Review: ‘Thunder Force’ Can’t Be Saved From its Mediocrity

There’s always been something fun about superheroes, both the idea of abruptly gaining special abilities and becoming superior to everyone else and the idea of celebrating that specialness by putting on colorful spandex and running around saving people from evil. Despite this, the pure superhero comedy is comparatively rare. While we have shows and movies making fun of power fantasies, this can sometimes make them less thrilling, usually looping back to a straightforward approach in the end. Continue reading “Review: ‘Thunder Force’ Can’t Be Saved From its Mediocrity” →

| Image

Review: ‘Aquaman’ is a Hot, Wet Mess

I never had high hopes for Aquaman. The very first trailers revealed the movie to be the eye-rollingly corny mess it ended up being. Though their choice of Jason Momoa to play Arthur, the titular superhero, was a good one — he was certainly one of the best parts of the movie — in almost every other respect, the movie let its viewers down. It is an unfocused, unfunny, uninventive superhero flick, and it is not worth seeing in theaters (or possibly at all).

Despite the massive critical and box office success of Wonder Woman last year, DC did not seem to take to heart the idea that superhero movies should be more than just spectacle. As a consequence, Aquaman is two hours of fights and explosions (literally five discrete times a scene is interrupted by an explosion coming through a wall) with a trite “chosen one” storyline and a massive underwater war that ultimately don’t add up to an engaging plot to string the fight sequences together. One of the antagonists, Black Manta (Yahya Abdul-Mateen II), is laughably campy and completely irrelevant, and the other, Arthur’s half-brother King Orm (Patrick Wilson), is so under-developed that the emotional conflict that supposedly drives his every action seems completely unbelievable.

Jason Momoa and Patrick Wilson in Aquaman (2018)

In fact, that is one of the movie’s central sins: underdevelopment of both characters and plot. The movie seems to assume that the audience has some familiarity with Aquaman already, whether from 2017’s Justice League or perhaps just from the comics, and so Arthur, too, is already seemingly familiar with his Atlantean heritage and powers. Skipping out on an origin story for someone like Spider-Man, as in Spider-Man: Into the Spider-Verse, is understandable — we all know how that story goes. But when it’s omitted from the story of a less familiar superhero like Aquaman, you lose out on that incredible magic of discovery that can provide for a story that endears the hero to the audience while also developing his character. As it is, the only real personality Arthur has is the charisma Momoa brings to the role. He, along with characters like Mera (Amber Heard), Vulko (Willem Dafoe), and Atlanna (Nicole Kidman) — who was completely wasted on this movie — are criminally underdeveloped, and their relationships, too, are cheesy and forced.

The plot, meanwhile, goes much too big too fast. It tries to incorporate too many elements — King Orm’s war, Atlanna’s storyline, Black Manta’s quest for revenge, Arthur and Mera’s quest for the lost trident of Atlan, their romance, and the conflict between King Orm and Arthur, among others. As a result, each storyline is not given enough attention and all of them feel vague and inconsequential. The romance between Arthur and Mera is particularly egregious.

Related image

The movie’s not all bad. Its visuals are stunning at times, especially the scene where Arthur and Mera use flares to ward off the Trench with a red flare. The underwater combat is admittedly pretty sick, especially when big sea creatures are involved. And Momoa is charming and occasionally funny when the overall poor writing permits. They even managed to make him look cool in his silly green and gold outfit. But these elements are not enough to save the movie.

Ultimately, though this will undoubtedly be another box office hit for DC if the opening weekend numbers are anything to go by, it is another creative stumble. With Disney’s Marvel films still going strong and Sony’s recent successes with Spider-Man: Into the Spider-Verse and Venom, DC is still struggling to find a successful formula for superhero movies that are both spectacular visually and engaging narratively. And Aquaman is certainly not the solution. Better luck next time with Shazam, DC.

Score: 2/5

| Image

Review: Won’t You Be My Neighbor? Offers an Emotional Look at Fred Rogers

This film was seen at the 44th Seattle International Film Festival. The film is now in wide release in Seattle.

In 1968,“Mister Rogers’ Neighborhood” launched and ushered in one of the longest running kids programs with over 900 episodes across 31 seasons. The show was a profound take on child’s television for the time, offering low production values, but earnest messages that helped with early development. Behind it all was Fred Rogers, a Presbyterian  minister who saw how television of the time was negatively influencing younger audiences with sought to do something about it. 

For 33 years, Rogers created television that raised generations of kids to be the best version of themselves, and Morgan Neville’s (20 Feet from Stardom) latest documentary, Won’t You Be My Neighbor?, aims to tell the story of everyone’s favorite neighbor. Using a combination of interviews, archived footage, and animated segments, Neville is able to dive deep and provide an introspective into Roger’s life. Doing so, gets at the heart as to how important Rogers was not only to children, but also society at large.

As with most good documentaries, there’s a revelatory quality to them that enlightens you about a subject matter. In this case, you really get a sense of how influential Rogers was. Rogers effectively raised an entire generation of children with his show, but you would never know that as a kid who grew up with him. At a young age, you may have watched “Mister Roger’s Neighborhood” and kept the lessons you learned, but never know the context of Rogers himself or how he was presenting wholesome, progressive values in an era when it was radically uncommon. What this documentary does so well is shine light on Fred Rogers’ ability to encourage children to to understand empathy, to be loved, and to be the best version of them self all from a single television program and one man’s dedication to improving the well being of children around the nation.

From his kind hearted nature revealed by behind the scenes stories to how he saved government funding for PBS, Won’t You Be My Neighbor? thoughtfully lays out key moments in  Roger’s life and not only translates them to character moments for Rogers, but also attaches a sentiment to them. Each ‘section’ of the film deals with a certain theme ranging from love and acceptance to race and war, and with each, you add another dimension that builds to more wholistic image of who Rogers was as a person.

The doc is incredibly powerful at converting these themes into messages that echo into 2018. Even though the show started in 1968, there are stark parallels that are almost uncanny in resemblance to today. King Friday wanting to build a wall to prevent change, Nixon wanting to defund PBS for its counter opinions to the administration, and the state of decency within the public are all represented in the show and brought up in the doc to expose some inherent reality we experience today.

With each aforementioned ‘section’ of the film, you’ll find yourself holding back the tears as periodic moment converges on an emotionally rich touching point. These points often relate to Rogers’ character as we see how much a good man he really was and frequently tie into the relevant themes noted above. Since its often so diverse, one moment you’ll be crying at Roger accepting a gay man despite his religion and the next you’ll be tearing up when you hear college students profess their gratitude to him. It’s hard to believe the film can illicit tears at so many moments, but it earns them, as it conveys a broad array of emotions like grief, love, and anger in a very concise package.

But of course this is a documentary about Fred Rogers, and one of its stronger elements is illustration of the unsung hero that is Rogers. Using first hand experiences of people who knew Rogers, the doc gives audiences an image of a man that had an unrivaled passion for helping children understand and interpret their emotions, and it shines light on how Fred Rogers influenced generations of kids to be the best version of them selves. Being able to connect with children in ways others could not and using his platform as a vessel for positivity, progressive ideas, and social acceptance are the ways in which Rogers shaped his audience to be better people. As one of the most influential personalities on television, Neville accurately paints the positive impact he had on them and the legacy he left because of it. In many ways the documentary lets us experience our own emotions by observing the man who helped us understand them.

It maybe hard to draw with words, but the weaving of relevant themes, emotional moments, and ovation worthy depiction of Rogers all mix and mingle incredibly well within Won’t You Be My Neighbor?. Collectively, the film uses these elements to showcase a man that made us better people and makes us strive to be more empathetic human beings. Rogers may have touched us in ways we may not recognize, but we certainly carry his lessons with us, and in a world as bleak as this, it’s nice to know there’s always someone out there as good as Fred Rogers.

4.5/5 Stars

| Image

Review: The Moral Quandaries in the Uneven Heist Film American Animals

This film was seen at the 44th Seattle International Film Festival. The film is now in wide release in Seattle.

They say imitation is the sincerest form of flattery, but in the movie business, it can be a tricky beast. All great films are built off those that came before it, but at what point does imitation become problematic? Queue Bart Layton’s American Animals.  American Animals is an example of when a film’s cinematic language tries too hard to be like something else. The film utilizes a variety of techniques but in doing so, it creates an inconsistent film that doesn’t find itself until later on in the film when it creates a consistency with its stylings.

American Animals depicts the true to life story of Spencer Reinhard (Barry Keoghan) and Warren Lipka (Evan Peters) are two friends who are tired of the same old mundane lives they carry out everyday and hope that one day they will achieve something “extraordinary.” One day while taking a tour of the Special Collections Library at Transylvania University, Warren notices that $14 million worth of rare books are protected by one librarian. He shares this with Warren and the two begin hatching a plan to steal a first edition of John James Audubon’s Birds of America and Charles Darwin’s Origin of Species that will set them up for life, but while trying to pursue something bigger than themselves, they realize the moral implications of their actions.

Side by side of the real Warren with Evan Peters’ Warren.

The film suffers from an identity crisis for the first two thirds of the film, and it is really prevalent in the films first act. Between the inter-stitched documentary-style clips of the actual capers, the fourth wall breaking narration, the inconsistency of narration, the light hearted jovial tone, and the serious tone, it’s hard to pin down exactly what the film is trying to be. Is it trying to be “I can’t believe these idiots are pulling off a heist” film like Logan Lucky? Is it a serious heist film akin to Heat? Or is it mistrustful heist film like Reservoir Dogs? The film doesn’t seem to know itself for the most of the run time as it tries to create a hodgepodge of other heist films. 

The film wears its influences on its sleeve, going as far as to have an isolated shot of rented heist films like Rififi that Warren and Spencer watch to learn the ins and outs of the business, and even a sequence that directly replicates the suave stylings of Steven Soderburg’s Ocean’s Eleven, complete with Elvis music and all. Part of this appreciation can be cited as the reason for being stylistically imprecise. Pulling from so many inspirations has caused a cavalcade of inconsistent moments that work on their own, but when strung together, result in an uneven film.

However, when the heist begins, American Animals actually begins to find its footing. Despite the jarring whiplash that occurs when the film turns into a very serious (almost dark) heist film, the newfound tone in the film helps it emerge from the shadow of its inspirations and declare its differentiation. The heist itself is handled with extreme gravitas; as the gang realizes what they are actually doing —not only to their lives but that of those around them—the tension ratchets up and sustains itself all the way until they get caught. Much of this is accomplished when the film finally nails down its tone and strips away the inspirations it was beholden to for the first two thirds of the film. By exploring the moral quandaries of their actions within a cohesive tone, the film hits its stride and shows that it doesn’t need to imitate anyone else.

What is commendable about this film is how much it tries to replicate from other films, but in doing so, it creates an inconsistent tone. Whether it be serious or funny, straightforward or deceptive, or realistic or hyperbolized, Layton tries a mishmash of techniques in an effort to pay homage to the films that inspired it while at the same time making American Animals standout. The film is indebted to the films that came before it, but it’s not until the film stops imitating something else does it become something worth watching.

Score 3/5