on the other hand picks the brains of the children, literally and intellectually.
“The Girl with All the Gifts” is based on a book of the same, where the writer most likely stole a few pages out of “The Walking Dead” playbook, incorporating emotion, character study, and morality into the zombie genre. Video gamers will get more of a Deja vu feeling as the fungal infection and foliage rich cities feel reminiscent of the PlayStation 3 game, “The Last of Us.” Despite some of the clear and possible influences, “The Girl with All the Gifts” avoids a lot of cliché pitfalls and is a solid addition to the zombie genre that’s been struggling to find anything fresh lately
Even with the star power of Glenn Close, the movie is led by the heartfelt, yet terrifying, performance of a 12-year-old actress. Sennia Nanua counterbalances the dire outlook in “The Girl With all the Gifts” with a curious coming-of-age story. If Melanie didn’t have dried blood on her lips and face half the time, she could be the Katniss of the zombie world. Melanie faces a lot of stark realizations about the real world as the movie progresses. Her adolescent transformation is quick, nuanced and captivating.
Melanie’s fresh grasp of the world, past, present and future, is integral, but it’s her relationships with Miss Helen and Dr. Caldwell that set-up a profound third act. It takes a while to get to the crux of it because the story meanders, but during that downtime, there are some solid moments. It’s there we find out about how the human mind and spirit can overcome carnal urges. It helps the audience better understand the painfully tragic choices we have to make when reality stares us down in the face.
The outcome will most likely be viewed as grim, but it’s important to keep in mind the lessons that Melanie picks up along the way. It’s interesting to watch a genre, generally rich with fear and cynicism, find a more impactful message about humanity’s selfish existence and fear of nature. “The Girl with All the Gifts” adds some intelligence to the brain dead genre by being more sensitive and curious about the human story developing on screen than it is with making the audience jump in their seats.
Starring: Matt Damon, Tian Jing and Willem Dafoe
Directed By: Yimou Zhang
Rated: PG-13
Running Time: 103 minutes
Universal Pictures
Our Score: 2 out of 5 Stars
12th century China looks weird. And it’s not just because of Matt Damon’s scraggly face sticking out like a sore thumb. There’s been a lot of vocal concerns by the mainstream media that “The Great Wall” is whitewashing history, but don’t worry. The movie isn’t historical in any way shape or form. But it does manage to explain why Damon’s character is there. He’s a European merchant in search of gunpowder. He talks about how gunpowder is a rumor, fantasized about by Western powers. If someone were to find it, take it, and bring it back, they would receive untold fortunes.
That’s logical. In fact it’s the only logical thing in this illogical movie. Sure Damon has a bland accent that disappears half the time and it’s not quite clear what nationality his character is, but it’s not the explosive controversy that’s being portrayed on “Good Morning America” right now. This movie is about as historically accurate as Mel Brook’s “History of the World, Part I.” It solidifies that fact when we’re introduced to the CGI asteroid demon creatures that have been spent centuries attempting to invade China.
That’s not a glaring typo or a misplaced sentence fragment from another review. There are green monsters that come from a lemon lime radiating space rock populating the screen. These creatures are of a hive mind, following orders from an ominous queen. These green monsters apparently want to invade ancient China because…well…the movie never answers that. It’s frustrating because the writers couldn’t even bother to steal a page from the “Starship Troopers” playbook.
The queen alien, who’s very unimpressive compared to her underlings, isn’t just some animalistic creature without a shred of intellect. There’s a drive behind her as she meticulously plans out traps, devises battle plans, and evolves her army’s military tactics over decades. “The Great Wall” explain too much without ever explaining any of the basic groundwork. This should be stupid fun time at the movies, but it’s interjections of seemingly random alien rationale and ramshackle attempts at historical precedent are befuddling.
“The Great Wall” can never make up its mind on if it wants to be a serious attempt at a summer blockbuster or fantasy alternative history. It can’t be both and fails at being either one. I didn’t expect much walking in. I truly didn’t. I expected a 2017-style “Gods of Egypt” tax write off for Universal, but that’s not what I got. Even while my brain was on cruise control I managed to pick up on the poor plot pacing and subpar storytelling. That’s not a good thing.
The saving grace in “The Great Wall” is its half-hearted attempt at likable characters. It helps that Damon most likely knew they were filming hot garbage and played into its schlock. But I lacked beer and friends to appreciate the pricey travesty I was witnessing on screen. There’s no doubt that it’s visually intense and the set designs are meticulously detailed and gorgeous, but this is a rough movie to like or even recommend.
Starring: Keanu Reeves, Common and Laurence Fishburne
Directed By: Chad Stahleski
Rated: R
Running Time: 122 minutes
Summit Entertainment
Our Score: 4 out of 5 Stars
Did the first “John Wick” need a sequel? No. Does “John Wick: Chapter 2” need a sequel? Yes. I didn’t know I needed “Chapter 2” in my life, but I’m glad I got it and now I want more. “Chapter 2” is more of the same from the first installment and that’s not a bad thing. It’s a great thing.
Picking right up where the previous movie ended, John Wick (Reeves), also known as “The Boogeyman,” is finishing off the lingering threats and hitmen who did him wrong from the first installment. But instead of easing back into a low-key and somber retirement, with a new dog in tow, he’s greeted by an old acquaintance, Santino D’Antonio (Riccardo Scamarcio). D’Antonio recruits Wick to help him take over a seat of power in the criminal underworld. Wick isn’t so sure, but Santino uses an old blood oath and three missiles to Wick’s home to sway him.
All the potential consequences and paths of this blood oath, as pointed out to Wick multiple times throughout, are Wick’s death. Luckily for Wick, and the audience, he’s the one who spends entire runtime dishing out death. Before the story even contemplates getting too muddled in specifics and new characters, “Chapter 2” takes a deep breath and once again stops itself from becoming too literal. Just like the original, character introductions are more about the person’s individual quirks, skills and ticks, than their actual name or purpose. And “Chapter 2” keeps the video games tropes around as everything is still paid through magical golden tokens and Wick’s gun is stuck on auto-aim.
This helps keep everything flowing as this sequel is about 30 minutes longer, but rarely dull. While “John Wick” was more about the man behind the blood hungry myth, the sequel appears to be more about Wick diving deeper into the world around him, including the Continental, the criminal safe haven, hangout and safe zone from the first film. The Continental is still shrouded in mystery, but the little depth that is revealed implies it’s a lot more than just a U.N. for gangbangers. It may be the actual cogs of society and government.
What made the original so good is that it never bogged itself down in realism despite the backdrop being New York City. Instead it collects visual actualities to prop up this notion that this alternative reality is percolating beneath the surface. “Chapter 2” expands this alternate reality by dropping visual indications on how all these backstabbing swindlers and emotionless assassins have managed to govern themselves. Murder is their business and they’re serious about it. The rules in this violent fantasy world are simple, habitual, rehashed for clarity, and never biased towards any of the heroes and villain.
“Chapter 2” also further establishes previous canon while building on fresh canon without having any of the new nuances become superficial. The violence is a lot more over-the-top, but played straight-faced for laughs. The killings are more gruesome, but never repugnant. Like much of the visually stunning set-pieces, like a room of rotating mirrors bathed in laser light, the violence is aesthetically pleasing. That’s because it’s visually relayed that Wick doesn’t love or sink his teeth into this line of work anymore, but does it as a necessity for survival.
The same crew from the first is back for more, providing an enjoyable and realistic continuation of a seemingly one-off story about a retired assassin out for revenge. He’s no longer out for revenge, but struggling with the underworld that wants him to be addicted to the rush and thrill of being a hired gun. Wick’s world is noir, retro, and techno all in one cohesive ball. The John Wick franchise is not only a great addition to the action-film catalogue, but a much needed renaissance for the CGI-heavy genre.
At 37-years-old, Director/Writer Patrick Rea is already making a name for himself in horror circles around the country. Since graduating from the University of Kansas in December 2002, Patrick has made dozens of short films and collaborated with other directors and writers on even more. He’s starting to get his footing as a feature-film director and took time out of his busy schedule to talk with MediaMikes about his latest film, “Arbor Demon,” which was a part of the Panic Fest lineup in January and premiered on video-on-demand on February 3rd.
Jeremy Werner: Not to steal one of the questions from one of the fine folks that attended Panic Fest, but I loved the answer you gave at it. So I have to ask, where did the inspiration for “Arbor Demon” come from?
Patricka Rea: It was a combination of things. When my wife and I were dating, we went camping one night at Lake Perry, near Lawrence, Kansas. In the early hours of the morning, there was an altercation that occurred between two other campers near our tent. After the fight ensued, one of the campers decided to hop on a rusty four-wheeler, with a deer skull on the front, and drive angrily around the campgrounds, narrowly missing our tent. My wife and I were pretty freaked out, but to cut the tension, I joked that it would be funny if something came out of the woods and attacked them, so we could get a good night’s sleep. That was where the seed of the idea came from. Once Michelle Davidson and I actually started writing the screenplay years later, my wife was pregnant, so the story really shifted to dealing with a woman’s pregnancy, along with being trapped inside a tent.
JW: What was it that Davidson brought and added to the script?
PR: Michelle is a great screenwriter and a terrific partner. Our process is really about going back and forth with ideas and solving problems within the story. She added so many layers to the script and really brought a fantastic female perspective. The movie is primarily a female driven story, and Michelle took that aspect to the next level. She also is a mother of two, and has a lot of experience to draw upon.
JW: I remember hearing that this script, including the name of the movie, has changed over time. What was it that changed and why?
PR: The original title of the film was “Enclosure”. It has played at a number of film festivals with that title and will continue to carry that name overseas. The biggest reason for the change was that distributor wanted the film to be more visible to consumers on Video On Demand. Since the film now starts with an “A”, it will be higher up on the listings.
JW: The creature in the movie, you really don’t get a good look at it until the end. But when you do, you notice all these different look quirks about them. What hand did you have in crafting the creature and what inspiration did you draw from?
PR: Davidson and I worked hard to come up with a fresh take on the monster. I enjoy drawing, so I sketched out ideas for the design. Eventually, we hired Megan Areford (“VHS: Viral,” “Cooties” and “Sharknado”) to handle make-up effects. She took my initial artwork and made some of her own sketches, which were incredible. From there she started working on the actual prosthetics for the creature and we communicated over Skype.
JW: Since the woods and nature plays a role in the movie, was there anything you manipulated in the woods you filmed in?
PR: I would say that we spent a good amount of time just trying to find unique trees and formations in the woods that would enhance the setting and story. But, in terms of actual manipulation, we built a small forest, designed by Production Designer, Leslie Keel (“May,” “Red” and “Welcome to the Jungle”) on a soundstage around the tent. This was to create the illusion that we were still in the woods when shooting all the tent interiors. This also allowed us to control the lighting and sound.
JW: What horror inspirations do you draw from when writing and directing?
PR: The early work of John Carpenter has always been a big influence on me, from the framing of the shots, to the pace and storytelling skills. I’m also inspired by directors like Wes Craven, Sam Raimi and of course Steven Spielberg. At this point in my career, I like to read about the challenges they faced while making their films. It helps me feel better when I have various roadblocks to overcome during the process.
JW: You’ve done a lot of shorts in the past and a handful of full-length movies…which one do you tend to gravitate more towards and enjoy working on?
PR: Well, I prefer doing feature films, but I love making short films. Short form filmmaking allows me to experiment with new equipment, crew and ways of telling a story. There are a lot of films that I don’t think should exist outside a smaller duration, so I tend to gravitate to those types of projects between features. I think I’ll always make short films, if nothing else to keep my storytelling skills sharp. Making a feature can take years, so it’s good to keep putting out shorter work in order stay on everyone’s radar.
JW: Obviously, this is your career. This your passion and love. What’s something outside that horror genre that you’d be interested in experimenting with and what are you working on next?
PR: I’m working on a number of things, including a CBS kids show titled “The Inspectors” which airs on Saturday mornings. Right now, Michelle and I are getting our next horror feature off the ground, that is a fresh spin on the imaginary friend story. As for experimenting, I really want to direct a high-concept sci-fi film. Just waiting for the right project to come along.
Starring: Fiona Dourif, Kevin Ryan and Jake Busey
Directed By: Patrick Rea
Rated: Unrated
Running Time: 100 minutes
Gravitas Ventures
Our Score: 3.5 out of 5 Stars
Things aren’t exactly going well for Charles (Ryan) and Dana (Dourif). They are getting ready to celebrate their anniversary, by returning to the spot where Charles proposed to Dana, and their different perceptions of life and long term goals are beginning to show. While Charles doesn’t exactly seem to know it yet, the trip is a way to patch up the relationship as it exists now and take it another step forward with Dana’s recent discovery at the doctor. She’s pregnant.
Charles isn’t the most enthusiastic about having children, seeming to ignore kids they encounter in public and jokingly saying that they’re not the kind of married couple that’ll have kids. However the risk of impregnating Dana doesn’t ever slow down his insatiable sex drive. There’s an impending sense of doom as they enter the woods, but things get eerie when they encounter a drunken group of hunters, firing wildly into the air and making a ruckus at the dead of night.
The encampment of drunks is attacked by an unseen force and soon Charles, because he’s a paramedic, makes it his duty to risk his life and take in an injured member of the group, Sean (Busey). The trio hunkers down inside the flimsy safety of an orange tent as something sinister stalks around in the woods, blending in with the surroundings. But it doesn’t attack. That’s because it may want Dana.
Lacking jump scares and jolts of fright, “Arbor Demon” seems more interested in the tension that evolves inside the tent that Dana, Charles and Sean are cowering in. When not focused on backstabbing survivalism, the movie peels back layers of its own mythology, touching upon the supernatural elements of nature and it’s deep connection to motherhood. It’s not until the end that the “demon” reveals itself and we understand why Dana is the treasured prize of the creature lurking in the woods.
Dourif, who’s probably sick and tired by now of hearing about how much she looks like her father, carries the fear of Dana of well through her eyes, breathing and physical reactions. Dana isn’t just fearful of the creature, but seemingly more fixated on if her marriage can survive the bombshell that she’s carrying Charles’ child. It plays into the third act and the movie floats away from its horror elements, finding more fun by playing with Indian mythos and supernatural components.
The story evolution helps break-up the potential monotony of your run-of-the-mill terror in the woods plotline. “Arbor Demon” isn’t going to scare you, but it does give the viewer a moment of reflection about how humanity and nature are so closely related, yet we constantly forget about it. “Arbor Demon” says a lot about gender roles when you get down to it. Dana seems to have an understanding while Charles and Sean seem to be in fight-or-flight mode.
The folks behind Panic Fest have a deep passion for horror and it showed all weekend long. Just like the past four years, the event was an absolute blast. While there’s always room for improvements, such as the amount of room there is at the Screenland Armour, it genuinely feels like the movies, the Q&A’s, the vendors, and everything else, were passionately combed over and whittled to near perfection. The efforts behind the creators and sponsors didn’t go unnoticed by those in attendance
The highlight from my first day was the sampling of local horror. Attendees were treated to movies with a local connection. I caught “Tonight She Comes” which was filmed in Missouri, just south of St. Louis, and was not for the faint of heart, squeamish, or those with a working moral compass. The other movie I caught was “Arbor Demon,” which was directed by KU alum, Patrick Rea. Despite his desire to film in his stomping grounds, he filmed his camping trip turned nightmare in South Carolina.
The second day, since I wasn’t hungover, began with an 11 a.m. selection of Saturday morning cartoons. Forever Bogus hosted the screening of late 80’s and early 90’s cartoons. As for the rest of the day, it was an eccentric collection of B-movie horror, nostalgic throwbacks, and psychological horror. The highlight of my night though was “The Last Podcast on the Left.” The trio of hosts, Ben Kissel, Marcus Parks, and Henry Zebrowski, tickled the funny bone throughout with taboo topics like Charles Manson, and absolutely bizarre topics like Batsquatch.
The final day was a rehash of some movies folks may have missed along with some new movies mixed in for flavoring. I feel like I caught the two best films of the festival that day though. Despite my well belief that the “Walking Dead” has ruined the zombie genre, “Train to Busan” and “The Girl with All the Gifts” is evidence to the contrary. And I’d be crazy not to mention “The Void.” Imagine if the creature effects people behind “The Thing” stumbled into a Clive Barker fever dream. That’s what watching “The Void” was like.
For those who attended, I bet you had a blast like I did. For those who didn’t, I hope to see you next year. You can check out the Screenland Armour here since they will be sprinkling some of the films from Panic Fest throughout the year. You can also go to the Panic Fest website here to keep an eye out for next 2018 and check out the movies I mentioned and didn’t mention.
One of the fun things to discuss, debate, argue, or silently complain about on social media is Oscar snubs. Luckily this year, the ship has been righted and I think we can put the #Oscarssowhite controversy to rest because of how diverse the nominees were this year. Although to be fair, the Academy set the bar pretty low the past two years in terms of cultural variety. But there’s one thing the Academy can never escape and that’s snubs. While I certainly don’t believe some of my snubs ever had a chance, they are deserving of some gold.
Best Picture Snub Swiss Army Man
I knew this was a longshot. I know the Academy isn’t about to publicly acknowledge a farting boner corpse movie. But a little part of me had hoped that its indie cred, combined with its existential storytelling, would have made it a respectable dark horse in a field of 10. It’s unique, fascinating, moving, well-acted and wonderfully shot. Its only flaw is that it’s too off putting for general audiences and slightly juvenile for the snobby voters in Hollywood. I swear this is the last time you’ll hear or see me cheerleading for this movie.
Honorably Snubbed as Well:20th Century Women
Best Director Snub
Robert Eggers, The Witch
Eggers immersed himself in 1630’s New England to deliver a historically accurate portrayal of terror in the unknown wilderness of early America. Everything from the film’s dialogue to the farmstead were meticulously groomed and crafted by the director. He managed to wrangle four (including one teenager) child actors, keeping them from being annoying, as they traditionally are in horror movies. This production designer turned director crafted an atmospheric horror masterpiece. Eggers is one to watch out for.
Honorably Snubbed as Well: Daniel Scheinert and Daniel Kwan, Swiss Army Man
Best Actor Snub
Tom Hanks, Sully
Let’s clear up this presumed notion I’ve seen on social media. Tom Hanks doesn’t get nominated every year. He hasn’t been nominated for an Oscar since 2001 and hasn’t won a golden statute since 1995. I’m not asking the Academy to throw him a bone, he doesn’t need one. But don’t overlook the fact that “Sully” is a sub par movie-going experience without Hanks’ hefty talents in the pilot seat. Hanks’ navigates Clint Eastwood’s so-so work into a memorable tale of average Joe heroism and the bureaucratic blame game.
Honorably Snubbed as Well: Jake Gyllenhaal, Nocturnal Animals
Best Actress Snub
Sasha Lane, American Honey
I wouldn’t blame you for not watching “American Honey.” Three hours of wanderlust is too much for the average audience. But first time actress, Sasha Lane, is a treasure to watch. She was up for every challenge of portraying an impoverished young adult. Lane portrays an innocent, if not naive, teenager looking for her purpose and a slice of the American dream. Her character, without speaking usually, represents youthful aspirations and good intentions, despite the thieving people around her. Lane keeps the flame of hope in her character lit throughout the movie, making her character one to root for her and admire.
Honorably Snubbed as Well: Amy Adams, Arrival
Best Supporting Actor Snub
Aaron Taylor-Johnson, Nocturnal Animals
The story within a story is the strongest part about “Nocturnal Animals,” mainly due to its wonderful performances. Leading the way is Jake Gyllenhaal, but his emotionally distressed character would be nothing without the terrifying Texas psychopath played by Aaron Taylor-Johnson. While visually disgusting, Taylor-Johnson’s grimy character radiates off the screen. He’s calculating, but relaxed. He’s vicious, but calm. The dynamic extremes of his character are balanced by Taylor-Johnson who’s “ablicious” and repugnant.
Honorably Snubbed as Well: Ben Foster, Hell or High Water
Best Supporting Actress Snub
Haley Bennett, Girl on the Train
I know. I know. This is a bad movie. But the Academy has not been above nominating a bad movie or rewarding the components of a bad movie. Let’s not forget that “50 Shades of Grey” is an Oscar nominated movie with five Razzie wins under its belt. While Emily Blunt should certainly be commended for her performance, it’s Haley Bennett’s performance as the tragically flawed suburban floozy that becomes the center of the movie’s suffering. Her character lives life emotionally empty, only to be killed when finding new life. In the rear view mirror of 2016, Bennett’s performance is brave and engaging, but trapped in a lifeless cliché movie.
Honorably Snubbed as Well: Greta Gerwig, 20th Century Women
Best Animated Feature Finding Dory
Is “Finding Dory” that average? I thoroughly enjoyed the Pixar movie and was surprised it didn’t, at the very least, get a nod. It’s not the best of the year, but it can certainly be mentioned in the same breath as the other candidates. I haven’t seen “The Red Turtle” or “My Life as a Zucchini” so I can’t comment on their quality since they certainly secured the final two spots. I’m sure they’re good. Maybe this is a sign that Pixar should just avoid sequels for a while. At least “Sausage Party” didn’t steal one of the nomination seats or else there’d be hell to pay.
Honorably Snubbed as Well: None. This was a year that saw Angry Birds, so we need to do better in 2017.
Best Original Screenplay Zootopia
It’s been mentioned before, and not just by me, that “Zootopia” benefited from coming out at the right time. The script, while being generously relatable to kids and adults alike, has a wonderful message about acceptance. A city populated with cute, furry animals taught everyone that sexism, racism, classism and xenophobia are still very real and can divide us in a heartbeat. Disney could have easily settled for a buddy cop movies with animals, but instead allowed the script to naturally evolve and survive the rewriting process. Despite nine credited writers, “Zootopia” never became diluted or a jumbled mess. Instead it ran smoothly with a clear message of tolerance.
Honorably Snubbed as Well:The Invitation
Best Adapted Screenplay Silence
Martin Scorsese’s decades long passion project is based on a work of historical fiction. While having never read the novel myself, the folks who have read the book have left nothing, but glowing reviews of it online. If the purpose of the 20th century novel is to make us reflect and question spirituality and our religious beliefs as a whole, Scorsese captured that wonderfully in a movie that, while drawn out, is beautifully retold on the silver screen. Scorsese painted a beautiful picture just like the book certainly transported readers back to post-Feudal Japan.
Honorably Snubbed as Well:High-Rise
Best Music
Cliff Martinez, Neon Demon
While I’m not completely sold on “Neon Demon” being a good movie, I found myself listening to the soundtrack of “Neon Demon” multiple times. While adding another layer to the movie, the soundtrack on its own accord is a wonderful synth album inducing feelings of hope and despair. “Neon Demon” is a visual experience, complimented by a wonderful score that spurs dread and bouncy optimism, sometimes within a single song. “Neon Demon” is the only movie this year where the music feels like an unseen narrator for how we’re supposed to feel.
Honorably Snubbed as Well: Johann Johannson, Arrival
Best Music, Original Song
Drive it Like You Stole It, Sing Street
The coming-of-age love letter to the 80’s, “Sing Street,” should have been more popular. Not only did the Clash, A-Ha, and the Cure get some much deserved love on the screen, but the movie featured some dynamic original music. Most of the original content, like “Riddle of the Model,” was short nods to music by Duran Duran or other iconic bands. However, the movie reaches its crescendo with its most poppy rock hit, “Drive It Like You Stole It.” The song is a big metaphor for the final act and growing up in general. Just listen to it and tell me that’s not the best original song of the year.
Honorably Snubbed as Well: Montage, Swiss Army Man
Best Foreign Language Elle
I’m finding it difficult, once again, to put into words why I like this movie so much. Just read my review.
Honorably Snubbed as Well: I’m not sure. I should be more cultured.
Starring: James McAvoy, Anya Taylor-Joy and Betty Buckley
Directed By: M. Night Shyamalan
Rated: PG-13
Running Time: 117 minutes
Universal Pictures
Our Score: 4 out of 5 Stars
Dissociative identity disorder (DID) is more commonly known as split personality disorder (SPD) or multiple personality disorder (MPD). The 90’s was full of daytime talk shows, like Oprah, talking to people who allegedly suffered from the disorder. The TV appearances didn’t add much credence to the ongoing debate over the diagnosis and legitimacy of the mental illness in the scientific and psychological communities. Instead it provided housewives with fodder and a free-pass for Hollywood to rejuvenate one of their favorite horror/thriller tropes. Now in 2017, the disease is back in “Split,” but not without a ferociously unique bite.
It’d be unfair to say that Kevin (McAvoy) kidnapped three women from a suburban Philadelphia mall. There are nearly two dozen other distinct personalities in his brain that could have done it or plotted to do it. However, just like his victims, we’ll soon find out that Dennis did it, but not without a little help. The trio of girls will also meet Patricia, Hedwig, Barry, and a handful of Kevin’s other internal personalities. The one victim that “Split” will tend to focus on is Casey (Taylor-Joy). Unlike her fellow captives, she isn’t crying or screaming for help. Casey seems to not only have a grasp on the situation, but an understanding of Kevin.
Another person with a deep understanding of Kevin is Dr. Karen Fletcher (Buckley). She’s talked with Kevin and nearly all of his personalities, but she’s unaware of his latest emotional developments and actions. She doesn’t view Kevin as a freak of nature, but as someone/something more. She believes Kevin’s DID makes him superhuman in nature, with personalities that not only control his mind, but his body, enhancing or crippling some of his physical attributes. That’s why it worries her that there are rumblings of a 24th personality, nicknamed ‘The Beast’. But is it just rumors between Kevin’s personalities or is there truly another personality, which can climb walls and feast on human flesh, lurking inside Kevin’s brain?
There’s more psychological and emotionally scarring at work in “Split” other than the harmful effects of DID. The mental traumas that Kevin and Casey endured previously before the current abduction predicament are revealed and make them more human. The level of empathy for the inherent villain of the movie, Kevin, is nurtured through light-hearted humor, the innocence of some of his personalities, and the one honest moment where the audience finally meets the real Kevin. McAvoy and Taylor-Joy find wordless ways to make their characters sympathetic, simply by letting tears well up in their eyes or flashing various facial tics at the right moment.
“Split” isn’t quite a return to form for Shyamalan, but more of an evolutionary step in his directing and writing. For years he’s been the twist guy that throws in some jump scares for good measure, but he’s dropped a lot of that in “Split,” relying more on atmosphere and the ability of his actors and actresses. But there’s a light joy to his movie, almost understanding that a movie about a man with DID should surely have a few jokes. Although anyone suffering from the disease and anyone without a funny bone in their body from the medical community would say otherwise. That’s not to say “Split” isn’t without its faults.
It runs a little bit too long and sometimes pushes the envelope without any purpose other than to visually or emotionally upset the audience. That may be Shyamalan tinkering with the formula since he is in new territory. “Split” is a restricted thriller, relying more on drawn out suspense and claustrophobic anxiety. “Split” is a slow boiler with enough tension to make you jump at the slightest movement. It also has Shyamalan working with a tragic villain for the first time since “Unbreakable.” If “Split” is Shyamalan’s apology for everything in between “Signs” and “The Visit,” then apology accepted.
Starring: Isabelle Huppert, Laurent Lafitte and Anne Consigny
Directed By: Paul Verhoeven
Rated: R
Running Time: 131 minutes
Sony Pictures Classic
Our Score: 4 out 5 stars
“Elle” has put me in an uncomfortable situation as a male reviewer because I’m going to have talk about rape. The act has been used before, so in that sense, it’s nothing new. Moviegoers have seen it in “Straw Dogs,” “A Clockwork Orange,” “Boys Don’t Cry,” and other films. Sometimes it’s the focal point or a moment that punctuates a grisly reality or message. But in “Elle,” there’s something disturbingly different about rape. It seems like an afterthought in the busy life of Michele (Huppert) and slowly becomes a tool of empowerment.
The movie begins with an intruder, breaking into Michele’s home, quickly and savagely raping her, as her gray cat casually looks on. He finishes and flees without much thought, leaving her unconscious and bleeding. It’s a difficult scene, no doubt. But what happens next is bizarre. She picks herself, goes to work, and even tells her son that she won’t entertain the thought of calling the local authorities. But that doesn’t stop her from daydreaming about murdering the rapist with her own bare hands.
It almost seems like she’s too busy to worry about the rape. She’s got a company to run with a video game that’s nearly half a year behind schedule. She seems unfazed by the video game graphics of a demonic creature molesting and raping an innocent woman, or the excessive amount of sexual and graphic violence that her all-male staff seems to be worried about inserting into the game itself. Then there’s all the family drama at home.
Her son can’t stand-up and assert himself in his own marriage, her ex-husband lingers trying to suckle at her own success, her mom lives with an escort, and her dad is one of the most infamous serial killers France has ever seen. “Elle” seems to be saying that the rape is almost the least of her worries, and certainly one of the least most screwed up things to happen in her life. That’s not to take away from the ferociousness of the movie’s opening moments.
“Elle” is an unpredictable journey that explores the psyche of a woman; Not a victim. It’s impossible to foresee how the movie unfolds because most of the time, Michele is shattering stereotypes and clichés of how society feels a rape victim should react. That’s not to say that this movie could be viewed as grossly insensitive to actual rape victims. But to put it bluntly, it is liberating to see someone who realizes the horrors and stigmas attached to rape, only to relish in it and use it as fuel for a much deeper and darker fire.
You don’t have to wait long for the rapist in “Elle” to reveal himself, unleashing a myriad of moral and ethical questions, both for Michele’s character and the man behind the ski mask. The surrealism of the movie is perfected by Huppert’s performance, which feels tragic at first, but unflinching when she breaks through the shackles of the viewer’s expectations. Huppert gives Michele a realistic range, which seems even more daunting when you begin to realize that Michele’s purpose may be to subvert a lot of society’s views of violence, sexuality and innocence.
Director Paul Verhoeven took a bold step directing “Elle” because it’s hard to imagine a mainstream audience stomaching it past five minutes or seeing Michele as a relatable character. It’s crazy to think that this is the same man who brought American audiences, “Hollow Man,” “Starship Troopers,” and “Showgirls.” With that in mind, this could be a middle finger to American taste and sensibilities after Hollywood flushed him down the toilet.
Starring: Andrew Garfield, Adam Driver and Liam Neeson
Directed By: Martin Scorsese
Rated: R
Running Time: 161 minutes
Paramount Pictures
Our Score: 4 out of 5 Stars
Very rarely do you have a religious piece of filmmaking that doesn’t question religion or support the existence of a greater entity. Martin Scorsese is no stranger to the topic; raising hell with “The Last Temptation of Christ,” but his latest film is a deep meditation and self-reflection on the topic. The myriad of ideas behind “Silence” are a little too insurmountable to summarize without glossing over one or two powerful and important themes. Nothing about this feels like your stereotypical Scorsese movie, which means it’s all substance and no style.
The movie follows Jesuit priests, Sebastia Rodrigues (Garfield) and Francisco Garupe (Driver). They receive a distressing letter about their mentor, Father Cristovao Ferreira (Neeson). He’s apparently committed apostasy and disappeared in post-Feudal Japan. Despite warnings about the inherent dangers of being a Christian during the Kakure Kirishitan era, a time when Christians were deep in hiding in Japan and feared being publicly executed for their beliefs, the duo head off with nothing but their faith and an alcoholic guide looking to be forgiven for his past sins.
While the first act establishes 17th century Japan, the rest of the movie follows Sebastia. There’s nothing unique about him, I guess that’s just how the cards fell in terms of storytelling and/or history. Both Sebastia and Francisco are devout men, struggling to deal with the harsh reality of potentially being murdered for their religion in a foreign land, as they watch as others are brutally slain in their God’s name, and in inherently, their names as well.
“Silence” is a struggle of morality, faith, and life. There are moments where Sebastia’s beliefs are selfish, wholesome, absurd, and compassionate. The clash of religious ideals stems from the Japanese power structure believing in Buddhism and viewing Christianity, not only as a threat, but as a toxic influence that can’t sprout in their land, which they constantly refer to as a swamp. And more frankly, the Japanese government sees Christianity as a sly form of Western intrusion and corruption. The philosophical struggles between the two beliefs don’t develop until halfway through “Silence” and that’s when they things get more profound.
We get to see the rotten and enlightened side of religion’s impact. It’s difficult to pinpoint an encompassing message in “Silence” because it plays out like a scholarly debate on faith. The three biggies in “Silence” are its reflection about how important and damning symbolism can be, it’s criticism about how humans can fetishize their own beliefs, the idols they keep close, and the images that they deem holy, and it’s praise for how religion can teach us compassion and give us silent strength when dealing with the impossible.
On a more personal level, Sebastia’s voice-over narration and internal monologue provide insight into his selfishness of wanting to be martyred much like Christ. Outside of Sebastia’s unintentional egocentric spiritual journey, it’s a humanistic learning exercise as he internalizes concerns that his prayers are said and uttered to an empty void with no one on the other end. Anyone who’s ever prayed can surely relate to that plight.
“Silence” isn’t entertaining in the traditional sense. You may find yourself bored if you aren’t willing to put your beliefs and other beliefs up for scrutiny or if you view religion as an intangible topic. “Silence” is not just an intense examination of religion, but it’s a study of societal ethics and personal morality as it relates to history, culture and your community. It’s not until the end that Sebastia aligns his priorities with what’s best for his. “Silence” may very well be Scorsese’s deeply religious message for those wanting to live life and find peace.
Starring: Lewis MacDougall, Felicity Jones and Liam Neeson
Directed By: J.A. Bayona
Rated: PG
Running Time: 108 minutes
Focus Features
Our Score: 4.5 out of 5 Stars
“A Monster Calls” is not a kid’s movie, although the trailer says otherwise and the studio probably wanted you to think differently when they greenlit it. There are moments that are too childish to entrance a teenage audience, but too dark and meaningful for a young one to fully grasp. I think the only people who would enjoy “A Monster Calls” are an adult crowd. Because when all is said and done, it takes a mature mind to recognize how beautiful and tragic it is.
The family members whispering amongst themselves is enough to give Conor O’Malley (MacDougall) a nightmare. Conor is viewed as a creative, but fragile adolescent, which makes those around him hesitate to state the obvious. His mom, Lizzie (Jones), has a terminal illness. The chemo isn’t working and the prognosis is bleak for the young mother. O’Malley’s father is out of the picture and his grandmother, played by Sigourney Weaver, is unable to handle the thought of having to bury her daughter. She’s more focused on getting custody of Conor and quickly settling other family affairs.
But Conor is suffering from a different kind of nightmare. Nightly in his dreams, he watches as the nearby cemetery, decrepit church and a twisted dead tree, collapse into the Earth. He screams as he sees his mother being swallowed along with the horrific mess. He clings to her as she’s about to fall into the unknown abyss that’s eating everything up. But before his nightmare reaches its crescendo, he awakes, sweaty and trembling. That’s when he’s greeted by a “monster”.
What conjures the deep throated tree monster, voiced by Liam Neeson, isn’t immediately clear and doesn’t become clear until the end. But what “A Monster Calls” does is provide something unique to the stereotypical coming-of-age movie. The voice of reason lies within the monster that spins fanciful ideas, speaks in vague riddles, and dishes out tales that seemingly relate to Conor’s growing predicaments.
The monster tells Conor that he will tell three stories and that by the end, he wants to hear one from Conor. Each tale doesn’t directly relate to a person or instance in Conor’s life, but each story weaved by the tree can be interpreted on multiple levels, possibly revealing its own secrets and truths to different viewers. The monster isn’t real, although there are plenty of moments to make you question that thesis.
It’s easy to see how a movie like this could have become a nightmare on its own accord. MacDougall, a somewhat fresh face to the movie scene, is given a lot of heavy lifting. While veterans and newcomers like Weaver and Jones are tasked with the adult response, MacDougall has a tougher task. He has to balance the conflict of teenage hormones clashing with a bitter reality. MacDougall handles the emotional cataclysm like a pro. This is a performance that could push him to stardom.
The script never becomes too sappy or attempts to emotionally manipulate the viewer, at least without a satisfying payoff. The visual style matches the fantasy book it’s based on, relying on real-life, CGI, and animation. The animation is a true standout with vibrant water colors that spill from scene to scene. Outside of its wonderfully distinct style, it’s a deep observation about the power of loss and the capacity of absolute truth. “A Monster Calls” is a soulful metaphor for anyone who’s old enough and open enough to feel, think and grow.
I’m not going to claim to have watched as many TV shows as I have movies. But I watch enough TV, good and bad, to develop an understanding of some of the best content out there. And I’ll admit I haven’t seen some of the programs other people are raving about, such as “Westworld,” “Atlanta,” or “Black Mirror.” But that shouldn’t take away from these TV shows that have graced us in 2016.
Honorable Mentions: “Ash vs. Evil Dead,” “Venture Brothers,” “It’s Always Sunny in Philadelphia,” “Better Call Saul” and “Silicon Valley”
5. “Last Week Tonight with John Oliver”
30 30-minute episodes just doesn’t seem like enough for comedian John Oliver to completely digest the absolute heartache and misery that this previous year was. But while Oliver and his team generally avoided contemporary topics and the early goings of the American political primary season, it found more to talk about with untouched topics and investigative journalism. Everything from the FBI-Apple encryption dispute and car financing to school segregation and the debt buying industry provided “Last Week Tonight” with enough content to inform the proactive political citizen and enlighten the casual observer. Here’s to hoping Oliver and gang continues to dig and shine a light on the weasels and rats that populate this world in 2017.
4. “Crazy Ex-Girlfriend”
Despite a delightful first season (and so far successful second season), a lot of people still have not watched this show or won’t give it a chance because it’s a musical. It doesn’t help that the CW has shuffled it to a less than desirable time slot, while continuing to advertise the hell out of their superhero TV shows. “Crazy Ex-Girlfriend” is a wonderfully bizarre comedy-drama that feels like a more toned down, but wittier, version of other TV shows. Despite the network restraints, “Crazy Ex-Girlfriend” has found a lot of unique and realistic ways to be daring and heartwarming. Led by the bubbly Rachel Bloom, the characters are all grounded in reality and offer their own genial practicality. It’d be a damn shame if the CW canned this show.
3. “Stranger Things”
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XWxyRG_tckY
The children of the 80’s are here and they’ve brought their childhood with them. The Duffer Brothers (Matt and Ross) are clearly fans of playing Dungeons and Dragons in their parent’s basement, Stephen King novels, and late night sci-fi and gore-filled horror movies. Outside of being a heavy slice of synth-laced nostalgia, it’s a competent tale about forgiveness and growing pains. Underneath the jump scares, shadow government and the mysterious psychokinetic girl named Eleven (or El) is a wonderful homage, not only to the 80’s, but to what made our childhood unforgettable and how we can become stronger people for it. To say that I’m excited for season two is an understatement.
2. “The Eric Andre Show”
This isn’t everyone’s cup of tea. Each low-budget, 10-minute episode, begins with the host, Eric Andre, tearing apart his set only for a new set to be brought in before his awkward opening monologue. The surreal show is filmed like a late night talk show with guests who are put through more pain and suffering than prisoners at Guantanamo Bay. This previous season saw rapper T.I., the iconic Flavor Flav, and actor Howie Mandel look on in disgust and contemplate what previous sins they’ve committed to wind up in Andre’s nightmare set. In between the intentionally uncomfortable interviews are real-life pranks and sketches that surely make New York City an ordeal to traverse through every day. You’ll either think it’s the dumbest thing you’ve ever watched or the most comically sublime thing you’ve watched in years.
1. “BoJack Horseman”
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VESKjoxAmZg
For a lot of fans, BoJack Horseman speaks to them. That’s a good thing or a terrifying thing. For three seasons now, we’ve watched the titular character slowly unwind and delve farther into his own narcissism, and harmful self-destruction. This latest season is no different, but it feels more personal and heart wrenching. While the laughs, puns, and sight gags are all still here, the TV show itself finds new ways to mirror its viewer’s discontent and potentially growing sense of self-doubt. The reason I say it’s good or bad that it speaks to people is because it’s therapeutic to know you’re not alone or it’s an eye-opening shock that leads you to a nervous breakdown and an existential crisis. The writers clearly have found their footing as the show gets better with every passing year, peeling back BoJack’s depression, drug abuse and addiction to harming himself and others.
Starring: Jennifer Lawrence, Chris Pratt and Michael Sheen
Directed By: Morten Tyldum
Rated: PG-13
Running Time: 116 minutes
Columbia Pictures
Our Score: 1 out of 5 Stars
At casual glance, “Passengers” is “Cast Away” in space. 30 years into a 120 year journey, Jim (Pratt) is awoken from suspended animation due to a technical glitch with the spaceship, Avalon. But out of the thousands aboard the ship, including the crew, he is the only one to be disturbed from his slumber. Alone, he spends the next year trying to entertain himself, only finding companionship with an android bartender named Arthur (Sheen). But there’s only so much chit chat with a machine, along with digital dance gaming, basketball, and other recreational activities, one can do before developing cabin fever and crippling loneliness.
But on one particularly lonely day, after contemplating suicide, Jim comes across a pod containing Aurora (Lawrence). It’s love at first sight, but suddenly he develops a moral quandary in his brain. Being an engineer, he has the capability of waking up Aurora. Aurora’s natural beauty is alluring enough for him to do some electronic snooping. So, much like a 21st century stalker, he goes through her digital footprint and learns everything about her. This should creep out any sane audience. Right?
Now comes the worst part. Instead of asking a moral question about the lengths humanity would and should go to combat isolation, “Passengers” takes a disturbingly sexist route. Jim awakens Aurora and keeps his bastardly deed to himself, thinking he’ll wait for the right moment to tell her he’s ruined her life and condemned her to a lonely death. Of course, any good audience should know it’s only a matter of time until Aurora finds out. But once she does, “Passengers” attempts to paint Jim as the.
I’m really not ruining anything for you. I’d like to believe I’m saving you. Aurora’s revelation happens around the midpoint of the film. The only reason it happens so early is so that “Passengers” can spend the rest of its runtime, justifying Jim’s actions, directly and indirectly. But the movie makes the mistake of allowing Aurora to say the one thing we should all be thinking, “He’s committed murder.”
He has. “Passengers” never finesses the simple, but complex ethical questions behind Jim’s actions. Instead we’re just supposed to believe the ends justify the means. It doesn’t help when we watch as Aurora attacks Jim in his sleep, along with moments where Aurora is by herself. Instead of watching her sulk or seeing her realize the horrifying predicament she’s in, we watch her play video messages of her friends back on Earth, basic calling her narcissistic and selfish. It also doesn’t help that when Jim and Aurora are separate, Aurora is helpless and constantly at risk of peril, while Jim seems like a self-sufficient machine.
Regardless of its visual style and modest attempt at interesting concepts of intergalactic space travel, the most glaring flaw in “Passengers” is one that can’t be ignored. It should be condemned and abhorred. While Jim’s plight could certainly be relatable and sympathetic, “Passengers” almost seems to casually fall back on the concept of victim blaming. “Passengers” is a movie about a relationship built on selfish lies, stalking and entitlement. Its attempt at romance and a cutesy happy ending are stomach-turning.
