Kingsman: The Golden Circle

Score:  B+

Directed by Matthew Vaughn
Starring Taron Egerton, Colin Firth, Mark Strong, Julianne Moore, et. al.
Running time: 141 minutes
Rated R

Long Story Short:  The Golden Circle is a follow up to the surprise hit Kingsman, a film where manners may maketh man, but the action and humor is liberated for maximum fun.  This sequel is too long, stuffed with more of everything and an even crazier plot, but the great tone and style is the same and there's plenty of thrilling action and sharp humor.  Should be seen by those who enjoyed the first, and it's worth recommending to anyone who enjoys the genre in general, too.


A year after saving the world, Eggsy (Egerton) continues his work as an agent in the secret Kingsman organization.  Upon leaving headquarters in London one night, however, he encounters a former fellow Kingsman trainee, Charlie, who had switched sides but also apparently died.  Eggsy barely escapes Charlie as they race through the city, and he goes home to see his girlfriend.  During the attack, Charlie had managed to hack the Kingsman network, and that night a series of missile attacks effectively destroy the organization, leaving only Eggsy and loyal trainer and staffer, Merlin (Strong).  The two initiate the Kingsman "Doomsday" protocol, and find themselves seeking a sister organization in America.  There they meet an old friend, and learn about a mysterious new international criminal outfit known as the Golden Circle.  Eggsy, Merlin and their new allies race to find the Circle's leader and stop its evil plans - before it's too late for millions around the world.

Kingsman: The Golden Circle has an impressive cast of stars, including much of the original and many new faces as well.  Taron Egerton returns to lead as Eggsy, who has grown past reformed criminal and novice agent, to full-fledged Kingsman agent.  While his character didn't lack for confidence in the first film, he is now assured in his role and is now a more typical hero type.  Egerton gets to display his impressive charisma early on, cocky yet self-effacing and amusing, but there's little development of the character as the film progresses.  Well-known spoiler alert: Colin Firth also returns as Eggsy's partner, Harry Hart or "Galahad".  His role is somewhat diminished here, but also one of the more interesting as his character battles amnesia.  Firth does a good job with this "different" character, and as he slowly recovers the relationship dynamic with Eggsy is subtly modified.  Mark Strong is once again, well, very strong in his role as Merlin, a sort of Q-meets-Alfred who also kicks ass; he gets a more significant part in this one, too.  Julianne Moore plays the new villain, Poppy Adams, a seemingly saccharine sweet woman who is in fact even more brutal and ruthless than her predecessor, Samuel L. Jackson.  She gets relatively little screen time, but makes a big impact.  Elton John gets an unexpectedly large and pretty bonkers role, while most of the other new stars are fine but also limited to essentially cameos (Halle Berry, Channing Tatum, Jeff Bridges).

The Golden Circle is a more flawed and less original film than the first Kingsman, but it retains much of the great style of the first and gives us more of, well, pretty much everything.  Writer/director Matthew Vaughn returns, along with the tone of serious enough to not be strictly parody, but also with a certain freedom from reality through comic book-like elements and great humor, both overt and tongue in cheek.  I find this balanced tone excellent, just like in the original.  The plot, however, stretches this tone to the limit.  It is similar to the original: a megalomaniac threatens widespread death and destruction with a plan that involves a contemporary hot topic (war on drugs this time) taken to an absurd level.  But the U.S. government plays a role, too, this time, with amusing political commentary yet also overboard; the introduction of an American version of Kingsman itself is interesting but also a bit much.  There is even more action in this installment, most of it quite good, especially the opening scene car chase.  It achieves a great balance of just enough realism-and outstanding choreography- with impossible but very cool comic book-like effects.  There is a lot to like in the climactic battle, too, including an Elton John-soundtracked start and a bravura 2-vs-1 ending.  But it's also almost exhaustingly long, like the film itself (nearly two and a half hours).  There are plenty of great scenes, moments, and ideas, but the impact of each is diminished with just so much going on; a twenty or thirty minute trim might have done wonders.

***

Kingsman: The Golden Circle is a highly entertaining sequel that doesn't quite live up to the stand out original, but is still quite well-made in its own right.  A warning: this film's tone, violence and humor are not for everyone.  It all works for me very well, but I'm also well aware that it will repel others equally strongly.  If you are as immature as I am, though, and entertained by a little action and humor that pushes the envelope (still far short of where some other films go), you might want to give this a try, or at least the original.  The critics have given it a fairly mediocre 50% on Rotten Tomatoes, but I think this mostly proves there are those who just aren't able to enjoy this type of film at all (which is me when it comes to horror movies).  If you've seen the first, I'd recommend this for a theater viewing but if not, you might want to wait for it to come to Netflix/streaming.



By Source, Fair use, https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?curid=54939477

Logan Lucky

Score:  A-

Directed by Steven Soderbergh
Starring Channing Tatum, Adam Driver, Daniel Craig, Riley Keough
Running time: 119 minutes
Rated PG-13

Long Story Short:  From the director who brought us Ocean's Eleven, Logan Lucky is another heist film - in a rather different setting.  Led by an impressive cast of stars (even Channing Tatum is great), the film quickly distinguishes itself from its predecessor.  It is a lot of fun, and funny, but it doesn't take the easy way out with redneck jokes, instead lifting up the culture of its characters.  Especially at this time of year, it's a top choice in the theater.  Highly recommended.


The Logan family seems to be anything but lucky.  Brothers Jimmy (Tatum) and Clyde (Driver) eek out a living due to regular misfortune.  Jimmy was once a star football player before suffering a leg injury, and finds himself laid off even from his construction job due to liability, while Clyde manages a bar having lost a hand while serving in the military.  After learning that his daughter is to move away with his ex, and suffering humiliation from out-of-towners, Jimmy decides that enough is enough.  He and Clyde devise a scheme to literally reverse their fortunes by robbing a nearby NASCAR race track.  But they'll need plenty of help, and so recruit their hairstylist sister, Mellie (Keough) and notorious safe cracker Joe "Bang" (Craig), among others.  While the Lucky brothers are surprisingly well-prepared, they still must heed their own warning that "shit will happen."

Logan Lucky has a very good cast, full of star actors in even small roles.  Channing Tatum is the lead as Jimmy Logan, an ordinary man struggling to get by in his rural hometown.  Channing owns the first part of the film, where he establishes his character as a man who has come to quietly accept that a significant potential of his life (as an athlete) is lost, though he is driven to keep moving forward for love of his young daughter.  It's some of the best acting I've seen from Tatum and gives the film a solid dramatic core.  Adam Driver's Clyde, Jimmy's brother, has less background but does a good job fitting in in the sibling relationship; he is even more hardened and stoic than Jimmy.  Daniel Craig gets the most colorful role in the film, seizing on the part of Joe Bang with great relish.  Very, very far from James Bond, Joe is at once wickedly funny and surprisingly disciplined and proud.  Riley Keough as sister Mellie is the most stable of the bunch, providing family (and criminal) stability but with attitude in a nice performance.  Fun or notable smaller parts abound here, from Joe's nitwit brothers, played by Brian Gleeson and Jack Quaid (sons of Brendan and Dennis, respectively), Katie Holmes as Jimmy's ex, Seth MacFarlane as an obnoxious Brit, Hilary Swank as an FBI agent, and many more.

The simplest way to describe Logan Lucky is "Ocean's Eleven taking place in West Virginia" (actually, it's North Carolina) but while very entertaining and somewhat familiar, the film is not a simple parody or remake.  A large part of what makes the film successful is the aforementioned cast.  It may not have the glitzy names of Ocean's - replacing Clooney, Pitt and Damon with Tatum, Driver and Craig - but this cast is every bit as skilled, and are all quite appropriate for their roles.  The very premise of the film risks condescension toward rural America, but (being from rural America myself) I feel it celebrated the culture, if anything.  Certainly much humor is based on the setting, and there are some broad stereotypes like Jimmy's daughter competing in a beauty contest, but little if any is judgmental.  In fact, the film rather pointedly shows how much these characters are like anyone else, how smart, hardworking, and community-based they are.  This portrait includes some very minor characters, either part of Jimmy's background (an old classmate) or part of the main plot (an unwitting racetrack employee) who might otherwise be dull.  Of course, the main heist is a big part of the film; it's more drawn out and less slick than Ocean's - while a bit disappointing, it also is a stylistically appropriate contrast with its predecessor and has plenty of surprises.  It can be a little challenging to follow the details of the plot (and the tone shifts and misdirects a bit), making a second viewing likely quite appealing, but we're left with an ending that is perfectly satisfying in a quasi-Hollywood way.

***

Despite its similarities to Ocean's Eleven, this is one of the freshest and most clever films I have seen in a while.  The critics are right on target in loving it (IMO), but it had an awful opening weekend with audiences with under $10 million.  Maybe a lot of people just don't know about Logan Lucky, because the premise seems like it should appeal to a large audience.  And unlike too many films with a good premise, this one follows through and more on its promise.  It is the kind of summer film that, again, should appeal to many:  a great, star-filled cast at the top of their game; a fun story that draws comparisons to a classic while finding its own unique path; and a feel good tone and ending.  I strongly urge you to go out and see this one in the theaters - we should convince Hollywood studios to make more like it!


By Source, Fair use, https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?curid=54170950

War for the Planet of the Apes

Score:  C+

Directed by Matt Reeves
Starring Andy Serkis, Woody Harrelson, Steve Zahn
Running time: 140 minutes
Rated PG-13

Long Story Short:  The rebooted Planet of the Apes franchise, which has been very strong but a little overshadowed by others (superheroes, etc.), gets a finale that sadly does not live up to the prior films. Andy Serkis returns as Caesar and the effects are fantastic, but the film is saddled with a generic set up made worse by a poor script, pacing, and a surprisingly ineffective villain played by Woody Harrelson.  Either go see one of the actually good films in theaters right now, or Netflix the first film, Rise, if you haven't already seen it.


An unstable, dangerous world continues on from this film's predecessor, Dawn, in which the remnants of humanity struggle to survive along with a separate community of super-intelligent apes, led by Caesar (Serkis). A human military group ambushes the apes, but when they are finally defeated, Caesar decides to spare the survivors as a gesture of good faith and attempt to end hostilities.  Unfortunately, the attacking military group was from a rogue group led by the Colonel, who is determined to wipe out the apes.  After suffering another sneak attack, Caesar is infuriated and resolves to get revenge.  While sending the rest of the ape community on a journey to a hopefully safer home, he goes with a small group of trusted friends to kill the Colonel.  Along the way, he learns of a potentially planet-altering development involving the remaining humans, and must decide what he is willing to sacrifice in order to keep his fellow apes safe.

Even more so than the first two films of the new Planet of the Apes trilogy, Rise and Dawn, this film features apes as the main characters.  Once again Andy Serkis, a veteran of motion-capture roles (Lord of the Rings, King Kong, etc.) is the lead as Caesar.  Serkis is so reliably good that it's easy to take him for granted, but he maintains the character so consistently well, from the physical (voice, style of movement) to the emotive.  Beyond the acting, the effects work is outstanding here; I can't think of a single poor frame, and the apes were completely convincing as regular characters (visually, anyway) throughout.  The two other main ape characters are Maurice, a peaceful orangutan who serves as Caesar's advisor; and Bad Ape, a new guy found along the way who can speak like Caesar and provides good comic relief (played by Karin Konoval and Steve Zahn, respectively).  The only notable human character is Woody Harrelson's villain, the Colonel.  Typically Harrelson gives strong, charismatic, unique performances but he's underwhelming here.  There's a lot of show, of course, but I did not feel the menace and danger the role required.

War for the Planet of the Apes retains some of the inherent strengths of its predecessors, but also unfortunately goes off the tracks in other ways resulting in a disappointing finale to the trilogy.  I note first that, like with Rise, I was deceived in a big way by the trailers; for Rise, the surprise was a pleasant one, but it was the other way around for War.  The overall structure of the story combines two very well-worn conventions: a good but embattled leader gets pushed too far and seeks revenge (will he go too far in turn?!), and the evacuation of a threatened community away from barbarians.  If executed well, this straightforward path could have produced a fine film.  And there are certainly strengths to be found; again, the visual effects are phenomenal, and Serkis's Caesar is a great lead (if a bit more generic this time around).  Bad Ape's humor is a very welcome addition, and the twist with the humans is pretty clever, and rather disquieting.  Unfortunately, the film gets bogged down not too far in, as the plot shoots ahead to what is normally a final act scenario - but it's only halfway through. The pacing becomes painful and the events telegraphed and decreasingly interesting.  I was counting on some pretty spectacular action, considering that this is the trilogy finale and Dawn had quite a bit already.  But this one goes out with a whimper, and features one of my pet peeves in being unrealistic even by the measure of its own rules.  Add in the fact that this is way too long at two hours-twenty minutes, and you have a classic letdown.

***

I'm pretty baffled by the critical raves War has been getting - it has a 93% on Rotten Tomatoes!!  The film does try to address some more advanced themes than most other blockbusters, but it doesn't do so nearly as well as Rise or Dawn - yet it is better reviewed than either of those.  I had been hoping July 2017 might turn out to be one of the strongest months for movies, with Baby Driver, Spider-Man and Dunkirk preceding it, but War let the others down, just as it did its trilogy predecessors.  I would like to see the entire franchise again over a short period, once this comes on DVD/streaming, and maybe my opinion of it will improve.  Certainly the effects work remains strong.  But if you are a fan of the first two films and are wondering about this last one, I suggest you wait for Netflix.  And if you haven't seen either of the others yet - don't bother at all (there are plenty of superior options in theaters right now; or, if anything, just watch Rise of the Planet of the Apes instead).



By Source, Fair use, https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?curid=48616125

Dunkirk

Score:  A+

Directed by Christopher Nolan
Starring Fionn Whitehead, Mark Rylance, Tom Hardy
Running time: 106 minutes
Rated PG-13

Long Story Short:  Dunkirk is a riveting war thriller like none other, a spectacular success from one of today's finest filmmakers.  There may not be much Hollywood star power here, but the film sucks the audience in to the intimate survival stories of the evacuation at Dunkirk in WWII.  Nolan's trademark narrative trickery pulls events on land, at sea, and in the air into a powerful cinematic symphony that is not to be missed.  An instant classic that must be seen on the big screen.


Soon after the Nazis unleashed their blitzkrieg on France in 1940, the stunned Allied forces of Britain, France and others found themselves retreating to the coast.  In no time, 400,000 troops were surrounded at Dunkirk on the English Channel - just a few agonizing miles away from England.  With the Nazis prepared to deal a deathblow to the Allied cause, desperate efforts on land, in the air and at sea went underway to save as many of the troops as possible.  A private named Tommy (Whitehead) manages to make it to the beach, only to find vast lines of troops awaiting evacuation.  He soon discovers the daunting challenges of both getting offshore - and then staying afloat.  Meanwhile, boats of all kinds are launched from Britain, including civilians like Mr. Dawson (Rylance), braving U-boat and bomber attacks while sailing straight into danger.  And a trio of RAF pilots also fly toward Dunkirk, doing what they can to protect those being evacuated.  While the short-term battle has already been lost, the situation at Dunkirk could still be either an irrecoverable loss - or an invaluable morale boost for the beleaguered peoples of the free world.

Dunkirk has a strong cast with a few familiar faces and a number of newcomers who prove up to the task.  Leading the way is one of the new faces, young Fionn Whitehead as Tommy, a British Army private.  The film has very little dialogue, and Tommy gets even less to say than most, but he does an excellent job of, above all, being a realistic, terrified yet courageous, surrogate for putting the audience right into the action at Dunkirk beach.  We know virtually nothing about Tommy, except that he's trying to survive, and that's enough.  His young army peers, particularly two companions, do similarly well.  More familiar to moviegoers is Mark Rylance, playing a civilian taking his small boat to help evacuate.  Rylance has a few powerful yet brief and simple lines, but mostly he is just quietly determined while also fearful for the two boys helping him.  Tom Hardy gets the final major role as a fighter pilot.  Although you can see nothing but his face (similar to his role in the inventive Locke), his acting combined with brilliant directing produce surprising nuance and depth.  Cillian Murphy as a shell-shocked survivor and Kenneth Branagh as a naval commander also bring the goods in smaller roles.

Dunkirk is a masterpiece; at once one of the best war films I've ever seen and one of Christopher Nolan's best, and both a thrilling blockbuster and an Oscar-worthy work of art.  There is much to laud, and I'll start with the technical.  While the subject matter here is new for director Nolan, his style of filmmaking is both clearly present and very appropriate for the proceedings.  It's in even the little things like the sound of gunfire, bombing, and strafing aircraft: loud, gruff, like a pack of hounds' vicious, intimate attack.  And it's also in the big picture; anyone familiar with Nolan's work knows he likes to toy with the timeline.  Here, he frames events on the beach over a week; those at sea over a day; and those in the air in just an hour.  Each area gets longer, uninterrupted action early on to get established, but as the danger mounts - and they draw closer to each other - the edits get faster and drive the action to its climax.  The action itself is superb, so effectively drawing the audience into the war.  Poor Tommy and his mates are literally sitting ducks, whether on the beach or on massive naval warships; the Channel, potentially their savior, is also often just as deadly as the Nazis' bullets and bombs.  The aerial dogfighting with Hardy and co. is spectacular - not for gee whiz (and unrealistic) effects but for dizzying, agonizingly precision and tense showdowns.  Much more frequent, though, is the dread of waiting: audience and film characters know that the enemy is lurking always, yet we're never shown an actual Nazi - only the death and destruction they deal out.

A primary criticism of Nolan's films - and I've often agreed - is that he struggles to effectively connect on an emotional level.  I would argue that he addressed that well with Interstellar, but he definitely also does so here.  As mentioned, there is very little dialogue (apparently the script was only half as long as usual), and there is absolutely no backstory for any of the characters.  Instead, it's all about the now: surviving and escaping.  Everything in the film is devoted to this immediacy, and in its desperation, it is just as (if not more so) effective than building characters traditionally.  Both large, historical stakes and moment-to-moment personal ones are more than enough to generate plenty of interest and empathy.  This is far from a sentimental film, but events naturally lead to several incredibly powerful moments, such as when a fleet of civilian ships approach the Dunkirk beach, and when the exhausted, demoralized troops are greeted back home to a heroes' welcome.  This, then, leads to a final important point: Dunkirk is not a typical war film in showing the good guys' courage and feats in destroying the enemy.  It is about the horrors of war, yes, but even more so about the tremendous courage, sacrifice, brotherhood, and force of will that it can bring out in humanity to deal with it.  The lines between military and civilian are blurred into one epic, human struggle for survival.

***

Dunkirk ranks right up there with Saving Private Ryan in tremendous war filmmaking.  Although they both are set during World War II, they are otherwise very different films.  Everything seemed to fall into place just right with this film.  I couldn't picture Nolan doing a traditional war scenario, and Dunkirk is certainly one of a kind.  Yet it offered tremendous challenges, not least of which being that the story is one of a major loss - survival, too, but essentially the surrendering of continental Europe to Hitler.  Nolan knew that such a story needed no extra traditional dramatic "padding", and instead put his extraordinary (perhaps unsurpassed) technical filmmaking skills to work to capture a web of intimate survival stories that get drawn together in a complex yet fine way that he is quite familiar with.  Add superb work from the actors, set designers, producers, music composer, cinematographer, etc. etc. etc... and you have an instant classic.  A must-see - and in the theater! - be sure not to miss out.




By Source, Fair use, https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?curid=51683157

Baby Driver

Score:  B+

Directed by Edgar Wright
Starring Ansel Elgort, Kevin Spacey, Lily James, Jon Hamm, Jamie Foxx
Running time: 113 minutes
Rated R

Long Story Short:  Better known for his satirical work like Shaun of the Dead, Edgar Wright finds great success in more straightforward but stylish action in Baby Driver.  Baby - the character - listens to music constantly, and it serves as the soundtrack for everything from his gripping getaways to quiet moments with his girlfriend.  While the super fun of the first parts of the film eventually fade and turn to darker fare, it's still a very entertaining and well made movie.  Highly recommended.


As a trio of bank robbers get out of a car, armed and about to hit their target, the driver sits calmly and revvs up his music.  When the robbers come running back, Baby (Elgort) lets the music drive him through the city with incredible precision, eluding a fleet of police.  Baby and the robbers return to headquarters, where their boss, Doc (Spacey), awaits them.  Baby is paying off a debt, and has just one more death-defying job to go before he is free.  Baby celebrates at a favorite diner, but he is pulled from his musical reverie by a new waitress, Debora (James), with whom he falls in love.  Baby dutifully serves as the getaway driver for one last job, however, and again barely escapes as he chauffeurs a particularly violent set of robbers.  Although he attempts to transition to a normal life, Baby encounters Doc again on a date with Debora.  Doc wants him to help with yet another robbery, and Baby is forced to reckon with the fact that leaving the criminal world will not be easy.

Baby Driver has quite a few familiar faces in its cast, but is led by a relative newcomer.  Ansel Elgort is the lead as Baby - yes, that's his name - and does a fine job in an unconventional role.  The film emphasizes his quirks early on, mostly stemming from his obsession with music (he has his ear buds in for most of the movie).  He is often shown as detached from the rest of the world by this trait, but he exhibits more normal reactions as Baby gets pulled farther into Doc's criminal enterprise.  Ansel doesn't do nearly as well with the latter part, but he's intriguing - and technically-speaking very impressive - with the music-based parts.  Everyone else is strictly supporting, but there are plenty of fun roles among them.  Kevin Spacey plays, well, Kevin Spacey, as the villain, a la House of Cards; even if it's not that different, he is still great to watch and menacing.  Lily James's Debora gets a meatier role than the usual girlfriend, and she does a very nice job in making a handful of flirting scenes interesting.  The robbers also all seem to relish their roles.  Jon Hamm is the main one, who starts out the most sympathetic but grows quite dark; and Jamie Foxx is surprisingly dangerous and cruel, very effective.

Baby Driver is a very entertaining, stylish action film that starts with a neat premise that begins to slip away in the second half.  The first fifteen minutes or so are just fabulous.  The music is synced perfectly with the action, first as Baby gets himself ready to go, and then as he leads a really impressive chase scene.  It continues in the aftermath of the chase, as he does normal things like picking up coffee for his crew, and flows into the first well-played meeting with Debora.  The film settles into a more traditional flow after that, which can't help but be a bit of a downer.  But between Spacey and his gang of criminals chewing the scenery, and Baby's burgeoning relationship with Debora, it continues to hum along quite enjoyably.  Things start to turn considerably darker when Baby gets pulled back in, as the violence ratchets up and formerly smiling (or at least smirking) characters are now deadly serious.  Getting darker isn't necessarily a bad thing, and Wright and his actors keep the quality high, but I was unpleasantly jarred by the change.  I found myself longing for more of what the first few minutes held.  It turns out that the only two significant getaway chases happen in the first third or so of the film (although notably there is a foot chase later that is also spectacular).  After all that, there is another jarring shift, as we get a surprisingly happy ending.  I was  quite pleased to hear the song played over the credits, though, which I had thought about ever since finding out about this movie in the first place.

***

Baby Driver is a high-quality action film, and another entry in what is already turning out to be a very strong second half of the summer movie season.  The first half of summer was extremely disappointing, and I didn't even bother seeing much of what was released (Wonder Woman being the lone bright light).  I can understand if others rate this movie more highly than me, but the primary reason I gave it a B+ was personal preference.  I'd been hoping - perhaps expecting - to see a lot more car chasing, in a tone that's not light-hearted, exactly, but leavened by the music.  The violent, darker turn it took was far less appealing to me, even if it was probably much more realistic (relatively speaking) for the story.  Still, if you are looking for a fun time at the movies - and particularly if you'd like to avoid the superheroes or franchises - this is a great choice.




By Source, Fair use, https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?curid=53460129

Spider-Man: Homecoming

Score:  A-

Directed by Jon Watts
Starring Tom Holland, Michael Keaton, Robert Downey, Jr., Marisa Tomei
Running time: 133 minutes
Rated PG-13

Long Story Short:  This Homecoming, just three years after the stalling out of yet another Spider-Man, was anticipated with skepticism by some, but like many heroes brought under the Marvel Cinematic Universe's umbrella, succeeds brilliantly.  Tom Holland is an excellent choice as the young new webslinger, and he alternates smoothly between deep immersion in the Avengers' story line and his own far more pedestrian (yet still interesting) Queens high school life.  Typical Marvel top-notch quality all around makes this a highly recommended theater viewing.


Having experienced a thrilling introduction to the Avengers via a battle splitting Tony Starks (Downey, Jr.) and Steve Rogers, young Peter Parker (Holland), aka Spider-Man, is promptly returned to his home in Queens.  Peter continues to take on small-time crooks at night (using a "Stark internship" as his alibi), but he longs for the day when Tony will call him up again to rejoin the Avengers.  Meanwhile, high school offers its share of trials and tribulations, from competition on the school's Academic Decathlon team to dreaming of his crush, Liz (Harrier), alongside his best friend, Ned (Batalon).  One night's crimefighting leads Peter to discover that new weapons, created from the alien remains from the Battle of New York, are being smuggled in the area.  Despite barely surviving an encounter with the smugglers' leader, Adrian (Keaton), and getting a warning from Stark, Peter is determined to solve the case himself.  The young Spider-Man is filled with enthusiasm but lacking in experience, and unaware of the dangers of his ambitions to those close to him.

Spider-Man: Homecoming benefits from the talents of both established veterans and fresh newcomers.  Tom Holland, an actor not much older than the teen he portrays, is a great fit in the role and a welcome follow up to Tobey Maguire.  Tom is able to convey the characteristics of a genuine teen, so that he fits into the high school scenes seamlessly (as opposed to making you wonder, "why is a superhero in high school?").  His teen eagerness for excitement and relevance beyond what he sees as his own small world are convincing and make for a great transition to his Spider-Man alter ego.  Yet the film never forgets that he is a newcomer, and he fails about as much as he succeeds.  The villain is played by Michael Keaton, who is as opposite in experience as you can get.  The role is given substantial background, providing nuance that Keaton digs into while also remaining quite menacing.  Fellow veterans Marisa Tomei and Robert Downey, Jr. (who gets a surprisingly large part) are also excellent.  Back to the other end of the spectrum, Tom's primary young companions are played by Harrier (his crush), Batalon (his best friend), and Zendaya (a friend, yet also a quirky loner).  None of them exactly do Oscar-caliber work, but most importantly they work well with Tom and maintain the authenticity of the film's coming-of-age elements.

This Spider-Man reboot, the third version in ten years, impressively manages to both refresh the franchise and also to incorporate it intriguingly into the immense Marvel Cinematic Universe.  It's also not particularly mysterious why it worked, as the latest incarnation differs in so many ways from its predecessors.  First, it blessedly and completely ignores Spider-Man's origin story - although that's not entirely accurate, as it does have a "replay" of events from last year's Civil War (but it's done succinctly, effectively, and with good reason).  Second, it has a really good villain.  Obviously it's a help to have Keaton play him, but the context fits really well into the MCU and the stakes are smaller than usual to fit the style of the film.  Most importantly (though connected to the first two), the film manages to tie Spider-Man to the Avengers' world in a compelling way, while somehow also developing a very non-Avenger-like (more like Ferris Buehler) everyday life for Peter Parker.  By introducing Spider-Man last year, the Avengers have a natural relevance to his story (plus some other reasons, brought in here).  And the script gives ample time to the normal high school stuff, showing how Parker must try to balance his full life, while not lingering too long on it, either.  Oh, right, this is a blockbuster, too?  Yes, Homecoming offers plenty of good action as well, having fun with Spider-Man's talent yet tendency to screw up, and confusion with his Iron Man-like suit.  My favorite set piece was a rescue at the Washington Monument that managed to kick in my fear of heights.

***

Marvel has done it again.  Its cinematic universe was already quite full, and while Spider-Man is one of Marvel's biggest characters he's also been run ragged by the recent "Amazing" reboot.  To have refreshed the character and pulled him into the larger Marvel world so seamlessly is a tremendous success.  Marvel did have a significant stumble earlier this summer with the Guardians sequel, but that seems even more now like it was the result of just trying to cash in on earlier success by making an even bigger (but devastatingly generic and pointless) follow-up.  When Marvel finds narrative purpose, like it did with Homecoming, the results are almost always spectacular.  They also once again found a perfect leading actor in Tom Holland, and the decision to stick Robert Downey, Jr. in there for a little mentoring almost feels like gloating.  A huge amount of fun, Spider-Man: Homecoming is finally getting this summer movie season on track.




By Source, Fair use, https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?curid=53586522

The House

Score:  B+

Directed by Andrew Jay Cohen
Starring Will Ferrell, Amy Poehler, Jason Mantzoukas, Nick Kroll
Running time: 88 minutes
Rated R

Long Story Short:  The House is one of summer 2017's major comedy films, featuring stars like Will Ferrell and Amy Poehler - and has fallen flat with critics and avoided by the masses.  But I would urge you to give this oddly old fashioned movie, about desperate parents and their unscrupulous friend starting a suburban casino, a try.  Its stars may not shine quite as brightly as expected, but the script, structure and tone are surprisingly good and carry the load.  Just be sure to see it with some friends.


Scott and Kate Johanssen (Ferrell and Poehler), and their daughter, Alex (Simpkins), are a happy family, but Alex's graduation from high school challenges their close-knit relationship.  Alex is excited to attend college in the fall, but Scott and Kate get a nasty shock when they discover that the community scholarship that was to pay her way has been canceled.  Desperate, the parents search for ways of making a lot of cash and fast.  When Frank (Mantzoukas), Scott's friend who has his own financial problems, learns about their crisis, he thinks he knows how to solve both of their problems at once.  While he has lost much already to a gambling addiction, the experience has taught him how much there is to gain from being on the other side of the table.  Thus, right in the middle of their sleepy suburb, Scott, Kate, and Frank begin a secret, lucrative, and increasingly wild new illicit adventure.

The House is stocked with some of the funniest comic actors in Hollywood, embracing the silly proceedings with varying levels of success.  Ferrell is perhaps the biggest name in film comedy (and my personal favorite), but he doesn't meet his own level of success here.  The tone and his role set him up well for his brand of hilarious wildness, but he fails to make the character as distinctive as many of his other iconic characters, and is even upstaged by his co-stars through much of the film. Amy Poehler seems to better embrace the style of the film, although the script unfortunately gives her relatively little to work with.  Still, she makes the most of what she has (and watching her more closely would be a great reason for a repeat viewing).  The star who shines the brightest here is the somewhat unknown Jason Mantzoukas (The League, Brooklyn Nine-Nine).  He is perfectly cast, as even when he is calm and speaking rationally, he seems capable of doing something crazy at any moment.  Jason is good at pacing himself, though, and easily commands attention in just about every scene.  There are a number of nice supporting roles, two of the biggest (and best) being Nick Kroll's crooked councilman and Rob Huebel as an earnest police officer.  They are polar opposites, and perhaps the most cartoonish (and possibly the funniest) of all the characters, but Kroll and Huebel both give great performances.

The House is a deceptively good, seemingly standard-issue comedy that occupies an intriguing place in today's genre.  Like so many other comedies, it has a two-part hook in an interesting premise and being led by a roster of well-known comic personalities.  Many recent titles have gotten by mostly, if not entirely, on the comedy chops of its stars (from Ferrell to McCarthy and so on), and the structure of the films themselves are often quite flimsy beyond the basic premise.  Here, it's surprisingly just about the opposite.  Ferrell and Poehler may be disappointing and/or sidelined, but the script serves up good old fashioned slapstick comedy that picks up the slack.  It's both goofier and more straightforward than its contemporaries, which takes some time to adjust to.  However, it does a great job of being consistently funny, in both the little moments (Ferrell and Poehler's suburban parent banter) and the big scenes (including some great setups in the underground casino like Ferrell's attempt to intimidate a cheater gone too far, and an impromptu fight club).  The script can seem a bit clunky sometimes, but I think that's largely part of it's back-to-the-basics approach, eschewing the modern style of being (or trying to be) coy, meta and/or quirky.  The House also does a good job at making you feel the feels it wants you to, whether desperation early on in realizing Alex's college career is in jeopardy, or - most effectively - a great sense of joy and fun in the casino.

***

The House is one of those films where I strongly disagree with the critics.  The film has an abysmal 18% aggregate score on Rotten Tomatoes, which likely had a big effect on its miserable $9 million opening weekend.  This film deserved a much better reception.  Although I have yet to read through those reviews yet, I would bet (seems appropriate for this film) that they simply were expecting a movie in the same style as other big contemporary comedy titles.  To be fair, partly it could be Ferrell's somewhat lackluster performance, too.  I felt jarred by the direction and tone of the film at first, too, but if you make the effort to go with its flow, you'll be richly rewarded.  Another reason for the poor reviews might be the result of critics watching it by themselves.  Most comedies are best seen with friends who enjoy the same stars and type of humor, and this movie might be more dependent on such a viewing setting than others.  So do yourself a favor and grab a friend or four and check this one out in the theater!




By Source, Fair use, https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?curid=53213479