Avengers: Endgame

Score:  A+

Directed by Anthony and Joe Russo

Starring Robert Downey, Jr., Chris Evans, Chris Hemsworth, Scarlet Johansson, Josh Brolin, et. Al.

Running time: 181 minutes

Rated PG-13

Long Story Short:. The Marvel Cinematic Universe (MCU) concludes an 11-year, 22-film, 3 “phase” adventure with Avengers: Endgame.  Some might think its three-hour run time and huge cast of characters too big a barrier for the non-MCU fan to enjoy, but with good pacing, humor and a plethora of strong performances, it’s fun for all.  For my fellow MCU nerds, Endgame is nirvana, a highly entertaining and moving end to the franchise as we’ve known it thus far.  Bravo!

**SPOILER WARNING! There’s no way to write anything interesting about this movie without including enormous spoilers, so please read on only if/when you’ve already seen it or otherwise don’t mind!**

Following immediately on Infinity War, the effects of villainous Thanos’s victory (the “snapture” - after collecting the six infinity stones, he wiped out half of all life in the universe with a snap of his fingers) reverberate through the universe.  Even when a new hero, the powerful Captain Marvel, unites with the remaining Avengers, they are helpless to reverse the calamity.  That is, until the literal smallest hero, missing for five years, reappears.  His miracle is the spark that gives hope to the heroes  that their failure may not be so permanent after all.  Still, the odds are long, and Earth’s mightiest defenders will be pushed to the absolute limit before all is said and done.

Before getting to the MCU-specific elements of Endgame, it’s worth noting that despite a three-hour long running time, the film flows quite smoothly.  The movie is more or less divided into three sections.  The first is somber but stylish, but before too long both a sense of hope and of humor begin to emerge as it transitions to the middle.  In a long movie this is a danger zone, but its quirky and zippy time travel scenes effectively inject more energy rather than take any away.  Avoiding another common pitfall, there is little build up to the climax; it’s just suddenly there and spirals in scope with increasing excitement.  Finally, we get just a few minutes at the end to send off our favorite heroes with appropriate respect.  For MCU fans, it all adds up to a whirlwind, losing track of time completely; I suspect that non-MCU fans will still find the running time well balanced and well beyond blockbuster standards.

How do you begin what is supposed to be one of the most epic films in decades?  The MCU subverts expectations, eschewing Infinity War’s thrilling opening and instead showing an average day in Hawkeye’s quiet country life - average, that is, until the snapture upends it without a whisper, sending chills down the spine.  The film respectfully takes the time to show a sample of the effects of the snapture in this first section, from dilapidated cities to monuments to the disappeared to group therapy.  Of course, we also only have half the heroes to follow, a clever byproduct allowing the film to focus on the originals: Tony Stark, Steve Rogers, Black Widow, and a few others.  Before long, others add a light-hearted comic element as possible solutions stir: Ant-Man, the unexpected, optimistic catalyst; a bizarre, chill Hulk/Banner hybrid; and most uproariously, fat Thor Lebowski.

What is the solution?  The film early on took the heroes to confront Thanos directly, despairingly to no avail.  So they go the time travel route, which ends up a brilliant choice in my opinion, for three reasons.  First, the present time has literally no options available; second, it allows the Avengers to humorously (and at times poignantly) revisit their own past adventures; and third, it gives the film freedom to accomplish a few other crucial things through the vagaries of time travel.  Those who want air-tight logic will be disappointed, and these things often bother me, too.  Ultimately, though, it worked for me just fine.  I think mainly that’s because the trip down memory lane is so well fused with the urgent, specific needs of going there.  Thor gets a crucial, personal moment, while Nebula’s unfortunate timing brings Thanos back into the mix.  Stark and Rogers’ trip to NY, then back to 1970, is more nostalgia-tinged, but it also gives the opportunity to wrap up their impressive backstories.  It does all pass almost like a dream, and I for one got the restless feeling that it was all too easy.  That is, until...

... what is perhaps the most impressive concluding battle scene I’ve witnessed!  Thanos, the Avengers’ most formidable foe, doesn’t just allow for a neat happily-ever-after.  Round one is a jarring three- (Iron Man, Cap, Thor) -on-one slugfest that had me gripping the seat of my chair.  Just as it seems Thanos will once again prove the inevitable victor, though, Sam/Falcon whispers “on your left” to Cap.  As another shiver ran through me, the un-snaptured heroes return to reinforce the beleaguered three, commencing a jaw-droppingly huge battle.  Of course, CGI stunts abound in what follows, but there remains a clear focus on the individuals in the fight and their specific goal (once again, those damned stones).  The tension remains high - despite reinforcement, good is still fighting an uphill battle.  Even with a field full of worthy warriors, though, it’s both special and bittersweet when the one who started it all is also the one to end it with his sacrifice.

It’s no secret that Endgame was intended as the final film for the Avengers to this point; more specifically, a conclusion for the Big Three and the infinity stones overarching narrative.  It also has callbacks to earlier films sprinkled throughout - beyond the overt time travel to several of them - that are both cleverly done and also move them forward.  These range from funny ones like Cap ending up in an elevator full of Hydra agents again (from his second solo film) to some of the most powerful ones such as Cap’s becoming “worthy” and wielding Thor’s hammer in the nick of time, and Stark’s final, triumphant proclamation of “I am Iron Man.”  This is where the film is most catered to the MCU devotees, and for us, they’re golden.

Endgame leaves its three main heroes (we’ll talk about the others another time) in just the right ways.  Thor, in fact, may not be done with the MCU at all, but rather joining up with his newfound Guardians buddies.  Even if he doesn’t continue on, though, Endgame completes his evolution to a new kind of hero, not the boring, traditional one he started as.  He’s, well, weird (maybe not the strongest Avenger, but perhaps the silliest?), and has accepted that; and prone to fairly un-herolike moodiness.  Steve Rogers/Cap gets the fairy tale ending, but in a cool new way.  Thawed from the 40s, he was never truly at home in the modern world, though of course he did his duty in defending humanity.  One final time trip both ties up the stones loose ends, and allows Rogers to live the life he was meant to, touchingly symbolized by Steve’s dance and kiss with Peggy in the last frame.  Finally there’s the biggest of them all, Tony Stark/Iron Man.  His ending is really in two parts:  the family he’s built in the five years following the snapture, and his defeat of Thanos for good.  Tony was the least natural hero in the beginning, and his sacrifice completed his long journey.

***

As you can probably tell, Endgame meant more to me than any other movie I’ve seen for years.  As the culmination of an 11-year journey, how could it not have?  It’s most important to me that I was personally happy beyond expectations with how it turned out, but it’s also been fun to see how the rest of the world has embraced it.  In addition to near-unanimous critical approval (94% on RT), it completely obliterated opening weekend records at the box office and it’s all but guaranteed to become the top global movie and second domestic (to Star Wars) all time.  The MCU has clearly been the defining cinematic experience of the last decade, churning out an average of two high entertainment (but also high quality) films each year.  I plan to write another blog post this summer, though the MCU will surely continue on, in a hopefully interesting new direction.  I would say it was worth the wait, but the adventure has been fun each step of the way, and Endgame merely provided an equally fulfilling conclusion.  Excelsior!

*By Source, Fair use, https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?curid=59301815

**PS: Writing this on an iPad was incredibly frustrating.  Get your act together, Google/Apple!!!

Shazam!

Score:  C+

Directed by David F. Sandberg
Starring Zachary Levi, Asher Angel, Jack Dylan Grazer, Mark Strong
Running time: 132 minutes
Rated PG-13

Long Story Short:  Shazam! is DC Film's latest effort to pivot to lighter superhero adventures.  While Levi's hijinks as a teen in an adult superhero body are enjoyable, there's just not enough going on around that to keep it interesting.  Along with the weak acting of the younger leads, there's little to entice the regular superhero fan, instead relying on typical genre fireworks to capture its younger, family-oriented audience.  If that's not you, just wait for the real show, Avengers Endgame.


Billy Batson (Angel), a teenage foster kid, is unable to adjust to his new families, continually searching for the mother he remembers as a young child.  His newest home, where he is joined by five new siblings, seems like more of the same, although Freddy (Glazer) does his best to help him fit in.  When Freddy is attacked by bullies at school, Billy intervenes and ends up fleeing - but suddenly finds himself in a whole new world.  He meets a wizard there who searches for a champion to take on his powers.  Billy is transformed into an adult superhero (Levi) with powers, and when he returns home he giddily shares the news with Freddy.  However, Billy and Freddy are not the only ones who know the source of Shazam's powers - and others have less innocent intentions for them.

Shazam! has a fairly large cast and some familiar faces, with mixed results.  Zachary Levi, best known as TV's Chuck, is a lot of fun as the adult superhero version of teenaged Billy.  Similar to the stars of the Jumanji reboot, Levi clearly has a blast literally acting like a kid, and his style is even more exaggerated than that film.  All of his moods are highlighted in neon - typically glee in testing his powers, but at times fear, annoyance and others.  Still, the film is at its best with Levi on the screen.  The young actors struggle, ranging from mediocre to poor.  Asher Angel in particular comes off as practically a novice, overacting at every turn and rarely seeming natural.  Grazer does a better job as Billy's disabled superhero fanatic of a brother, but he also often tries too hard, perhaps a bit competitive with his costar.  The other siblings have bit roles, with Faithe Herman by far the most charming of the group.  Mark Strong is the villain, a role he's well acquainted with, but he is either phoning it in or just hamming it up too much.  Djimon Hounsou is a waste of talent for such a small part as the wizard, but he at least plays it up more effectively than Strong.

Shazam! is a reasonably entertaining superhero film targeted at a younger audience, but mediocre execution and some bizarre narrative choices hold it back.  The film starts with a solid premise with its teenage lead acquiring superpowers not directly, but by actually inhabiting a different, adult body.  Jumanji demonstrated the potential in this, particularly for humor, and the film is most fun when Billy is exploring his new powers, using them how you might expect a young person to.  Unfortunately, there's only a modest amount of this, and the surrounding elements are not particularly interesting.  Of course there's the fantasy part, including another dimension (essentially a large, dark hall) and the bad guy and his plans.  Pretty typical stuff, perhaps cornier than usual - with an occasional wink - but also with a few scenes more violent than expected, as when Strong's character attacks his tormenting father.  The film really prefers to focus on Billy's normal life as a teenage foster kid.  Unfortunately, as already mentioned the young actors just aren't up to snuff.  There are some potentially interesting themes to be explored, particularly the sociology of the foster home, but it's oversimplified and blurred with more typical coming-of-age elements.  Also - spoilers! - for some reason they let Billy finally find his mom... only to find out that she intentionally left him, and doesn't want him in her life even now.  Obviously, this is something that (tragically) happens in real life, but was entirely unnecessary for the story and inappropriate to the tone and audience.  Finally, the action is fine, but if you watch action movies, you've seen it all before, and done better.

***

Shazam! is yet more proof that DC is to Marvel as DreamWorks is to Pixar.  Sure, it's fun at a certain level, but in a generic, forgettable way - without the signature style and level of quality of Marvel (or Pixar).  I'm rather stunned that it has a 90% rating on Rotten Tomatoes.  I suspect either critics are just so desperate for something positive out of DC, and/or they are so sick of the genre that they are automatically attracted to something that even clumsily satirizes the genre.  If you have young kids or teenagers, this is a fine choice for a family outing.  But I hope that DC begins putting more effort into their films, going beyond an interesting premise and a Marvel-imitating lighter tone.  Outside of the family audience, if you haven't seen this yet, just wait another few weeks for the must-see event: Avengers Endgame.




By Warner Bros. - Warner Bros., Fair use, https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?curid=60344684

Captain Marvel

Score:  C+

Directed by Anna Boden and Ryan Fleck
Starring Brie Larson, Samuel L. Jackson, Ben Mendelssohn, Jude Law
Running time: 124 minutes
Rated PG-13

Long Story Short:  Captain Marvel introduces a major new superhero into the well-populated MCU, just in time for the concluding Avengers chapter.  Larson is a fine choice in a role that seems Marvel's answer to Wonder Woman, but unfortunately the character's development is stunted by its having to compete with an overly intricate alien plot and generous helpings of action.  It ends up failing both the MCU's overall story and its efforts to develop a more diverse family.  Still, it is pretty good fun and this is my perspective: give it a try for yourself.


A young alien woman on a planet far, far away is having bad dreams.  A powerful new member of a battle squad, Vers (Larson) is mentored by her commander Yon-Rogg (Law), who urges her to improve her focus in order to master her powers.  During a mission to rescue a fellow operative, the squad is ambushed by a team of shapeshifting aliens called Skrull.  Vers is captured, and taken along with the Skrulls to their next destination, backwater planet C-53 (also known as Earth, circa 1995).  The place is strangely familiar to Vers, who, with the help of a local security force known as SHIELD, tries desperately to round up the camouflaged Skrull.  Before long, though, Vers realizes that it's not just the Skrull whose appearances are deceiving.

Captain Marvel, like its MCU kin, boasts an impressive cast including both familiar characters as well as new stars in new roles.  Brie Larson is great as the lead, Vers aka Captain Marvel.  While Larson's talent is proven, having won an Oscar in 2015, she's also relatively unknown; I've only seen her in a handful of small roles myself.  This lack of a preconceived notion of how she'd play the character, the final and one of the most important in the MCU, is good.  The thing is, even after seeing the film, it's still a bit hard to define how she plays the character, due to the story (more on this later).  What I can say is that Larson has a great, assured presence - in that she is not pushing too hard to squeeze herself into the immense MCU.  She has a nice swagger and set of distinct physical mannerisms (wonderful eyebrows!) that give her a place right alongside the Tony Starks and Thors of the world.  I only wish we had gotten to see even more.  Samuel L. Jackson is fun, and has great chemistry with Larson as essentially the sidekick here.  However, for those familiar with the MCU, he is joltingly different, too - this younger version is far more gregarious, replacing gruff sidelong glances with cooing over kitties.  I wasn't ready for that - but it may grow on me later on rewatch.  Ben Mendelssohn is the villain as the leader of the Skrulls - he's a tremendous actor, but I'm afraid his talents are somewhat wasted.  In a smaller part, Jude Law as Vers's mentor comes out better.

**Significant spoilers ahead!! Sorry, but I couldn't provide my full thoughts without doing so**

Captain Marvel plays several specific roles underneath its ostensible status as yet another superhero movie - and its level of success depends on why you're seeing it.  What the hell does that mean, you ask?  See the next paragraph.  First, I'll try to evaluate it on its own terms.  When you do that, what you'll find is a pretty typical superhero adventure, one that relies on the early naivete of its main character (and audience) before making sense of it all with a major twist at the end.  It's a familiar tactic, and necessary here in slowly unveiling Vers's human origins.  It also provides a great template for really digging into a character's history.  Unfortunately, the filmmakers are seduced by action - particularly in the crucial first and last sections - and so for all the latent focus on character, it gets reduced down to one scene in which Carol DanVERS receives her powers.  Even the twist with the aliens, transforming the Skrulls from vile, shapeshifting spies to persecuted refugees, simply takes up far too much time (yet also not enough to be done properly).  At a more granular, but important, level, the script is just OK - not nearly as sharp as most in the MCU, the dialogue often defaulting to more generic fare both in humor and Drama.  The pacing is good, though, at right around two hours and there are plenty of the usual blockbuster thrills.  Still, the main thing holding it back is the incomplete exploration of Vers, and this is where the other aspects of the film come in.

For us MCU fan(atics), this is the penultimate film of the franchise as we know it, with Avengers 4 - coming in less than two months - promising a conclusion of some kind.  Captain Marvel the character likely plays a large role in it, yet audiences are only being introduced to her now.  Second, and applicable to a wider audience, is Captain Marvel's presentation of a major female superhero, with all its inevitable comparisons to Wonder Woman.  While the details of Captain Marvel's origins are interesting, the more important role for Captain Marvel in the broader MCU was to show us who she is as a character, her raison d'etre - something that Stark, Rogers and company had the advantage of multiple films to figure out, but Marvel had to cram into one film here.  This was unfortunately crowded out by the convoluted story and obligatory action.  The MCU has had a near perfect record in choosing just the right way to tell different kinds of stories, but it failed here by going too broad.  You can make a similar criticism of the film's handling of the gendered aspect of its new hero.   Having neglected a fuller development for Vers, we get a rushed montage of her struggling and failing, yet keeping on trying, as a replacement that feels slightly pandering.  Wonder Woman, by comparison, works on its character's growth steadily and clearly (though not heavy-handedly) throughout the film.  For all the "emotion" Yon-Rogg criticizes her for, there's little to support it.

***

As you can probably tell, I find Captain Marvel to be quite the loaded film, and probably didn't realize how much until afterward.  I should also say that I look forward to seeing this again in theaters, if only to see how my initial reactions hold up.  The process of writing this review if anything deepened my disappointment in the implications of the film, if not its more explicit qualities (or lack thereof).  Brie Larson did a commendable job, particularly considering all the challenges, but it's a shame that her character is still such a question mark heading into Avengers 4.  And while it's great to see the MCU continue to "diversify" (embarrassingly belated, at that), this is far less successful than Black Panther on that front.  If you haven't yet seen Captain Marvel, I would still recommend that you go see it, as I feel a higher-than-usual likelihood that individual reactions will vary.  Here's hoping for a brighter follow-up for Captain Marvel after a bit of a rough start!




By Source, Fair use, https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?curid=56660636

Fighting With My Family

Score:  A-

Directed by Stephen Merchant
Starring Florence Pugh, Jack Lowden, Vince Vaughn
Running time: 108 minutes
Rated PG-13

Long Story Short:  Fighting With My Family is a sports drama based on the true story of a family of wrestlers in England.  Led by the creative mind of funnyman Stephen Merchant, the cast, particularly lead Florence Pugh, creates a genuine family you would go to the mat for.  Don't worry if you're neither a wrestling nor a sports film fan - this is just a really well done, entertaining drama, period.  Recommended for all.


In Norwich, England, body slams are the favored gesture of affection for one family of four.  Parents Patrick (Frost) and Julia (Headey) Knight, having emerged from a rough background involving years of jail time, are enthusiastic community wrestling leaders, and actively encourage their children to join them.  While son Zak (Lowden) jumps into the ring from an early age, Saraya (Pugh) is more skeptical, starting much later.  The family dream is to join the professional wrestling league, the WWE, for fame and fortune, and Zak and Saraya finally get to try out as young adults.  Only one gets the opportunity to continue pursuing this dream, though, leading to a hopeful yet bittersweet split in the family.  While those left behind continue to struggle to make ends meet, the chosen one confronts their own ultimate challenge in the most difficult test yet.

Fighting With My Family is anchored by a strong family core, plus a surprising supporting role.  Florence Pugh, an up-and-coming British star whom I had not seen before, plays the lead as Saraya (or Paige, her wrestling name).  She does excellent work, particularly once she's on her own trying to make the WWE.  The quiet younger sister in a family of big wrestling personalities, Pugh shows her character's impressive physical and mental comfort with the sport.  Yet the film emphasizes just how difficult the process is, and Paige is by no means the favorite: she's both physically small and psychologically vulnerable due to both her isolation and the ruthless nature of the competition.  She pulls you in close with her relatable failures - and her reactions to them.  And her connections to her family, particularly her brother, Zak, are genuine and warm.  The brother is also an impressive character, as played by Jack Lowden.  More confident in his role in the family, he is tested by even more trying circumstances left behind at home, and his bitterness and despair - and later, his hope - are palpable.  Rounding out the family are the parents, played by Nick Frost and Lena Headey.  They get showier roles in support, making them a blast to watch, particularly Frost, but the deep love they have for their children is also touching in quieter scenes.  The last notable part is Vince Vaughn's WWE trainer Hutch Morgan.  I wouldn't have thought him capable of real sincerity in a part like this but he surprised me, both berating and encouraging Saraya/Paige in a crucial role in the film.

Fighting With My Family is one of the best sports films I've seen in years, thanks largely to the unorthodox sport and story and its focus on family drama.  The film comes from the British comedic mind of Stephen Merchant (frequent collaborator of Ricky Gervais), who wrote, directed, and produced.  Thus there's plenty of good humor sprinkled throughout, but the tone is really more a standard drama.  It's based on a true story, after all, and while I can't confirm its accuracy, it makes for a wild and intriguing, yet also affecting adventure.  The first part of the film does a great job capturing the sense of place, in a rougher, English neighborhood, while keeping the narrative going at all times.  The ragtag group of kids who train with the family are fun, including even a blind boy (apparently part of the true story), as they bounce along in a broken down van.  The cast does such a great job of inhabiting this family of wrestlers, highlighted by a hilarious dinner scene with the mortified, upperclass parents of Zak's girlfriend.  Later, as the story's tension rises, release occurs through quieter scenes between Saraya and Zak, or Saraya and her parents.  The brighter, Florida-set WWE training scenes offer a nice change of tempo, while still maintaining the overall tone.  You can feel the sweat dripping in the gym scenes, and easy cliches are chucked aside, particularly in Saraya's female colleagues, former models and dancers who have considerable depth and toughness.  Rather than winning games, the challenge here is two-fold: to survive the intense physical conditioning, and then put forth the most charismatic face possible for the crowd to keep them happy (and the wrestlers employed).  There are no surprises in the ending, but the joys and struggles of the journey are more rewarding than the final, crowning moment itself.

***

Fighting With My Family is one of those pleasant surprises I hope to run into each year at the theater. I had never even heard of it until I saw its impressive 92% score on Rotten Tomatoes; given its unique premise and helming by the funny Merchant, I gave it a try.  Typically I'm not a sports movie fan (I much prefer the real thing), and I'm even less interested in wrestling - but this is more a warm, funny drama that happens to deal with wrestling (admittedly, an intriguing sideshow).  My biggest bone to pick with this movie is in its marketing, which features Dwayne "The Rock" Johnson heavily.  He has approximately five minutes of screen time - his presence is a good one, certainly, but basically a cameo.  But never mind that: the actors and characters that are featured are great, and the story is Rock solid, entertaining and resonant.  Appropriate for a broad audience, I highly recommend it.




By Source, Fair use, https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?curid=59374165

2018 Cinema & Stadium Film Year-in-Review

2018 Cinema & Stadium Film Year-in-Review

I am always excited for this annual opportunity to look back at the previous calendar year in film.  Writing this post makes me experience these movies again - not just by looking back at my review from the first time around, but trying to call back the way I felt when I saw them.  The passage of time often results in surprises in what stands out in my memory, and I usually have at least a small shift in my overall opinion.  I smashed my personal record for movies seen in the theater this year, so there will be a lot to remember.  Glancing at the list, it looks like it was another strong year overall - as usual, most of what I saw was in either the action/adventure or drama genres, although I saw more comedies this year than last.

As a reminder, I count only films that were released in theaters near me (i.e., rural area) in 2018 so you'll find some films here that were in last year's Oscars.  The format of my year-in-review is the same as always, celebrating the good, the bad, and everything in between:

• Top 10 films of the year
• Most underrated/overrated films
• Most surprising/disappointing films
• Worst film of the year
• Second chance: films I saw on Netflix
• List of other films I saw and reviewed

Please do also check out my Oscar-style awards for 2018 post here, and all of the films listed below are linked so you can jump to my full reviews if/when you're interested.  Enjoy!

Top 10 Films of 2018

10 (tie).  The Post (Directed by Steven Spielberg; starring Meryl Streep, Tom Hanks, Bob Odenkirk)

The Post's trio of Spielberg-Streep-Hanks is a movie lover's dream, and it is indeed a great one, even if it doesn't quite meet my (very) lofty expectations.  This is the story of the Post's decision whether to publish the classified Pentagon Papers, containing explosive revelations on the Vietnam War.  The paper fights a classic underdog battle, and wisely focuses not on Hanks's grizzled, confrontational editor but on Streep's underestimated owner.  She is the film's heart and soul, creating a vivid, complex character with both courage and insecurities.  The Post doesn't dig as deep or hit as hard as its cousin, Spotlight, but it's still an entertaining and important film.

10 (tie).  Widows (Directed by Steve McQueen; starring Viola Davis, Elizabeth Debicki, Cynthia Erivo, Michelle Rodriguez)

With all due respect to the fun-as-hell Ocean's franchise, this is about as good a heist film as I've ever seen.  Largely, that's because the heist aspect is essentially a vehicle for fascinating explorations of women bursting out of their husbands' shadows and bleak but illuminating political machinations.  Viola Davis leads the charge, devastated by her husband's sudden death but immediately forced to fight for survival.  She soon rounds up her fellow widows, mutually suspicious but capable of more than they imagine.  Meanwhile, Farrell haunts as a dynasty heir in an unforgettable city tracking shot while his disadvantaged rivals turn ruthless.  Add the heist itself, and it truly hits the jackpot.

9.  Vice (Directed by Adam McKay; starring Christian Bale, Amy Adams, Steve Carell)

I'm not afraid to confront the obvious political stigma it bears in my choice: regardless of all that, it's a cleverly constructed story fronted by outstanding performances.  Christian Bale is the latest in a line of top-flight actors (Oyelowo, Oldman, etc.) to slip into a historical icon's skin and soul; physical transformation and mannerisms amazing, subtle inner life just as good.  Adams and Carell as wife Lynne and Rumsfeld, respectively, are also to be praised as they show the nuanced, complex ways their relationships shaped Dick.  It's well-written, a thorough but well-paced journey to the crucial 9/11 pivot point, after which it allows itself a full-throated condemnation.

8.  Game Night (Directed by John Francis Daley; starring Jason Bateman, Rachel McAdams, Kyle Chandler)

One of the funniest comedies I've seen in years, I'm kicking myself that I didn't see this in the theater. Just about everything in it is unexpected, from an odd assortment of actors to a tone that somehow careens from goofy to straight to dark without feeling out of place.  Bateman as usual is a superb comic lead, and helps the less humor-centric players like McAdams and Chandler hit their stride; though it's little-known Jesse Plemons who is the so-bizarre-he's-hilarious scene stealer.  It has some genuine spooks, but it knows just how to play the horror and other genre bits for maximum humor.  Very well-written and never predictable, this Game Night is worthy of an encore.

7.  Roma (Directed by Alfonso Cuaron; starring Yalitza Aparicio, Marina de Tavira)

I'm usually not on the lookout for deliberately-paced foreign language films, but this Netflix original from one of Hollywood's best directors is entertaining and moving to go with its artsiness.  Based on Cuaron's childhood, the focus is the family's maid who is played brilliantly by the acting novice Aparicio.  Filmed in black and white, it really does feel like a memory playing out.  The first half sets the stage, most often simply following quiet Cleo around the home as she washes the floors or looks after the children.  Well done, but frankly a bit slow with little narrative so breaking it into multiple viewings is recommended.  By the end, however, the investment pays off as the story picks up.

6.  First Man (Directed by Damien Chazelle; starring Ryan Gosling, Claire Foy, Kyle Chandler)

Much of this fascinating Neil Armstrong biopic is about its subject's inner, suppressed tempest, but it also thrills when it shows that man bring the chaos of space to heel - by the thinnest of margins.  Gosling, rejoining La La Land's Chazelle, is far more reserved yet focused this time.  First Man explores him - how personal trauma drove professional brilliance and landed back in the home again - more so than the moon landing itself.  While his colleagues become like family, the strain with his real one culminates in a wrenching pre-launch farewell.  And in several space scenes, you're placed right in the cramped, rattling pods, hanging on for dear life.  An adventure, inside and out.

5.  Mission Impossible: Fallout (Directed by Christopher McQuarrie; starring Tom Cruise, Henry Cavill, Rebecca Ferguson)

Typically, by the time an action franchise reaches its sixth film - and its star's 56th birthday - you don't expect much that is either new or better than what you've seen before.  Well, Cruise and Co. turned all that on its head with the latest Mission Impossible.  Previous entries have seen one death-defying practical stunt each; this one has at least three, and they're all jaw dropping.  Most impressive are the ludicrously long car- and motorcycle chase through Paris, and the helicopter finale.  There are also some great fight scenes, and the humor is even more a relief here to catch your breath.  Bonus intrigue for those who saw the previous one, but if you didn't catch this in the theater, you missed out.

4.  Can You Ever Forgive Me?  (Directed by Marielle Heller; starring Melissa McCarthy, Richard E. Grant)

This little biopic defies just about every rule in Hollywood in quietly becoming one of the best dramas of the year.  Melissa McCarthy, hilarious but also a tremendously talented (if underestimated) overall actor, delivers a brilliant performance.  Lee Israel, a failed writer who turns to literary forgery to get by - and also to give her peers the finger - is a peevish misanthrope.  Yet McCarthy is so devoted, and the screenplay helps give her such depth, that she is sympathetic nonetheless.  Grant's street scoundrel is a perfect foil and the story itself is fascinating: Lee's actions may be criminal, but there's plenty of shadiness to be found elsewhere, too.  See it at home when you can.

3.  Black Panther (Directed by Ryan Coogler; starring Chadwick Boseman, Michael B. Jordan, et. al.)

Among the first superhero films to court major awards buzz, Black Panther is not only a top-tier example of its genre but it also creates a rich fictional world that has plenty to say about our own.  At its center is the fantasy country of Wakanda, a striking inverse of historical pattern: using powerful alien material, it has become by far the most advanced culture in the world, but hides and isolates itself.  The production design is dazzling and immersive, from gleaming cities and industry to vibrant fashion and customs.  Boseman quietly bears the weight of the world is on his shoulders: newly crowned, he confronts both his nation's tradition as well as a fierce and charismatic rival.  And the complex female roles steal the show on top of it all.  A landmark film in many ways.

2.  Molly's Game (Directed by Aaron Sorkin; starring Jessica Chastain, Idris Elba)

Aaron Sorkin's incredible writing finds a perfect muse in Jessica Chastain - whose acting is strong enough to shoulder the technical demands but also to give it a warm, beating heart.  Based on a true story, Molly's life as an Olympic skier turned underground poker manager is so full of complex, amazing detail that only Sorkin's vibrant, rapid-fire yet comprehensible writing could capture it.  Chastain is a chameleon on screen, but playing a bold, determined heroine is her sweet spot and she just cranks this part out of the park.  Elba and Costner provide some emotional fireworks, but it's Chastain who does the heavy lifting, often without even speaking - a true trick from Sorkin.  From its incredibly entertaining and moving story to the crackling writing to Chastain, you can't miss it.

1.  Avengers: Infinity War (Directed by Anthony and Joe Russo; starring Robert Downey, Jr., Chris Hemsworth, Josh Brolin, et. al.)

In case you hadn't noticed, I'm a bit of a fan of the Marvel superhero movies.  It's not everyone's thing and frankly, even most people who do enjoy these films wouldn't put Infinity War at the top of their list for 2018.  But damn it, I've enjoyed the MCU ever since Iron Man back in 2008 and have only enjoyed and respected it more since then.  For fans like me, Infinity War is an immensely gratifying culmination of a ten-year saga, filled with both exhilarating joy and gripping suspense.  Quite often, my top movie of the year is one I consider to have had a high degree of difficulty in achieving any kind of success, let alone mastery.  Infinity War most definitely qualifies: not only does it have an insane number of characters to juggle (well over 30 make at least an appearance), but it's only part one of two of a saga finale without peer (in its overall scope) in film history.  It handles these challenges gracefully, thanks to the dynamic creative duo of Anthony and Joe Russo (who also helmed MCU standouts Captain America: Winter Soldier and CA: Civil War).  There's plenty of exposition and character meetings, which typically are murder for a film's pacing (not least one that's 2.5 hours) - so they amp up the humor and energy as high as possible, made possible by the extraordinary casting and chemistry among the heroes built up over the years.  On top of this rock solid frame is laid plentiful action, which is spread out, varied and then escalated appropriately so that by the end rather than exhausted, you are charged for the conclusion - a cliffhanger that leaves you hanging in all (and the best possible) ways.

Do I recommend this to simply anyone?  No.  But for those of us who have followed and enjoyed the Marvel superhero films of the past decade, there was simply no greater experience to be had at the movie theater in 2018.

Honorable mentions:  The Old Man & the Gun; BlackKklansman; Tag; Solo: A Star Wars Story


Miscellaneous Awards:

Most Overrated Film of the Year:  Bohemian Rhapsody (runner-up: Deadpool 2)
I enjoyed the first Deadpool a lot: its irreverent tone, even how it sends up my favorite genre.  But this sequel makes the whole vibe already feel tired.  There's just more of everything, but nothing is better (although the jump scene with X-Force was hilarious).  There may still be life in this mini-franchise, but they need to pull back a lot and not just throw everything at the wall.
Bohemian Rhapsody actually does not have a great Rotten Tomatoes score, at 61%.  But it has a Best Picture nomination at the Oscars and won at the Golden Globes.  How either of these things happened, I have no idea.  Yes, Malek is good, and some of the show scenes are well done.  But it's such a cliched rock biopic movie, and the band's history is exaggerated if not entirely altered whenever needed to fit the desired narrative arc.  It's not bad, but not at all worthy of the awards attention it's received.

Most Underrated Film of the Year:  Solo: A Star Wars Story (runner-up: Tag)
Critics weren't game for Tag, giving it just a 56%; though it opened to a soft $15 million, word-of-mouth got it to a respectable $56 million total.  This is not the smartest comedy in the world.  But once you get past that, the sheer nuttiness of the premise and willingness of the cast sweeps you up.  Give this a try, and before long you'll be looking to tag others to its charms.
Solo got a decent critical reception, at 70%, but audiences abandoned it: after the previous three SW films broke box office records, this one got a "paltry" $213 million.  Maybe it was due to coming so soon after Episode VIII - which itself was controversial among the diehards.  Personally, I enjoyed this one more than the other offshoot film, Rogue One.  Ehrenreich makes a perfectly good Han, and its gritty, Indiana Jones-like vibe is a welcome change up.  Give it a chance.

Most Disappointing Film of the Year:  A Wrinkle in Time (runner-up: Jurassic World 2)
I probably shouldn't be surprised (and therefore, disappointed) that Jurassic World 2 wasn't very good.  The series "reboot" in 2015 was very entertaining but also a broad, dumbed-down product that happened to be executed quite well.  Sure, there are some exciting scenes here, but we're now quite far from the masterful original.  Good for the (older) kiddies, otherwise skip.
I read the classic children's book years ago in school, so I re-read it right before it came to theaters.  I'm glad I did read it again, because it's a great book, but the film is a flimsy adaptation, with shockingly little genuine wonder or resonance.  Granted, it is a titanic challenge, and the story demands so much from the reader's imagination that one film couldn't hope to satisfy everyone.  My advice: just stick to the book.

Most Surprisingly Good Film of the Year:  Crazy Rich Asians (runner-up: Tomb Raider)
Movies based on video games likely have the worst reputation in Hollywood, and deservedly so.  But I just had a feeling about this one, and was glad that I tried it.  Oscar winner Alicia Vikander carries it, a sympathetic street urchin early and then quite a believable action star - less fighting, and more thrilling stunts that you can almost feel yourself.  Try it when you need solid, fun adventure.
Rom-com is only slightly ahead of horror for me in the genres I am likely to see (in other words - few and far between).  But with so much hype, and an intriguing premise, I decided to give it a try.  Not earth-shattering, but it's quite entertaining, and quietly revolutionary in some ways.  The leads are charismatic, and there are a number of good supporting players (particularly Awkwafina and Nico Santos).  A feel-good celebration, even for non-rom-com fans.

Worst Film of the Year:  The Spy Who Dumped Me (runner-up: Life of the Party)
Melissa McCarthy has several times lifted up poor material into decent films.  No such luck with this loser about a mom going back to college with her daughter (it has every single horrible cliche and bashes your skull in with them).  It's especially shocking to see this in the same year that she was so good in Can You Ever Forgive Me?  For the love of God, someone please find a half-decent comedy writer for Melissa!!!
The premise for this - the girlfriend (and her girlfriend) of a spy going on a deadly mission, featuring a talented lead duo - was too much to resist.  Rotten Tomatoes tried to warn me (I think it was around 35% when it came out; somehow it's now up to 49%?!?).  This movie starts bad, and if anything only gets worse.  The filmmakers should probably be put on suspension - awful writing and directing.  Kate McKinnon improvises like crazy - whether because they asked her to or she just dumped the script, who knows - but even she comes up flailing.  It's pretty obvious this is a date movie, but anyone who took their loved one to see this is probably now single.


Netflix Summary:

• BlackKklansman (A-):  Not sure why/how I didn't see this in theaters.  Based on an incredible true story of a black detective infiltrating the KKK - with his Jewish partner - it has good humor and unforced significance.  Highly recommended.
• Tully (B+):  Theron is great as a mom at - and beyond - her breaking point.  It effectively shows real pain and struggles, though I'm iffy on the twist at the end.
• Eighth Grade (B+):  Yet another coming-of-age story, this one distinguishes itself by the young actor's skill and almost painful realism.  Doesn't have a lot going for it otherwise, but decent.
• The Death of Stalin (B):  If you're a fan of a certain kind of satire, you'll love this.  I'm not, so while I respect some of the cleverness and acting, it got old for me pretty quickly.
• A Quiet Place (B):  I don't get the hype on this one.  It's fine, and Blunt is great, but it seems pretty standard sci-fi/horror fare to me.  Plus, the ending is kind of lame.
• Blockers (B-):  Solid premise, but the execution is mediocre.  It struggles to create consistent laughs, and goes overly crude at times while overly hesitant at others.
• Annihilation (B-):  I should probably just stop seeing this kind of weird sci-fi film.  I respect the tone and imagery, and it's quite spooky, but it's just too weird for me, especially Natalie Portman wrestle her alien doppelganger.

Other Films I Saw in Theaters in 2018 (click for full reviews):

• The Shape of Water (A-)
• Ant-Man and the Wasp (B+)
• Incredibles 2 (B+)
• Ready Player One (B+)
• Overlord (B+)
• Night School (B)
• Bad Times at the El Royale (B)
• Isle of Dogs (B)
• Ocean's 8 (B)
• Fantastic Beasts: Crimes of Grindelwald (B-)
• Aquaman (B-)
• Pacific Rim: Uprising (C+)
• The Predator (C)

I hope you enjoyed reading some or all of this year-in-review (and come back later if you're in need of movie night suggestions)!  I'm looking forward to some more great times at the theater in 2019 - I am counting down the days until two series finales in particular in Avengers: Endgame and Star Wars Episode IX.  I'm sure there will be plenty more worth seeing on the big screen, known hits and pleasant surprises alike.  Enjoy!!



* Image source:  https://www.imdb.com/title/tt4154756/mediaviewer/rm1947159040

2018 Cinema & Stadium Film Awards

2018 Cinema & Stadium Film Awards

While I generally like to write about whole movies, I also like to take the opportunity each year to recognize what I thought were the most outstanding individual accomplishments (plus, like many people, I like to share where I think the Oscars were right - and wrong).  As in previous years, there are two "rules" which make my awards a bit different from what you'll see at the Oscars:

1. Only films released widely in 2018 are eligible (this is getting murkier each year, so another way to put it: whichever year it came out in my theater is the year I'm sticking it, so certain films often have to "wait" a year), and 
2. Only films that I've actually seen are eligible.  

I'll note who the Academy Award nominees are for each category, too, and when there are differences it's often because of one or both of those rules.

Please also check out my companion post, where I count down my top 10 films of the year and dish out other "awards".  I hope you enjoy, and please feel free to let me know your own opinions!

Winners in bold
Runners-up underlined


Best Actress
Yalitza Aparicio (Roma)
*Jessica Chastain (Molly's Game)
Viola Davis (Widows)
Sally Hawkins (The Shape of Water)
Melissa McCarthy (Can You Ever Forgive Me?)
Meryl Streep (The Post)

2019 Oscar nominees not listed: Glenn Close (The Wife), Lady Gaga (A Star Is Born) - didn't see films; Olivia Colman (The Favourite) - film released in calendar 2019

This is possibly the best collection of performances I've seen from actresses in a single year; I must admit, I often simply don't go see the movies that showcase the best female performances.  Even after adding a sixth spot to recognize this, I left plenty of strong ones off the list, from those in physical, action roles (Alicia Vikander, Tomb Raider) to comedy (Constance Wu, Crazy Rich Asians).  I chose Jessica Chastain as my winner partly because she's one of my favorite actresses, and because the role offered such a variety of challenges.  But really, any of these performances are fully worthy of an Oscar win, and each one is so distinct.  That's why I don't have a runner-up - they're all winners.


Best Actor
*Christian Bale (Vice)
Tom Cruise (Mission Impossible: Fallout)
Ryan Gosling (First Man)
Rami Malek (Bohemian Rhapsody)
Robert Redford (The Old Man & the Gun)

2019 Oscar nominees not listed:  Bradley Cooper (A Star Is Born), Willem Dafoe (At Eternity's Gate) - didn't see the films; Viggo Mortensen (Green Book) - eligible but chose not to nominate

A very solid group of acting performances, even if they're overshadowed by the women this year.  While Cruise's is not a typical "Oscar" performance, I have to give him a nod for what is practically (in multiple senses) the ultimate action role.  Malek does a great job, though a bit overrated; meanwhile, Redford and particularly Gosling were snubbed by the Academy.  No one can touch Christian Bale this year, though, in what feels like a sequel to last year's award.  Like Oldman as Churchill, Bale's transformation - physical and interior - into his subject is just jaw-dropping.


Best Supporting Actress
Amy Adams (Vice)
Cynthia Erivo (Bad Times at the El Royale)
Claire Foy (First Man)
*Danai Gurira/Lupita Nyong'o/Letitia Wright (Black Panther)
Anne Hathaway (Ocean's 8)
Sissy Spacek (The Old Man & the Gun)

2019 Oscar nominees not listed:  Regina King (If Beale Street Could Talk) - didn't see the film; Emma Stone, Rachel Weisz (The Favourite) - film released in calendar 2019; Marina de Tavira (Roma) - eligible but chose not to nominate

I only have one overlapping nomination, but still feel that this year's roster is extremely strong (like the lead women, I gave an extra nod).  This category does have some intriguing comparisons; Hathaway and Spacek add mischievous spice to their films, while Adams and Foy are incredibly strong spouses of the male leads.  Erivo is a revelation, too.  While the Oscars would never bend their rules this way, I can do whatever I want, so I'm handing the win to Black Panther's amazing trio of women - without whom the film would be a shell of the triumph it is.


Best Supporting Actor
Josh Brolin (Avengers: Infinity War)
Steve Carell (Vice)
*Richard E. Grant (Can You Ever Forgive Me?)
Michael B. Jordan (Black Panther)
Jesse Plemons (Game Night)

2019 Oscar nominees not listed:  Sam Elliott (A Star Is Born) - didn't see the film; Mahershala Ali (Green Book), Adam Driver (BlackKklansman), Sam Rockwell (Vice) - eligible but chose not to nominate

This might be the most I've ever diverged from the parallel Oscar category in acting.  I totally agree on Richard E. Grant, in fact think that he should win, for his unique and inspired role in an otherwise badly overlooked film.  Ali and Driver were good, but to me, not quite good enough.  Instead, I'm giving the nod to two of the MCU's best villains to date.  Rockwell clearly benefits from recency bias as he won the award last year, but Carell's performance in the same film is superior.  Finally, Plemons' gonzo role in Game Night also deserves recognition.


Best Director
Ryan Coogler (Black Panther)
David Lowery (The Old Man & the Gun)
Steve McQueen (Widows)
*Anthony and Joe Russo (Avengers: Infinity War)
Aaron Sorkin (Molly's Game)

2019 Oscar nominees not listed:  Pawel Pawlikowski (Cold War) - didn't see the film; Yorgos Lanthimos (The Favourite) - film released in calendar 2019; Alfonso Cuaron (Roma), Spike Lee (BlackKklansman), Adam McKay (Vice) - eligible but chose not to nominate

This category is a little tricky for me to decide who is most worthy; usually, I look at degree of difficulty for the movie being successful, and a good balancing of the various elements (tone, pacing, performances, etc.).  Well, Infinity War definitely meets the criteria for degree of difficulty, so the guys in charge win for me.  I'd also like to note that both The Old Man & the Gun and Widows feel like they could have ended up badly if not for a strong director at the helm.


Best Screenplay
Liz Hannah, Josh Singer (The Post)
Nicole Holofcener, Jeff Whitty (Can You Ever Forgive Me?)
Adam McKay (Vice)
Mark Perez (Game Night)
*Aaron Sorkin (Molly's Game)

There are some absolutely brilliant contenders for writing this year.  Sorkin, one of the best writers out there, took his game to a whole new level so he takes the prize.  Can You Ever Forgive Me? edges the others because of its balance of humor and pathos, but the other three are all knockouts, too (in particular, Hollywood comedy writers: please take regular lessons from Perez.  PLEASE!!!)

Best Visual Effects
Ant-Man and the Wasp
Aquaman
*Avengers: Infinity War
Fantastic Beasts: Crimes of Grindelwald
Ready Player One



* By Source (WP:NFCC#4), Fair use, https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?curid=43704847

Roma

Score:  A-

Directed by Alfonso Cuaron
Starring Yalitza Aparicio and Marina de Tavira
Running time: 135 minutes
Rated R

Long Story Short:  Roma is an intensely personal, small-scale film for the director of such hits as Harry Potter (#3) and Gravity.  It focuses on a family based on Cuaron's own childhood, centered especially on the maid/nanny who is played beautifully by acting novice Aparicio.  The first half is rather slow though vivid in its portrait of the family, before increasing the narrative and emotional stakes in a powerful but still realistic second half.  Highly recommended.


Cleo Gutierrez (Aparicio) is a live-in maid and nanny to a Mexican family in the early 1970s.  Sofia (de Tavira) and her mother run the household as her husband flits in and out of the home.  It is the children, three boys and a girl, who Cleo knows and loves the best, rousing them from bed each morning, preparing meals, and gently breaking up their sibling squabbles.  Her peaceful but uneventful life swerves into turmoil, however, as she is courted by a young man, joins the family on a strained holiday getaway, and witnesses the violence of civil unrest.  Life is change; a strong soul, Cleo will both be changed by her world as well as exert her influence on those around her.

Roma has a small cast of native Mexican actors, led by a revelatory performance from a newcomer.  Yalitza Aparicio plays Cleo, the lead in the film who is in nearly every frame - and she had never acted before.  Regardless of her lack of experience, Aparicio does a phenomenal job as the quiet but dedicated and compassionate maid and nanny.  The naturalism of the film's style, and her role in particular, may have actually made the inexperience an advantage: much of her acting is literally doing work around the house, interacting with others in a caring yet minimalistic way.  But she also does outstanding work in the more dramatic, emotional moments, coming off just as believable (and heartbreakingly so).  Marina de Tavira, who is a professional actor, gets the main supporting role as the matriarch of the home, Sofia.  While the focus rarely strays from Cleo, Marina asserts herself in crucial moments, and her importance to the family - in a strange but lovely duet with Cleo - rises throughout.  Like any well-developed character, she illustrates both Sofia's vulnerabilities, as she feels increasingly isolated, as well as her strength, in pulling her family - and herself - through adversity.  The child actors do quite well, too: each distinctive, and very much wonderfully unpredictable creatures while not getting in the way, acting-wise, of the main players.

Roma is a warm, intimate film, full of lasting images and moments both of quiet contemplation and searing emotion.  The story is based on writer and director Alfonso Cuaron's own childhood growing up in Mexico, and particularly his fondness and respect for his family's own Cleo-like figure.  It is shot in black and white though with modern digital technology, producing the look and feel of a vivid memory.  The movie's first half is its most naturalistic, taking its time in showing the daily life of the family, though at the same time setting the narrative stage of the family's absent father and Cleo's full (limited) social circle.  The opening credits play over a shot of a single area of tiled garage, soapy water splashing as Cleo washes somewhere offscreen; it reminded me of the calm, beautiful start to The Revenant and its gorgeous, trickling winter stream.  This is good preparation for the somewhat meandering first half, which is highlighted by Cleo's relationships with the children, singing quietly to them in bed or lying in the sun together on the roof.  While it's all well done, this does start to drag as it takes over an hour of the two hour, fifteen minute run time.  The second half is where more of a narrative comes in, based mostly on Cleo's pregnancy and the departure of the father.  It sprinkles in historic events on the periphery, for context.  Thanks to Aparicio and de Tavira's fine performances, the heights - Cleo's selfless protection of the children on a beach - and depths - tragedy in chaotic circumstances - carry great weight.  Yet the film remains naturalistic, a memory, as the final scene shows Cleo silently carrying on - literally, carrying laundry to the roof - even after the all the momentous events of the past year we just witnessed.

***

Roma is a great film, and noteworthy in its production and distribution as well.  Roma was (is) distributed by Netflix, the massive streaming company's first Best Picture-nominated film.  Not only is this yet another signifier of the company's growing power and influence, but - more positively - it makes the work immediately available to millions of people around the world (as opposed to most Oscar prestige films which open in a handful of cities and only to the rest of the world much later, if at all).  Combine this availability with the fact that Roma is a foreign language film, and this represents an excellent opportunity to spread diverse, high-quality art widely.  I must also admit that for those of us with short attention spans, getting to see Roma at home is also an advantage so you can watch this deliberately-paced film in chunks (I highly recommend splitting it in two, with an "intermission").  I encourage you to stream this sometime soon, and if you don't have Netflix, get it for a month (and while you've got it, try Avengers: Infinity War for counterprogramming).



* By Source, Fair use, https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?curid=59422310