Star Wars: The Rise of Skywalker

Score:  B+

Directed by J.J. Abrams
Starring Daisy Ridley, Adam Driver, John Boyega, Oscar Isaac
Running time: 142 minutes
Rated PG-13

Long Story Short:  Star Wars, as the world has known it since 1977, comes to a conclusion in this ninth film, and sure enough there are echoes from around this entire galaxy throughout Rise.  Rey, as played by Daisy Ridley, continues as the strong lead in this particular trilogy, and her story takes on even greater prominence than before.  Unfortunately, there's just too much packed in around her, and supporting players like Poe and Finn fall short as it all reaches an exciting yet predictable climax.  Obviously a must-see for fans, but it isn't quite the level of special we've come to expect.


As the First Order, under the command of Kylo Ren (Driver) continues to spread its shadow over the galaxy far, far away, the Resistance fights to survive.  A spy within the Order gives our heroes a breakthrough, revealing that an old foe on an unknown planet is the focal point of their plans.  The last remaining Jedi, Rey (Ridley), ventures out with ace pilot Poe (Isaac), stormtrooper-turned-rebel Finn (Boyega) and Chewbacca to find the planet and defeat their foe before it's too late.  However, Ren - once a Jedi himself - continues his personal mission to find and turn, or destroy, Rey.  The fate of the galaxy, then, rests once more on the outcome of a clash in the Force.

The cast of Rise of Skywalker is quite large, adding to the characters introduced in the previous films in the trilogy.  The lead is Daisy Ridley's Rey, as she has been throughout this Star Wars series (for some stupid reason, though, she is only the fourth actor to appear in the credits).  While the script still doesn't help her as much as it did her predecessor Mark Hamill (Luke Skywalker), she impressively conveys her own, distinct mix of strength and vulnerability.  She is now almost fully in command of her tangible powers in the Force - from floating serenely in the air to zapping enemy ships with deadly lightning.  Yet she is also still clearly bothered with the mystery of her place in the Force; now that she had ordinary parents, and that she is also the last of the Jedi, what is her responsibility, to the ancient (and essentially extinct) order and to the war raging around her?  Ridley is equally compelling and believable in showing both her internal and external conflicts, and my only regret is that she wasn't given more to work with in this trilogy.  Adam Driver also does well, though I'm not sure he is as successful with Kylo Ren as Ridley is with his opposite in Rey.  I don't think it spoils much to say that Ren remains conflicted for much of the film, and though Driver favors his own, dour mask rather than the Vader-like device, it may hide his own struggles a bit too well here.  Poe and Finn, played by Isaac and Boyega, respectively, reprise their roles as Rey's buddies, but sadly they are less interesting and more generic in this last chapter.  Poe is a bit more the mischievous one, and Finn more protective of Rey, but they really serve the same purpose of following her around until the final battle.  With so much action and attention revolving (appropriately) around those four, the rest of the cast gets bits and pieces, some more effective than others.  Carrie Fisher's Leia gets a poignant and fitting end, and C-3PO has one of the film's more clever, humorous touches.  Still, several of the new characters are pretty much irrelevant, and if you happened to enjoy some of the other returning ones, you may also be disappointed (or if you didn't like them, pleased that they are minimized).

The Rise of Skywalker, as the end (perhaps?) of the Star Wars tale forty-two years in the making, is epic, blockbuster filmmaking; inevitably, there are both thrilling victories and plenty of nagging concerns.  I will attempt to review it here by two standards: as a standalone film, and as an entry in the Star Wars universe.  A new Star Wars movie is always one of the biggest spectacles to experience in the theater, and Rise of Skywalker makes good on that promise.  Plenty of dazzling space battles and intense lightsaber duels, along with a story that, while focused on characters, also features literally planet-exploding stakes.  The thing is, it's getting harder and harder for even blockbusters to truly inspire awe.  The Force Awakens managed this through a modernized visual style on the old school SW feel; The Last Jedi used some new techniques and the element of surprise to achieve it.  Skywalker seems to mostly go with quantity over quality, though, and so it doesn't measure up to the previous two films.  There are exceptions, particularly scenes teased in the trailers (Rey's desert showdown with Kylo, and their duel on the wreckage of the Death Star).  The "bigness" of a film can swallow it up, but Abrams keeps the characters central as much as possible.  Again, fan allegiances may (will, really) sway how you feel about it, but many characters get little more than nods that also help keep the film grounded.  It's the main characters that truly carry the film, though, and here, Ridley and Driver are what make it a worthy adventure (even if Poe and Finn - secondary roles - drag it down a bit).  The pace is rocket-fueled from the start, which in general is just fine and helps the two hour-twenty minute show flow right along, though like Last Jedi it stuffs in too much superfluous material.  The humor is below standard, though the droids, particularly C-3PO, continue to please.

**Star Wars saga commentary - spoiler alert!!!**

As a Star Wars film - both the ninth overall, and the third in this "mini" trilogy - the events of Rise of Skywalker are frequently the culmination of extensive plot and character developments.  Probably the most significant of these are Rey's triumph over the Sith and her embracing the role as the last Jedi; Ben Solo's redemption (Kylo Ren being his "bad guy"/Sith name) and death; the revelation of Rey being Palpatine's granddaughter; and the defeat of the First Order.  I liked the first two results, and have mixed or indifferent feelings about the last two.  While parallel in many respects to Luke's, Rey's victory feels distinct, too; I think her individual resolve shines through even more.  Obviously the Sith have proven rather durable, but Rey (hopefully?) extinguished Palpatine once and for all; if nothing else, he and his pals have no more "home base" to rally from.  The finality of that victory is appreciated, and I'm also glad that Ben's sacrifice did not seem to overshadow Rey's achievement.  In fact, what he - the Skywalker, remember - does is of a literal supporting rather than leading role.  On the other hand, I might have preferred that Rey truly was a "nobody", rather than a Palpatine.  It still works - and the presence of Palpatine himself is important as the symbol of the Sith through the entire saga - but it would have been even more potent to make this one, vital deviation from the family lineage theme.  There's also the defeat of the First Order, which is practically an afterthought, compared to the Jedi-Sith showdown.  Really, the FO was Empire-lite from the start.  The rebels vs. empire rehash was probably the weakest part of the entire trilogy, both lazy and dull, and the weakest element of Disney's bending to demand for the "good old days" of Star Wars.  No one will agree with every single creative choice made, of course, but the fierce debates are both a sign of and the reason for the enduring, widespread love for the galaxy far, far away.

***

The Rise of Skywalker is among the last movies that I will see this year, and therefore the decade, which seems appropriate given its status as the last* Star Wars (HUGE asterisk).  Two of my other favorite franchises concluded their journeys this year, in Avengers and Game of Thrones.  The first was a resounding success in the form of Endgame, improbably pulling together twenty-one previous films and approximately 35890 characters into something not just coherent but emotionally resonant and viscerally powerful.  Game of Thrones... not so much.  An incredible, intricately-constructed six seasons gave way to two rushed seasons where character development went out the window, the plot became predictable, and my favorite characters (Tyrion and Daenerys) were ruined.  So Star Wars falls somewhere in between those two extremes, probably pretty close to the exact middle.  It's inspired me to do a rewatch of the series sometime, similar to what I did with the Avengers movies this spring.  Stay tuned!

**Update, after second viewing:  I enjoyed the film significantly more the second time around, as I concentrated more on the best parts - basically anything with Rey and/or Kylo Ren - and didn't let the swirl around it distract me.  It is still too busy, and Poe and Finn still unimpressive, but it's quite a bit of fun even beyond the tremendous leads.  I also paid more attention to the score, and I must beg John Williams for forgiveness - I'm not sure what I was thinking earlier (I have deleted the evidence!).  So upgrade this to an A- for me, and most likely a spot in my top 10 of the year.



* By Source, Fair use, https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?curid=61598068

A Beautiful Day in the Neighborhood

Score:  B-

Directed by Marielle Heller
Starring Tom Hanks, Matthew Rhys, Susan Kelechi Watson, Chris Cooper
Running time: 108 minutes
Rated PG

Long Story Short:  The famous children's TV show creator has been getting his due recently, and not much can strive to do that better than a feature film with Tom Hanks in the title role.  Unfortunately, this biopic does not live up to its ambitions.  While putting Rogers in more of a side role is smart, the core story is almost unwatchable; only when Hanks shows up does it have a pulse.  Look elsewhere for drama in the theaters; or, check out the Mr. Rogers documentary instead (now on HBO).


Dealing with tumult in his personal life both positive (a new son) and negative (a rift with his father), magazine writer Lloyd (Rhys) is given a "fluff" assignment: a brief profile of Fred ("Mr.") Rogers.  Renowned for his deep, cutting looks into public figures, Lloyd's innate skepticism meets its match in the quiet, modest, and almost unbelievably kind Mr. Rogers.  Still, Lloyd hangs around the set of Mr. Rogers' children's TV show, trying to find his angle.  His focus on this article becomes more intense, too, as his personal life continues to spiral out of his control.  Nearing the end of his tether, perhaps only an opening of his professional mind will allow Lloyd to find peace.

A Beautiful Day has a fairly small cast, and the characters involved don't fulfill the roles one might expect.  It is the journalist Lloyd, played by Matthew Rhys, who is the lead, rather than the famed Mr. Rogers (and the vaguely recognizable actor portraying him).  Unfortunately, this lead role is at the center of the film's deficiencies.  Rhys' acting itself is pretty bland, mostly either unengaged or forced despite being placed in a variety of either dramatically or interpersonally dynamic scenarios.  I'm not sure which was worse: the casting choice, or Rhys' effort.  The script doesn't do him any favors (more on this later), but I put a lot on the performance.  In a significant supporting role is Tom Hanks's Mr. Fred Rogers, and he does excellent work despite some challenges.  Yes, Hanks - perhaps Hollywood's most likable actor - is an obvious choice to play the supernaturally kind Rogers.  But when the audience is very familiar with the appearance and personalities of both actor and character, it's also a strange experience.  It's almost like watching a clone of the two of them mushed together.  Still, Hanks does great, nuanced work, picking up on Rogers's trademark slow and gentle physical and vocal rhythms.  Once again, a better script could have improved the effect further, but it's fascinating nonetheless.  Elsewhere, Watson's subtle performance as "the wife" is really good, while Chris Cooper, playing Lloyd's father, appropriately does as poorly as Rhys (like father like son?).

A Beautiful Day is a bit of a paradox in several ways; it's a straight-ahead drama while trying to insert interesting stylistic aspects here and there, and ultimately it's just OK when it could have been great.  The film is at its core a Mr. Rogers biopic, and the central, if unusual, decision to make Fred a supporting character in his own movie was very wise, I think.  Despite having been a flesh-and-blood human being, Rogers is practically fictional for how different he seems to the rest of us; therefore, a "common" person to serve as audience surrogate was useful.  The problem is that the film presents an entirely uninteresting family drama as the main story and frame it with the Mr. Rogers elements, which when added in feel either bizarrely fantastical or simply too different in tone from the rest.  In fact, the family drama story is treated as a giant episode of Mr. Rogers's show - mainly metaphorically, but also literally in a few odd moments (the first scene is a re-enactment of the start of a Mr. Rogers episode - cool! - and ends in Fred revealing a picture of Lloyd - umm...).  I know this is based on a true story - it's a biopic, after all - but Lloyd's family drama is incredibly dull for how well-worn and predictable it is.  Add in the aforementioned poor performances, and too much of the film that doesn't have Hanks/Rogers in it is almost painful to watch.  Rogers's presence almost always boosts things, but it's also frustratingly hampered by the contexts in which he's placed.  Now, it's not all bad.  Most of the scenes on the TV set - and accompanying characters - are pretty good, and if expanded would have been very welcome.  Along with Hanks's overall performance, a handful of parts are pretty special: the final few moments are so good, in fact, it's an aching reminder of how good the whole thing had the potential to be.

***

A Beautiful Day was disappointing to me, but I seem to be in the minority on this one.  It has a 95% rating on Rotten Tomatoes; despite a modest-sized release, it's also made $47 million so far.  It's hard to imagine a more enticing film if you want a feel-good drama than one about Mr. Rogers, and I'd like to see more films coming out with this general premise and purpose.  I also understand that Marielle Heller (who made last year's outstanding Can You Ever Forgive Me?) was trying to frame her biopic in a way that best suited her subject, and perhaps show off some stylistic flourishes here and there.  But - in my opinion - it just did not work.  The family drama was so simplistic, over done, poorly performed and flat-out insipid that even the legendary Mr. Rogers could not resuscitate it.  See it when it comes on streaming if you're really curious - and Hanks's performance is worth getting at least a little taste.  But I would strongly advise you turn to the excellent documentary Won't You Be My Neighbor? if you need Mr. Rogers in your life again.




* By Source (WP:NFCC#4), Fair use, https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?curid=61900962

Knives Out

Score:  A-

Directed by Rian Johnson
Starring Daniel Craig, Ana de Armas, Chris Evans, Jamie Lee Curtis, et. al.
Running time: 130 minutes
Rated PG-13

Long Story Short:  Knives Out is a star-laden whodunnit, a sharp turn for one of Hollywood's most intriguing new directors, Rian Johnson.  Although it's not sci-fi, like Looper or his Star Wars, Knives Out similarly toys with audience expectations for a well-worn archetype.  The cast is sharp and entertaining, and while you may not agree with all the myriad ways Johnson has rearranged the furniture, you'll have a great time anyway.  Highly recommended.


A celebrity is dead, and renowned detective Benoit Blanc (Craig) is on the case.  On the night of elderly crime novelist Harlan Thrombey's birthday - with his entire family home to celebrate - an act of violence throws his clan into disarray.  While it is initially ruled a suicide, Blanc has been hired by a mysterious donor to investigate, and when he interviews the family and house staff, he finds that there are indeed some suspicious details.  Harlan had generated a considerable fortune from his writing, and motives for his untimely demise abound.  But as he finds subterfuge around every corner of the mansion, even Blanc's impressive skills are put to the test to solve this grisly case.

Knives Out has a star-studded cast, and the well-known players seem to be having a blast with their outsize characters.  While there's no clear lead, Daniel Craig's private detective Blanc is at the center of the action.  Similar to his role in Logan Lucky, Craig again shows that he can easily loosen up his acting - in a variety of ways - from the cool 007 he's best known for.  The British actor employs a heavy, sometimes exaggerated, southern drawl, and even as he shows a genial, innocent face to his nervous witnesses, he also has all the skills and attentiveness of a Poirot-style hero.  Craig seems like he might be having even more fun than anyone else, but I have to admit that his approach falls a bit too much into parody for me.  Great fun, but maybe a little too much.  The relatively plain house nurse Marta, played by Ana de Armas, is arguably the co-lead.  Unlike her co-stars, de Armas mostly plays it straight, except for a single incredible, ingenious tic.  A relative newcomer (after an impressive appearance in the Blade Runner sequel), de Armas may be disarmingly beautiful but fully inhabits her modest and quiet, while internally strong yet stressed character.  Chris Evans, famed as Captain America, also plays against type with his selfish, aloof yet calculating heir named Ransom.  Evans puts his considerable charisma to use for ill here, in particular via a scene-stealing, mid-film introduction.  Jamie Lee Curtis, Michael Shannon, Toni Collette, and Don Johnson are all great as proud siblings bickering over their inheritance - and grudges.  There are plenty of other, smaller roles that are intriguing, too, from Christopher Plummer as Harlan (in flashbacks), to the manipulative granddaughter played Katherine Langford.

Knives Out is a well-made, supremely entertaining new take on the whodunnit genre, thanks not only to its starry cast but also to a rising talent in the director's chair.  Rian Johnson has made just four other feature films including Looper, an excellent but under-the-radar sci-fi flick, and the radar-dominating - and highly polarizing - Star Wars: The Last Jedi.  He very much continues his path of subverting expectations in well-known genres; I think it works even better here, though I don't necessarily love all the individual elements (yet, anyway).  Things seem different right off the bat, as the usually crucial (and later-arriving) interrogation of suspects happens early; rather than letting the secret family histories trickle out slowly, as expected, I was jarred by how much is revealed so quickly.  Additionally, instead of slowly accumulating clues to the murder itself, we get the whole scene played out in the first half.  Thus, the film's main perspective (and therefore the audience's) is actually not Blanc's as the detective, but rather the culprit's, who I will SHOCKINGLY reveal to be lowly little Marta.  But that spoiler isn't as bad as it may seem.  I like the idea of this change of focus, but it personally made me squirm uncomfortably as I oddly began rooting against Blanc from figuring it all out.  The style and context of the film are perhaps just as important as the switcheroo Johnson pulls with the murder plot structure.  It's blatantly taking place amidst current events, and several of the characters reflect either individuals or groups (from Gwyneth Paltrow to social media pundits).  At the same time, much of the dialogue and even action is tongue in cheek or outright silly (from Blanc's hilarious fixation with donut analogies to the world's slowest care chase).  Your mileage will vary to the extent that you buy all this or enjoy it.  I found it hit or miss, but above all I appreciate the efforts of the filmmakers to try something new, providing a great time at the theater.

***

Knives Out is a strong film by itself, one of the year's better entries, but perhaps even more encouraging as a general direction for Hollywood to (hopefully) embrace.  It is a critical hit, its 97% score on Rotten Tomatoes almost unheard of for a genre film like this; audiences aren't flocking to it quite as well yet, with $27 million in the opening weekend, but a strong hold in the coming weeks could make it a financial success, too.  Admittedly, just like The Last Jedi, I wasn't sure how I felt about it as I walked out of the theater, as opposed to, say, Ford v Ferrari (on the positive) or Ad Astra (on the negative).  But I think that is mostly because Johnson is giving audiences films they haven't seen before.  Is it all for the better?  Probably not.  Still, as I harp on this blog regularly, trying new things is essential, in Hollywood as it is elsewhere.  I therefore look forward to seeing this again, hopefully soon, and encourage you to try it (or give it a second watch), too.




* By Source (WP:NFCC#4), Fair use, https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?curid=61197044