Film Review: “Renfield”

 

  • RENFIELD
  • Starring: Nicholas Hoult, Nicolas Cage
  • Directed by Chris McKay
  • Rating: R
  • Running time: 1 hr 33 mins
  • Universal Pictures
Currently in theaters and available on streaming is the Nicolas Cage foray into comedy horror titled “Renfield.” While Cage is an absolute delight as Dracula, “Renfield,” which is told from the viewpoint of Dracula’s human assistant, does not quite live up to the standard set by the 2014 classic “What We Do in the Shadows.” It does have moments of genuine levity, but it also falls flat in others and a performance by Awkwafina in a supporting role is nothing short of annoying.
“Renfield” opens with some creative, black-and-white recreations of scenes from 1931’s “Dracula” with Cage supplanting Bela Lugosi as Count Dracula and Nicholas Hoult supplanting Dwight Frye as Renfield. It is a wonderful way by director Chris McKay (“The Tomorrow War,” “The Lego Batman Movie”) to present a quick backstory before the story moves closer to present day. An attack on Dracula by vampire hunters, and his subsequent assistance from Renfield, who gains some of his master’s powers by eating insects, reveals just how much the Count needs his servant as well as how manipulative he is of him.
Finding refuge in an abandoned building in New Orleans, Renfield seeks out new blood for his master as he recovers from the last attempt to destroy him. Wanting to avoid killing innocent people, Renfield attends a group counseling session for people who are being controlled by others. He then seeks out these “bad” people and delivers them to Dracula for food. However, Dracula grows tired of this and wants a busload of cheerleaders instead.
Tired of being under Dracula’s thumb, Renfield begins to branch out on his own and even attempts to court a New Orleans traffic cop (Awkwafina). Amid all this, they become embroiled in a fight to bring down a notorious and ruthless gang in the city, which turns the story into a complete mess as it runs off the rails. “Renfield” goes from being creatively funny to nothing less than dull and uninspired.
Cage’s performance is the strongest suit for this film. It’s campy at times but always entertaining. Hoult is a good counterpart to Cage yet he and McKay fail to delve much into the insanity that would seep into the mind of anyone who had been harvesting victims for a vampire for decades. Hoult and Awkwafina have zero chemistry, and the latter fails to bring any comic relief to the table. In fact, it’s painful to watch.
Overall, “Renfield” has some good moments and it’s great to see Cage in a major motion picture again, but it’s only worth your time if you have nothing else to do.
“Renfield” receives two stars out of five.

Film Review: “A Man Called Otto”

 

  • A MAN CALLED OTTO
  • Starring: Tom Hanks, Mariana Treviño
  • Directed by Marc Forster
  • Rating: PG-13
  • Running time: 2 hrs 6 mins
  • Sony Pictures
There are only a small handful of thespians who could read the proverbial phonebook and somehow make it entertaining. This is applicable to Tom Hanks whose body of work speaks for itself. His newest work, “A Man Called Otto” may not be among the best films he has ever done, but it is an emotional drama with characters that feel like real people whom virtually anyone can identify with.
A remake of a 2015 Swedish film “A Man Called Ove,” which in turn was based upon a 2012 novel of the same name by Swedish author Fredrik Backman, “A Man Called Otto” begins in the winter of 2018-19 and is set in Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania. Otto Anderson (Tom Hanks) is the embodiment of what a curmudgeon is – he’s quick to call people idiots, he’s rude to everyone, and he prefers to be alone. Otto is also fastidious about rules and regulations, and he sees the world in black and white.
Otto’s behavior is rooted in part by the fact that his beloved wife has recently passed away and the company he worked his whole life for has forced him into retirement. Feeling that he has no purpose in life anymore, Otto decides it is time to take his own life.
Prior to attempting to hang himself, Otto becomes sidetracked when he sees his new neighbors, Marisol (Mariana Treviño, 2018’s “Overboard”) and Tommy (Manuel Garcia-Rulfo, 2016’s “The Magnificent Seven”) trying to parallel park with a trailer. It infuriates him so badly that he marches out and parks their vehicle himself before marching back inside his home to resume his suicide attempt, which fails.
Otto, who always lived with an enlarged heart, isn’t done with trying to kill himself, but he gradually becomes more involved and hence attached to Marisol and her family as well as some of his neighbors. It ultimately leads to some genuine, heart-warming, and tear-jerking poignant moments in the film.
Hanks, who took on a slightly gaunt appearance for the role, is as brilliant as ever with the portrayal of a man in psychological despair. I still regard him as his generation’s Jimmy Stewart. He has an everyman quality about him that makes it easy for people to identify with his characters. His primary counterpart in the film is Garcia-Rulfo who delivers a strong supporting performance as a woman’s whose generosity and kindness compels her to develop a relationship with Otto despite his gruffness. Garcia-Rulfo’s emotional range is superb, and she shares great chemistry with Hanks.
Director Marc Forster (“Christopher Robin,” “World War Z”) maintains a nice, even pace throughout the film’s running time as he infuses the story with a sense of realism. He times out well a series of flashbacks to Otto’s younger days when he and his wife, Sonya (Rachel Keller, “Legion”) first meet, date, get married, and experience joys and tragedies. The younger version of Otto is played by Hanks’s son, Truman whose only other big screen role was a small part in 2020’s “News of the World,” which also starred his father. Keller delivers a sweet performance, but Truman comes across as a little wooden on the silver screen.
Overall, “A Man Called Otto,” available on streaming services, is a wonderful little drama, but just make sure you have a tissue box handy.
“A Man Called Otto” receives three-and-a-half stars out of five.

Film Review: “Avatar: The Way pf Water”

 

  • AVATAR: THE WAY OF WATER
  • Starring: Sam Worthington, Zoe Saldana
  • Directed by James Cameron
  • Rating: PG-13
  • Running time: 3 hrs 12 mins
  • 20th Century Studios
When the director James Cameron’s “Avatar” was released in 2009 yours truly opinioned that while it was a visually stunning, epic popcorn movie, it was in essence a spin on 1990’s “Dances with Wolves,” albeit one on steroids. Under its gloss it spoke to anti-imperialist themes and the conquering of native peoples all in the name of greed. The recipient of four Oscar nominations and one win for Best Achievement in Visual Effects, “Avatar: The Way of Water,” which will be available June 7 on streaming.
The original was set in the year 2154 when all of Earth’s natural resources had been depleted. The Resources Development Administration (RDA) showed up on the moon of Pandora to mine a valuable mineral needed for humanity’s continued sustainability. Sixteen years after he helped repel the RDA’s invasion, Jake Sully/Na’vi (Sam Worthington) is now chief of the Omatikaya clan along with having a family with Neytiri (Zoe Saldana).
Their peaceful lives come to an end as the RDA arrives with a new invasion and plans to colonize, this time headed by the ruthless General Frances Ardmore (Eddie Falco). To enhance their chances to defeat Na’vi’s clan, the RDA employs recombinants implanted with the memories of deceased human soldiers including those of the tree hating Colonel Miles Quaritch (Stephen Lang). After a human boy is captured by Colonel Quaritch that proves to be his long-lost son, Na’vi and his family are forced to flee to Pandora’s eastern seaboard to ensure his clan’s safety.
Upon their arrival, Na’vi’s family seek refuge with the Metkayina clan, who reluctantly accept them in. Their haven is only temporary as Colonel Quaritch, with the help of his son, begins learning how to adapt to his surroundings, which leads to a relentless campaign to find Na’vi and destroy him.
That is a brief, cliff note version of the story without giving much away because the full story takes so long to get through that people have celebrated a couple of birthdays while watching the film. Visually it’s just as stunning if not even more so than the original. The story, which could be called “Dances with Wolves 2,” is entertaining although pacing is sluggish at times and requires caffeine and sugar to get through. The bringing back of Colonel Quaritch is okay as Lang plays a superb villain, but it demonstrates a sense of laziness with inability to create alternatively diabolical evildoer. Of course, if what seems like a 52-hour movie isn’t enough entertainment then no fear, there are three more sequels to be released beginning in 2024.
Overall, “Avatar: The Way of Water” is a terrific popcorn flick, that is if you have an entire weekend free to watch it.
“Avatar: The Way of Water” receives three stars out of five.

Film Review: “The Pope’s Exorcist”

  • THE POPE’S EXORCIST
  • Starring: Russell Crowe, Daniel Zovatto
  • Directed by Julius Avery
  • Rating: R
  • Running time: 1 hr 13 mins
  • Lionsgate
Nominated for 10 Academy Awards, the 1973 supernatural horror film “The Exorcist,” starring Max von Sydow and Ellen Burstyn, is regarded by many as a true, cinematic classic. The newest entry in the demon possession genre, “The Pope’s Exorcist” is not so much. It is loosely based on two books – 1990’s “An Exorcist Tells His Story” and 1992’s “An Exorcist: More Stories” by Italian priest, Father Gabriele Amorth (1925-2016) who claimed to have performed tens of thousands of exorcisms during his career. Filled with cliches and horror scenes too reliant on over-the-top special effects rather than true psychological terror, “The Pope’s Exorcist” should probably be exorcised from theaters for everyone’s well-being.
Set in 1987, “The Pope’s Exorcist” takes us to a small Italian village where Father Gabriel (Russell Crowe), the Pope’s personal exorcist, drives a demon out of a man and into a pig, which is subsequently shot dead. The incident gets Father Gabriel, a practical man with a sense of humor, in trouble with a Catholic Church tribunal who questions him for acting without permission. There is a sense that there are forces within the Church working against Father Gabriel, but this aspect of the story is inexplicably dropped and not further developed.
Meanwhile, a recently widowed mother (Alex Essoe, “Doctor Sleep”) and her two children – a traumatized son, Henry (Peter DeSouza-Feighoney) and an angst-ridden, rebellious, moody teenage daughter (isn’t that how all teenage girls are portrayed in horror films?), Amy (Laurel Marsden) – have traveled to Spain to move into a spooky old castle that’s undergoing renovations. Shockingly enough (insert sarcasm), strange things start happening and Father Gabriel, under direct orders by the Pope (Franco Nero, “John Wick: Chapter 2,” “Django Unchained”), comes to the rescue aboard his motor scooter.
Assisted by a local priest, Father Esquibel (Daniel Zovatto, TV series “Station Eleven,” “Penny Dreadful: City of Angels”), Father Gabriel encounters a demon possessed Henry as the two priests must overcome their own sins to defeat evil.
Directed Julius Avery, who brought us the forgettable 2018 film “Overlord” about a bunch of American soldiers fighting Nazi zombies in World War II, “The Pope’s Exorcist” is a rather silly film that lacks thrills, chills, or even mild goosebumps. Fear is replaced by a few laughs and sheer boredom. Crowe is entertaining in the role and seems to be having a good time with it. There is also somehow one good, albeit brief scene, when Crowe’s character first encounters the possessed boy. The remaining time is just unimaginative schlock.
Overall, say a prayer to give you the strength to not watch this film.
“The Pope’s Exorcist” receives one star out of five.

Film Review: “65”

 

  • 65
  • Starring: Adam Driver, Ariana Greenblatt
  • Directed by Scott Beck and Bryan Woods
  • Rating: PG-13
  • Running time: 1 hr 33 mins
  • Sony Pictures
A cross between “Jurassic Park,” “Predator,” and every other science fiction flick where a human, with or without companions, somehow ends up stranded on an alien planet, “65” is a forgettable foray into subgenre that has become as lifeless as the void of space. Adam Driver, who has a wide spectrum of genres to his acting credits, delivers a solid performance, but it’s not nearly enough to overcome the shear boredom that comes with watching this film.
On the fictional planet of Somaris, a pilot named Mills (Driver) is reluctant to leave his family behind to go on a two-year space expedition. However, the payment he will receive for doing it will save his ill daughter’s life. While his passengers are asleep in cryostasis chambers, Mills’s ship encounters an unexpected asteroid field. Extensive damage causes the ship to crash land on an uncharted planet – Earth approximately 65 million years ago when dinosaurs were the top of the food chain.
All the ship’s passengers are killed except for one – a young girl named Koa (Ariana Greenblatt, who played a younger version of Gamora in 2018’s “Avengers: Infinity War”) who speaks a different language than Mills. With a giant asteroid on a collusion course with Earth, Mills must traverse hostile terrain with Koa to reach an escape pod that has the potential of getting them off the planet in time.
There is nothing that is all that thrilling or exciting about “65.” The story gives a good motivation for Mills to want to stay alive and the initial premise seems like it could have some promise. However, everything that’s done in “65” has been done a million other times. Thankfully it’s only 93 minutes long, but in reality, it feels like it’s twice that long, although not as long as “Avatar.” It does have plenty of scary looking dinosaurs but the mystique of seeing these extinct species on the silver screen evaporated a long time ago.
Overall, “65” is perhaps a good film to fall asleep to on a rainy, Sunday afternoon where there is absolutely nothing else to do and football isn’t on.
“65” receives one star out of five.

Film Review: “She Said”

 

  • SHE SAID
  • Starring: Carey Mulligan, Zoe Kazan
  • Directed by Maria Schrader
  • Rating: R
  • Running time: 2 hrs 9 mins
  • Universal Pictures
There are films made which serve an entertainment purpose only. You get a few laughs, some thrills, or maybe a couple tears. Occasionally, a film is made that reaches a level of importance that causes it to be something every person should see. “She Said,” currently available on streaming but was released last November in theaters, is one such film. Detailing how two “New York Times” reporters were able to bring down one of the biggest figures in the film industry and sparking a revolution, “She Said” is absolute classic that belongs in the same breath as “All the President’s Men” and “The Post.” The fact it was snubbed at the Oscars in favor of a silly film about time travel, is a complete travesty of epic proportions and shows just how ridiculous the once king of award shows has become a joke. And a bad one at that.
This biographical drama takes back to 2017 when “New York Times” reporter Jodi Kantor (Zoe Kazan, “The Big Sick”) is tipped off that actress Rose McGowan is about to make some serious allegations about sexual misconduct and assault involving Miramax chief, Harvey Weinstein. Kantor also learns of similar sickening incidents involving actresses Ashley Judd and Gwyneth Paltrow. However, no one wants to speak on the record out of fear for their careers. To help get others to talk on the record, Kantor recruits fellow “New York Times” reporter Megan Twohey (Carey Mulligan, “Promising Young Woman”).
While juggling the demands of being mothers and aided by the unquestioning support of their husbands, Kantor and Twohey set about on an arduous task that requires patience, diligence, and tenacity from both as they struggle to get women from Weinstein’s past to speak on the record. However, little by little they inch closer to their ultimate story that causes 82 brave women to come forward with horrific allegations against a monster who landed a 23-year prison sentence because of their voices.
Not only should have “She Said” been nominated for best picture, among many others, but it should have also given nods to Kazan and Mulligan who are nothing short of spectacular with their inspiring performances. Hats off to them and director Maria Schrader for infusing their characters with genuine realism. While they pour everything into the challenge of getting their story right, both are humanized by showing the effects the stress of the task at hand has on them personally and with their families. Kudos also to Ashley Judd for playing herself and re-living on the screen the pain she went through at the hands of Weinstein.
Overall, “She Said” is a borderline cinematic masterpiece and is a work that every single person, minus small children, should see to help appreciate the beginnings of the Me-Too movement.
“She Said” receives four-and-a-half stars out of five

Film Review: “5-25-77”

  • 5-25-77
  • Starring:  John Francis Daley, Austin Pendleton and Colleen Camp
  • Directed by:  Patrick Read Johnson
  • Rated:  PG 13
  • Running time:  2 hrs 12 mins
  • Filmio

A young man, enthralled by the rmagic of the movies, begins to make his own films with his family and friends.  If this sounds like Steven Spielberg’s film, “The Fablemans,” you would be right.  However, “5-25-77” has been around, in various forms, since 2007.

Film fans will recognize May 25, 1977 as the day “Star Wars” opened in the United States.  Like “Jaws” before it, the effect the film had on Hollywood would change it forever.  Thanks to the success of “Star Wars,” films like “Star Trek the Motion Picture” and “The Black Hole” were greenlighted by studios, bringing science fiction, once a stalple of 1950s Hollywood, back to the cinema.

 

Pat Johnson (Daley) takes in a showing of “2001: A Spsce Odysey” and is mesmerized by what he has seen.  He begins to make home movies in the neighborhood and finally saves the money to travel to Hollywood with one mission: to meet Douglas Trumball, the man behind the special effects of “2001.”  His trip doesn’t go exactly as planned, but what does happen changes Pat’s life forever.

The film follows Pat on his journey west – he lives in Illinolis – where, while waiting to meet Trumball he runs ito a young Steven Spielberg, who is currently finishing up the special effects on “Close Encounters of the Third Kind,” a film Trumball also did the special effects for.  He also stumbles into a room containing models for another upcoming film called “Star Wars.”  Impressed by the young man’s interest, one of the crew invite him to a screening room where he is given a peek at a very rough cut of “Star Wars.”  Overwhelmed by what he’s seen, Pat returns home where he does his best to make his friends and family as “Star Wars” crazy as he is.

 

The first act of the film is well done.  Daley captures the same enthusiasm that my 16-year old pals and I had in wating for the film to open.  It’s clear to the viewer that “Star Wars” really had an effect on Pat’s life, much the same way that “Jaws” had on mine.  So excited is Pat that he invites his entire class to be his guest at the theatre on opening day.

It’s the second act of the film where things begin to fumble.  Even though the film runs a healthy 132 minutes (11 minutes longer then “Star Wars”), Mr. Johnson has tried to cram too much into the final 45-minutes of the film.  It’s almost as if, after 15 years of working on the film, Mr. Johnson decided to use everything he had.  As someone who focuses on the minute trivia of films, I was disappointed to find a Cubs game on television late at night.  I lived in the Chicago area until 1974 and I don’t recall Cub games being re-broadcast.  Also, if my ears are working correctly, there is a batter in the game that has 98 RBIs – in mid-May.  I have other issues with the film but to list them would require a SPOILER ALERT notice.

 

I first became aware of this film when Mr. Johnon was interviewed for the “Jaws” documentary “The Shark is Still Working,” a film in which I also appear.  I was intrigued by the 5-25-77 poster behind Mr. Johnson and have eagerly been waiting for this film since then.  While I did have some quibbles with the film, it is definitely one that should be seen, not only for movie lovers who will find a kindred soul in young Pat Johnson but as a validation of Patrick Read Johnson’s perseverance.

 

I give “5-25-77” 3.5 stars out of 5.  

Film Review: “The Little Mermaid” (2023)

  • THE LITTLE MERMAID
  • Starring: Halle Bailey, Jonah Hauer-King
  • Directed by Rob Marshall
  • Rating: PG
  • Running time: 2 hrs 15 mins
  • Walt Disney
With its origins in the 1837 story of the same name by Danish author Hans Christian Andersen (1805-75), who also created “The Princess and the Pea” and “The Snow Queen” among others, the 1989 animated film “The Little Mermaid” became a classic in the Disney library. It is one of many that parents everywhere have probably seen a million times. To cash in even more money, Walt Disney in its infinite wisdom has created a live action version of this beloved musical fantasy. The magnitude of this underwhelming achievement can be summed up in one word: meh.
This overly long, uninspiring cinematic punishment has a simple premise. Ariel (Halle Bailey), the youngest of several princesses/daughters of the protective King Triton (Javier Bardem), has a fascination/obsession with the surface world. Even though her father reminds her that it was surface dwellers who killed her mother, Ariel remains undeterred to learn as much about them as possible.
Ariel’s fascination turns into infatuation when she saves Prince Eric (Jonah Hauer-King) from drowning near his island nation. Watched from afar by the sea witch Ursula (Melissa McCarthy), who is also King Triton’s banished sister, Ariel is manipulated and tricked by her aunt who desires to possess her siren song. It is left up to Ariel’s friends – Sebastian (Daveed Diggs) the crab, Flounder (Jacob Tremblay) the fish, and Scuttle (Awkwafina) the dimwitted Northern Gannet – to make sure a romance blossoms between Ariel and Prince Eric, and thereby thwart Ursula’s schemes.
“The Little Mermaid” is one of the most uninspiring flicks in recent memory and is emblematic of Hollywood’s problem with coming up with any new or inspiring content. Just look around to see that the 23rd installment of “Fast and Furious” and the 25th of “Transformers” are coming out this year. Director Rob Marshall (“Mary Poppins Returns,” “Chicago”) has fallen into a trap of serving unoriginal content and covering with fancy special effects and pretty costumes. All that’s left now is for Walt Disney to make sequels entitled “The Littler Mermaid” and “The Littlest Mermaid.”
I would make comments about the acting performances, pacing, action, etc. but it is so dull and unwatchable that there really is no point. The only exception would be that this version of “The Little Mermaid” is probably a smidge dark for your littlest ones.
Overall, if you go to the movie theater, go watch something else. Anything else. Please.
“The Little Mermaid” receives one star out of five.

Film Review: “The Banshees of Inisherin”

 

  • THE BANSHEES OF INISHERIN
  • Starring: Colin Farrell and Brendan Gleeson
  • Directed by Martin McDonagh
  • Rating: R
  • Running time: 1 hr 54 mins
  • Searchlight Pictures
A recipient of nine Academy Award nominations, including Best Picture, Director, and Actor, “The Banshees of Inisherin,” currently available on multiple platforms after being released in the United States last September, is a dark comedy/drama with well-crafted lines of dialogue and excellent acting. It also provides some interesting insight into Irish culture. However, while not as high on the overhyped scale as “Everything, Everywhere All at Once,” “Banshees” remains a long-winded affair that has the pacing of molasses that can lead to a feeling of outright boredom.
Set on the fictional Irish island of Inisherin, “Banshees” takes place in 1923 towards the end of the Irish Civil War. We know that fiddler Colm (Brendan Gleeson) and his drinking buddy Pádraic (Colin Farrell), a bit of a dullard, have been lifelong best friends. When we meet them, Colm, without any warning or explanation, has decided he no longer wants anything to do with Pádraic. This turns the latter’s life upside down as he struggles to figure out why his friend has discarded him.
Pádraic repeatedly attempts to understand why Colm has ended their friendship, even though Colm tells him that he wants to be remembered for something and has been wasting time with dull conversations with Pádraic. Eventually, Pádraic’s dogged determination leads to Colm threatening to cut off his own fingers if Pádraic doesn’t leave him alone, which he incredibly follows through with. It’s all a weird series of events that include Pádraic’s sister, Siobhán (Kerry Condon, the voice of Friday from “Avengers: Infinity War” and “Avengers: Endgame”) leaving for the mainland after getting tired of their senseless feud, something I wanted to do as well while watching it.
English Director Martin McDonagh, who wrote “Banshees” as well as “Three Billboards Outside Ebbing, Missouri,” created dialogue that’s masterfully delivered by co-stars Gleeson and Farrell. The accents are not so thick that the actors cannot be understood, but what is not understandable is how overly drawn-out the story is. It’s a one-trick pony that gets old halfway through at the latest as the story leads to nowhere. Essentially, it’s easy to sympathize with Colm.
Great performances and beautiful shots of Irish countryside aside, “Banshees” is an overhyped film that probably require a pint to help get through it.
“The Banshees of Inisherin” receives two-and-a-half stars out of five.

Film Review: “SISU”

 

  • SISU
  • Starring: Jorma Tommila, Aksel Hennie
  • Directed by Jalmari Helander
  • Rating: R
  • Running time: 1 hr 31 mins
  • Lionsgate
If “John Wick” and “Nobody” had a baby, and Quentin Tarentino served as the surrogate mother, then its name would be “Sisu.” Bloody, grotesque, gritty and violent, “Sisu” is everything you could ask for in a film in which a multitude of Nazis are killed in a multitude of ways. Its story, set against the backdrop of the waning days of World War II in Finland, is elegant in its simplicity. However, while it may have its element of fun, the film is nothing we have not seen before.
During the early years of World War II, Finns fought alongside Germans against the Soviet army, which became known as the Continuation War. This changed in September 1944 when an armistice between Finland, the Soviet Union and the United Kingdom brought this part of the conflict to an end. As part of the agreement, Finland was required to launch what became known as the Lapland War. From September to November 1944, Finland launched a military campaign against retreating German forces in the country’s northernmost area. Within this context we have “Sisu,” a word that has not literal English translation but is akin to a grim determination against adversity.
Gold prospector Aatami Korpi (Jorma Tommila, “Rare Exports”), with only his faithful dog and horse, is alone in the barren Lapland wilderness. Wanting nothing to do with the ongoing conflict, he digs pit after pit trying to strike it rich until one day, he hits the motherload. With a large amount of gold nuggets in his saddlebags, Aatami sets out on a long ride to the nearest town to cash in.
Unfortunately for Aatami, or perhaps more so for the Nazi soldiers, he encounters a 30-man platoon led by SS commander Bruno Helldorf (Aksel Hennie, “Headhunters”). The Nazi officer lets Aatami pass without harm as he is more interested in joining the rest of the German army in Norway. However, when Aatami later encounters a small, second group of soldiers on the same trail, and kills them all after they try to take his gold, Bruno turns his men around to find out what the commotion is about.
Bruno’s chase of Aatami becomes an obsession as he realizes the Finn’s gold haul could be his ticket to escape the gallows once the war is over. The violence only escalates as we learn that Aatami was once a member of Finland’s special forces and was credited with killing hundreds of Soviet soldiers. Bruno and his men soon discover what sisu means.
Finnish writer and director Jalmari Helander (2010’s “Rare Exports”) has created a fun, albeit violent work of cinema set during a little-known period of World War II history. It does get ridiculous by the end and is often more unbelievable than watching John Wick survive a fall from a multi-story building. Tommila delivers solid, near-silent performance, but it is something we have seen multiple times from actors Clint Eastwood to Keanu Reeves. Hennie provide an interesting performance as a German officer who has resigned himself to his fate only to have a light at the end of the tunnel fall into his lap. Yet, even his character does not separate itself from the plethora of other Nazi officers seen depicted on the silver screen.
Overall, if you want to watch an almost equally violent World War II flick with a much better story and acting, then find “Inglourious Basterds” on your streaming service and watch it instead.
“Sisu” receives two-and-a-half stars out of five.

Panic Fest Film Review: “Birth/Rebirth”

Starring: Marin Ireland, Judy Reyes and Breeda Wool
Directed by: Laura Moss
Rated: NR
Running Time: 98 minutes
IFC Films

Our Score: 4 out of 5 Stars

You know you’re in for a good movie when a director is able to summarize their film without giving away too much. Before “Birth/Rebirth” began, Director Laura Moss discussed how the film was her own unique take on “Frankenstein” and how the idea has been simmering in her mind since she was a teenager. Even with that kind of spoiler in mind, one where I could expect the reanimation of a dead person, I couldn’t foresee what kind of horrors could be and would be mined in “Birth/Rebirth.”

Celie (Judy Reyes) is a natural as a prenatal nurse at the hospital she works at. She brings her motherly warmth to work to help patients and others, but that warmth will disappear in a flash. Celie’s daughter, Lila (A.J. Lister) abruptly dies, leaving Celie with so much to ponder. On the flip side, we meet a morgue tech by the name of Rose (Marin Ireland) who goes about her work with about as much warmth as the corpses she digs around in. Celie and Rose are strangers, but Lila’s death is going to bring them together in horrific ways.

The mantle of Dr. Frankenstein could be divided up between Celie and Rose, who work together after Rose reanimates Lila. Celie, despite being unable to communicate with the daughter she used to know, tries in earnest to recover what she had by focusing on nearly every aspect of Lila’s life. Rose on the other hand takes a more rudimentary, yet scientific approach to Lia as she makes notes, runs experiments and monitors the overall situation. Sometimes the roles flip as time goes on where one character assumes the role of scientist and the other as parental figure. Because the reanimated Lila remains mostly quiet throughout the duration of the film, it’s difficult to tell what’s actually going on in her head as opposed to the emotional projections by Rose and Celie.

I can’t think of a “Frankenstein” reimaging or story that heavily shifts the narrative to a female centric one. The original story could be viewed as man’s attempt to control what humanity cannot control, life and death. In some ways you could argue the original doctor was also driven by a need to create. The ability to create a human life is not possible for someone born as a man, so Dr. Frankenstein had to create human life in another form. “Birth/Rebirth” seems to explain the passion and need to control life and death as that of a woman/parent. We see how Celie and Rose work with Lila to ensure she survives, the sacrifices both of them make, but is it more about science or more about basic maternal instincts? Rose is the calculating, numbers driven and scientific to all her approaches, but the longer she spends with Celie and Lila, the more something else is taking shape beneath her expressionless face. On the flip side, Celie also realizes the lengths she’ll go to obtain what she used to have, but must also reckon with what it takes to reach that goal.

The film’s ending, which will certainly be annoying to some, leaves more questions than answers. The audience is supposed to reflect on the idea of motherhood and what parenthood in general does to us. The morals of the film are constantly being debated by the characters and by their inevitable actions. Just like the Mary Shelley classic, “Birth/Rebirth” asks us to examine creation, life and death, through our own selfishness, our own sacrifices and ultimately what we are willing to do to secure and fulfill what we see as our obligations to our creations. “Birth/Rebirth” is a monster that you’ll be thinking about long after the credits and lights go up.

 

Film Review: “Guardians of the Galaxy: Volume 3”

 

  • GUARDIANS OF THE GALAXY: VOLUME 3
  • Starring: Chris Pratt, Bradley Cooper
  • Directed by James Gunn
  • Rating: PG-13
  • Running time: 2 hrs 30 mins
  • Marvel Studios
To be blunt, “Guardians of the Galaxy: Volume 3” is not only by far the most brilliant film in the “Guardians” trilogy, but it is also one of the best films to be released within the Marvel franchise. A stellar piece of filmmaking by director James Gunn, “Guardians” contains a surprising amount of emotional depth mixed in with the terrific humor we have come to expect from the series. It also doesn’t disappoint with its entertaining action sequences and wonderful soundtrack.
Gunn’s endeavor included tying up multiple character story arcs while emphasizing those of Peter Quill/Star Lord (Chris Pratt) and Rocket (voiced by Bradley Cooper). As for the latter, “Guardians” starts off with taking us back to when Rocket was a baby raccoon and was forced to endure horrible scientific enhancements, something that was alluded to in the first “Guardians.” These were performed at the direction of the High Evolutionary (Chukwudi Iwuji, “John Wick: Chapter 2”), a prototypical mad scientist who goes from simple instability to complete insanity as he attempts to create a perfect lifeform. (In many respects, he is far dastardlier than Thanos or any other villain our Marvel heroes have faced on the silver screen.)
The movie’s current timeline takes place a few years after the events of “Endgame” with Peter still desperately mourning the loss of Gamora (Zoe Saldana). It’s to the point where he will eventually drink himself to death if something doesn’t give soon. He is temporarily distracted when Rocket is gravely wounded by the almost childlike Adam Warlock (Will Poulter, “We’re the Millers”), a creation of the Sovereign who want justice because Rocket stole from them. The powerful High Evolutionary has other plans and forces the Sovereign leader, a creation of his, to retrieve Rocket so he can examine his brain.
With the help of the Ravagers and a reluctant, alternate version of Gamora, the Guardians, including Drax the Destroyer (Dave Bautista), Nebula (Karen Gillan), Groot (voiced by Vin Diesel), and Mantis (Pom Klementieff), go on a quest to save Rocket’s life and put an end to the High Evolutionary’s madness. During their adventures, they still manage to work as a dysfunctional team with Peter trying to come to terms with why the “new” Gamora won’t give him the time of day, not to mention coming to a reckoning with the past he left behind on Earth.
Plenty of heartstrings are pulled within Rocket’s gut-wrenching backstory and will certainly cause a few watery eyes in the theater. Credit to Cooper’s great voice work as he gives the pain Rocket goes through a tangible, almost haunting quality. Pratt delivers his best to-date performance as Peter/Star Lord undergoes true growth as a character. (This contrasts with Thor devolving into buffoonery and Peter Parker never growing at all.) Lastly, I would be remiss if I did not mention Iwuji who succeeds in not going over the top with his performance. His character’s cruelty and madness are disturbing to say the least, and Iwuji pulls it off fantastically, even when he is spitting as he screams and rants.
This last incarnation of the “Guardians” team we have become accustomed to succeeds beyond all expectations by delivering a story that is entertaining in every way possible. Whereas “Wakanda Forever” restored faith in Marvel films being great again, after a long period of meandering, “Guardians 3” reinforces that faith. (No offense against the last “Ant-Man” film but it was merely a cute popcorn flick that lacked gravitas in comparison.)
Overall, this movie is a thrill ride of emotions, adventure and some songs that will stick in your head for days to come.
“Guardians of the Galaxy: Volume 3” receives four-and-a-half stars out of five.
  •  Reply  Reply All  Forward

Film Review: “The Whale”

 

 

  • THE WHALE
  • Starring: Brendan Fraser and Hong Chau
  • Directed by Darren Aronofsky
  • Rating: R
  • Running time: 1 hr 27 mins
  • A24
A box office star in the 1990s and into the 2000s, Brendan Fraser seemingly disappeared in recent years even though he continued to find work. Of course, this thread was discussed ad nauseum during the months leading up to the recent Academy Awards where Fraser’s years of hard work paid off with his own golden statue. It was much deserved for Fraser’s memorable role in the depressing drama “The Whale” is not only the best performance of his career but one of the greatest ever captured in cinema.
Now available everywhere, “The Whale,” based upon a 2012 play of the same name, revolves around Charlie (Fraser), a morbidly obese English instructor who teaches online writing courses with the camera turned off. A complete recluse, his only friend and caregiver is a gruff nurse named Liz (Hong Chau, “The Menu”). She repeatedly tries to get Charlie to see a doctor for his congestive heart failure, but it’s clear early on that he wants to die. His reasoning, though, is a mystery until later in the story.
On one random day, he is visited by Thomas (Ty Simpkins, “Iron Man 3,” “Jurassic World”), a young Christian missionary who tries, unsuccessfully, to convince Charlie that his soul needs saving. What Charlie wants to save instead is his relationship with his estranged and moody teenage daughter, Ellie (Sadie Sink, “Stranger Things”). She wants nothing to do with him because Charlie had abandoned her and her mother (Samantha Morton) to be with another man.
Knowing that death is coming, something he seems to welcome, Charlie bribes Ellie to start visiting him by promising to help her with schoolwork and the prospect of $120,000 going into her bank account. For her part, Ellie is asked not to tell her mother about her visits. As his health deteriorates more rapidly, Charlie’s desire to salvage his relationship with Ellie intensifies.
Directed by Darren Aronofsky (“The Wrestler,” “Pi”), “The Whale” often feels too much like a stage play and it comes off disjointed at times as a result. Aronofsky gets the most out of his cast, yet the story is a little too blah, which matches the overall feel of the film. All quibbles aside, what must be looked upon with awe is Fraser’s unforgettable performance. Forget about his wearing a 300-pound suit to reflect his character’s obesity. What’s important is how tragically sad and depressed his self-loathing character is. Fraser makes his character’s despair and desires tangible to the viewer, allowing us to easily become emotionally invested into Charlie. Without his towering performance, “The Whale” would have been something long forgotten about by now.
Overall, “The Whale” is watchable because of Fraser’s one-for-the-ages performance.
“The Whale” receives three stars out of five.

Panic Fest Film Review: “Black Mold”

Starring: Agnes Albright, Andrew Bailes and Jeremy Holm
Directed by: John Pata
Rated: NR
Running Time: 92 minutes

Our Score: 3.5 out of 5 stars

I’m asked anytime by people who find out that I do urban exploring (the art of exploring abandoned buildings, tunnels and everything in between) about whether or not I get scared. Of course. That’d be like asking a trapeze artist if they’re ever worried about plummeting. The thought will always be there. When it comes to my side hobby, I’ve almost been attacked by humans and animals, nearly broken bones, and, worst of all, almost been caught by authorities. So when I recommend “Black Mold,” a film about two urban exploring photographers taking on a deadly task, it’s not because it taps into that fear.

Brooke (Anges Albright) is going through the motions as her and her budding photographer, Tanner (Andrew Bailes) are adding more photos to their portfolio. The abandoned countryside homes they photograph aren’t enough for Brooke today though. She’s got her eyes on the duo’s white whale, a rundown government facility that is the center of several area rumors. Ignoring the fencing, warning signs, and obvious threats, the two are dropped off by their driver, whom they tell to come back in three hours. The two then  set foot inside a building they may never leave.

“Black Mold” never does what you’d expect, which is a treat because it uses a lot of horror tropes. While the story is familiar, the path isn’t. Brooke, we learn, has never come to grips with a traumatic part of her childhood, the death of her father and the ensuing blame being directed at her. While the movie solely focuses on her, Tanner is also dealing with his own personal demons even though they’re never discussed or shown. We just see him react to what he thinks he’s seeing or actually seeing, just like Brooke begins to wonder if a homeless person they encounter in the building is her father.

That is one of the more befuddling parts of this film, what’s real and what isn’t. It’s intentional, but also confusing. For about half of the film, we’re left wondering what experiences are real and which ones aren’t. Eventually day turns to night and we even have to question if time is changing along with perception. I’m not sure why Tanner is in the film, but over time, I wondered if the film could have been better without Tanner because we have no emotional attachment to him. That, and I imagine the isolation would be more impactful for Brooke and the audience.

“Black Mold” is kind of a play on the idea that mold in a dilapidated building could impact your mind. I also believe it’s how the trauma that Brooke experienced not only effects her creatively and in her hobby, but also emotionally because it’s obvious she’s never dealt with her father’s death in any meaningful way or talked with anyone about it. Psychologically and visually speaking, “Black Mold” is a fascinating watch, but the horror itself isn’t as scary as it could be, and the ending feels like a little bit of a letdown.  Overall, the film is an enjoyable journey into the psyche of regret, loss and broken relationships.

 

Panic Fest Film Review: “Satan Wants You”

Directed by: Steve J. Adams and Sean Horlor
Rated: NR
Running Time: 88 minutes

Our Score: 4 out of 5 stars

Children are the greatest non-violent weapon humans have ever had. In 2020-21, my social media was being spammed with #savethechildren. Sounds noble. Besides, who hates children and wishes them ill will? Unfortunately, the #savethechildren people on social media were ignorant to the reasoning behind the hashtag. All these #savethechildren people were suckers for Q’Anon, a conspiracy theory about how the world’s elites are eating, raping, beating, sodomizing, and killing children. Not only children, but newborn infants. While it sounds too crazy to believe, “Satan Wants You,” is a reminder that we’re constantly doomed to repeat an inherent part of our history, believe stupid crap.

If you haven’t heard about the Satanic Panic of the 80s and early 90s, it’s kind of like Pizzagate for the pre-Internet age. They even had their own hashtag before hashtags, having people say “Believe the Children.” The insanity kicked off in 1980 with the book, “Michelle Remembers,” where Canadian Michelle Smith, with the help of her then-psychiatrist at the time, remembered buried memories. Those memories were of being kidnapped, caged, beaten, sexually assaulted, raped repeatedly and forced to eat babies along with other Satanists in a ritual meant to summon the Lord of Darkness himself. Makes for an interesting fiction novel, but “Michelle Remembers” was touted as a real life encapsulation of a secret cabal right under society’s nose.

“Satan Wants You” doesn’t dig around in every nook and cranny, but it’s an incredibly entertaining and serviceable documentary on the Satanic Panic, for those who know nothing about and those like me who could stand to learn a little bit more, including the interesting tidbit later in the documentary about how insurance companies may have saved the day. The documentary’s focus is on how such a perverse lie was able to spread around the U.S. like a new strain of COVID-19, while examining the possibilities of why Michelle would remember…a lie.

Michelle’s psychiatrist, Lawrence Pazder, eventually became her lover and husband. It doesn’t take an HR consultant for most people to recognize a doctor and patient hooking up is the biggest ethical red flag you could potentially spot. The documentary seems to imply more wrong with Pazder than it does Michelle, as it talks with his family members about how he abandoned them for one of his patients. It details how Pazder had a fascination with the perceived weirdness of other cultures and traditions, and how that kind of got channeled through his sessions with Michelle. In my personal belief, I think he was a sexual deviant and Michelle’s recollections were simply part of his fetish.

But what about Michelle? It’s easy to pin the blame on the person spinning these lies, but the documentary treats everyone fairly, including Michelle. If anything, she is a victim to Pazder’s delusions of grandeur, because he envisioned himself becoming famous with her recounting of the alleged demonic occurrences. She also was seeking psychiatric help because she had endured a miscarriage. So in a vulnerable position, she was most likely persuaded by Pazder. A lot of this is my own musings based on the film because “Satan Wants You” is so balanced and thoughtful in its approach. The film doesn’t look to demonize or point the finger of blame at anyone particularly. Unfortunately we can only blame ourselves, especially since history shows that anytime there’s a crisis of faith or a newfound religion, one side attempts to demonize and disparage that group with lascivious lies involving children. For a harmful conspiracy theory to flourish, it takes a village of idiots.

For those who are interested in the Satanic Panic, “Satan Wants You” is a must-watch, even for those who may not know anything about it. At times it feels like it doesn’t say enough while at the same time giving us enough information to completely understand and digest the whole damn mess. You may find yourself wondering aloud during the film, “How the hell do people believe this?” Well, just wait until 2060 when we release a film about all the morons who thought a billionaire narcissist was going to save all the babies from demonic Jews in positions of power eating babies or how Lil Nas X is the Anti-Christ or how social media campaigns never helped children.

 

Copyright: MediaMikes.com © 2023 · Powered by: nGeneYes, Inc. · Login

All logos and images used on this website are registered trademarks of their respective companies. All Rights Reserved. Some of the content presented on our sites has been provided by contributors, other unofficial websites or online news sources, and is the sole responsibility of the source from which it was obtained. MediaMikes.com is not liable for inaccuracies, errors, or omissions found herein. For removal of copyrighted images, trademarks, or other issues, Contact Us.