Category Archives: Movies

That Potential Harry Potter Series

.

Deadline and other sources are reporting that Warner Brothers, a studio once known for its anti-fascist stances, is looking to move forward for a re-booting of the valuable Harry Potter IP as a series for its streaming service HBOMax. It is reported that WB CEO Zaslav has met with JKR in hopes of bringing this project to life and that JKR may even be producer on the series. JKR, in addition to the controversies surrounding her small-minded stance on trans issues, is notorious for demanding control over the property and would likely wield great influence over the series’ production.

It’s understandable that people became fans of the franchise either through the books or the films before JKR’s opinion became public poisoning, quite understandably, many against the author. With the proposed series all this is known ahead of time on this go around and raises ethical and moral concerns about financially supporting JKR as she continues with what many people feel are bigoted opinions.

I fully support those who protest and drag into the light the statements and attitudes of JKR, but I also think it would be wise and just to be prudent in who is targeted if this series continues to move forward.

For example, the young actors cast in the series I would not want to see hounded or harassed on social media. ‘We are not so smart when we are young,’ as one fictional character observed and it is already a very hard road to travel as a child actor there is little, very little, to be gained targeting them.

The writers of the ‘writers room’ are likely to be in the first stages of their careers, struggling with student debt, the high cost of living in LA, and the difficult task of landing any paying gig in Hollywood, refusing an assignment may not have been a viable option for them.

However, the show runner, as of yet unnamed, the person with creative control only checked by the studio and the dictatorial JKR is another matter. That person is likely to be an experience veteran of the business with the financial and career resources to walk away from the series. If they choose to get into bed with JKR, fully aware of the controversies she brings along, then they have made their decision and shouldn’t be surprised when it turns out to be far from popular.

I have read the books and seen the film adaptation and found them enjoyable but flawed. Others have done a fine job pointing out the antisemitic tropes and the ignorant racism in the text so I will not elaborate on that here just beware it is there. I have no need to purchase anything new from the franchise and I am quite happy leaving it behind, the proposed series holds no interest for me and hopefully not for you either.

Share

Movie Review: Dungeons & Dragons: Honor Among Thieves

.

This past Saturday the 25th I had the good fortune to see an advance screening of Dungeons & Dragons: Honor Among Thieves a big budget cinematic adaptation of the tabletop role playing game. As a gamer for more than 40 years I had a keen interest in the film and when a fellow writer popped up with invites to the screening I had to attend.

There have been other attempts to leverage the game into popular media. From 1983 through 1985 saw the production and airing of an animated series Dungeons & Dragons with the three season clearly target for a younger audience. 2000 saw the release of a live-action film Dungeons & Dragons that was poorly received by both critics and audiences. (Though successful enough for two direct to Home Video sequels.) This production, Honor Among Thieves is boasts the most resources and well-known names to adapt the property.

The film, like most sessions of the game, is an ensemble piece, though more focus is given to Edgin (Chris Pine) a man who through tragedy has turned to thievery and Holga, (Michelle Rodriguez) his dangerous barbarian partner in crime. They assemble a team, Simon (Justice

Paramount Studios

Smith) a Sorcerer with self-esteem issues, Doric (Sophie Lillis) a tiefling druid desperate to save her people and wilderness from encroaching ecological devastation, Xenk (Rege-Jean Page) a paladin with ties to Edgin past before Edgin fall from grace. What starts as a heist, with a few side adventures to gather the materials required, transforms into a battle against a vast and evil conspiracy with thousands of live and the future in the hands of the thieves.

Each character has an arc of character development and with the story compressed to a single film none are particularly deep or complex. Honor Among Thieves is not a contemplative examination of the human condition but romp, an exercise in fun with just enough character to allow the actors to invest, engage, and embrace their roles. No third act twist is truly shocking or surprising, but the film isn’t relying on that approach. It expects, with reasonableness, that characters and the actors portrayals with keep the audience emotionally invested and not some amazing reveal to recontextualize the story.

The filmmaking is solid, competent, but not groundbreaking or visually stunning. For the most part, with the except of one shoot, the directors, Jonathan Goldstein a & John Francis Daley, avoid drawing attention to the VFX with ‘impossible’ camera moves and Barry Peterson’s cinematography is perfectly serviceable with decent compositions but never remarkable.

Dungeons & Dragons: Honor Among Thieves is a ‘popcorn movie,’ one meant to provide a short diversion from the grind of reality and give some thrills, laughs, and a touch of real emotion. In the matter the film succeeds. It is fun and worth the hair over two hours spent watching it.

Share

Movie Review: 65

 

Movie Review: 65

Adam Driver plays a pilot from an alien civilization that crashes on Earth 65 million years ago at the end of cretaceous period and must save himself and his sole surviving passenger while fighting off dinosaurs.

That single sentence description far more action and entertainment than the delivers. I went into the auditorium expecting a fun, mindless, ‘popcorn movie’ but discovered that 65 failed to deliver anything approaching even the barest minimums of engagement. It would be difficult for me to remember a screening that had left me as bored as this one.

Driver’s character, Mills, is given a perfunctory and cliche backstory, presumably to create emotional engagement and to misdirect the audience as to the exact nature of his emotional distress. After encountering another tired, worn, and idiotic cinematic cliche from bad 50’s Sci-Fi films, the ‘uncharted meteor storm,’ his ship is disabled and crashes on cretaceous Earth, an equally ‘uncharted’ planet. The passengers, all in some sort of hibernating sleep capsules, are killed save for the one that will have emotional resonance with Mills. However, this star-faring race with faster than light travel apparently never invented a manifest and so he has no idea who she is, where she’s from, or even which languages she might possibly be familiar with. Now this ersatz father-daughter duo must transverse on foot less than 10 miles to escape this deadly planet.

What should have been a sequence of set pieces with thrills, tension, and scares quickly becomes a tedious pattern of nothing exciting. Oh, Mills and the girl do face danger at every turn but nothing that was supposed to be tense ever possessed the least amount of actual tension. Mills has advanced technology to assist, except for when the scrip requires it to fail, which it does just long enough to cause trouble and then the tech resumes proper function. There is a piece with a waterfall that I honestly thought. “Oh, they ripped this off from the Universal Studio’s ride, and the ride did it better.”

The third act bring in the Chicxulub impactor, the asteroid hypnotized to have cause the extinction of the non-avian dinosaurs, as an additional ‘ticking clock’ and a futile attempt to inject tension into the flaccid fairytale.

Nothing that happens in 65 is in the least bit surprising, original, or even entertaining. It is a movie constructed of bit and bobs from better films and wasted 90 minutes of my limited time on the planet.

Share

Animal Cruelty in Film and that Kangaroo Hunt

 

 

It has been more than a week since I watched Wake in Fright and the film remains in my thoughts. I have sought out and listened podcasts discussing the film, its troubled launch, its status as a ‘lost movie,’ and its eventual rediscovery, restoration, and honors from the likes such as Martin Scorsese.

No aspect of the film is more controversial that the third act Kangaroo hunt depicted in savage, revolting realism because it was an actual, government sanctioned, kangaroo hunt.

The film’s director, Ted Kotcheff, is a vegetarian and reportedly, even at the time, quite concerned with animal rights. It is quite clear that nothing in the hunt is filmed in such a way as to glorify its violence or brutality. The sequence, critical to the character’s arc, is about John Grant’s final descent into a mindless, drunken state that surrenders all pretense of civility, rationality, and Ash in Alien might pronounce, ‘all delusions of morality.’

The controversy is could have Kotcheff, already a veteran director with three feature film and more than a dozen television episode under his belt, achieved the same dramatic and moral effect with a simulated hunt?

The cinematic technology of 1971 hasn’t yet dreamed of the fantastic capabilities computer generated imagery and Jaws with its robotic shark lay 4 years in future and with a budget 8 times that available to Kotcheff. Given the technological and budgetary a graphic, ‘in your face’ depiction of the Kangaroo hunt could only have been achieved with a real slaughter.

Was the goal worth the killing?

That’s a question without a clear objective answer. The hunt was not conducted for the film’s benefit. It was an already scheduled event that would have transpired with or without the production’s participation. Not filming it would have prevented no cruelty, It could be argued that the production taking part in the hunt actually saved some Kangaroos.

There are reports that the hunters drank heavily and in a drunken state began carelessly and cruelly wounding the animals and that this so offended and sicked the production team that they engineered a ‘power failure’ stopping the hunt. It is also possible that the presence of the production helped to encourage the drinking and rowdiness contributing to the violent orgy. We can’t know what would have happened without the production present.

How about the audience? It that level of graphic content necessary to provoke a response?

For people already concerned or disposed to care about animal cruelty, that level of graphic repulsive violence is not required. But perhaps for the large percentage of the population who gives it little or no thought, what have not experienced or envisioned what slaughter and cruelty actually look like, it might need that stomach turning sequence to shake them out of their complacency. Had Wake in Fright been a massive international box office hit it may have sparked an awareness in the public in the manner that Jaws launched a hatred and killing of sharks that the novel’s author regretted for the rest of his life. However, with the film not finding acclaim or success until the next century any impact from its intention is minimal to non-existent.

We can say at least Kotcheff tried to make a statement, an impression, to awaken public apathy to animal cruelty but another film has none of those reasons or excuses for its on-screen brutality to animals.

Michael Crichton’s 1979 film The Great Train Robbery, adapted from his own bestselling novel is a fictionalized account of a daring gold heist in Victorian England. One sequence of the film involves find the moral weakness in what appears to be an incorruptible man and that failing turns out to be ‘he’s a ratting gent.’

Ratting is the brutal sport of betting on terriers in a pit with rats and wagering on how many rats the dog can kill.

Crichton says on the laserdisc commentary that he was unaware that they would be filming actual ratting until they reached the set but if he knew in advance or not I still find it reprehensible. The sequences served no greater purpose in the film than to uncover this man weakness. It was not an advancement of the protagonist’s emotional growth or understanding, it was not to shock sensibility into the audience. It is a cruelty that I consider wholly unjustified.

I am conflicted about the hunt in Wake in Fright but not at all about the ratting in The Great Train Robbery. Film is wonderful and wonderous, but it does not justify abuse and cruelty to animals or people.

Share

I don’t Normally Comment on The Oscars

 

It’s not that I have some great animosity towards the Academy Awards nor is my silence a protest over to whom the awards are presented. There are a great many overlooked films and persons involved in film production with many unjustly not considered for these elaborate peer group affirmations. That’s what all awards are, peer-groups reflecting the pride and prejudices of their times and members expressing collective opinions about what they approved of. These are not objective measures but as with everything associated with the arts subjective impressions and reactions.

A24 Studios

With all that said, it warms my awards cold heart that Everything Everywhere All at Once took home so many of those little golden funny men this year.

EEAO won the Best Picture, Best Director, Supporting Actor and Actress, Lead Actress, Original Screenplay, and Editing. That is an impressive sweep and for a genre film that sways from the deeply profound about the existential dread that can lie at the heart of human existence to very silly gags about butt-plug powered martial arts, those wins are ever more impressive and less likely.

It is no secret that in the arts, stage, screen, television, and publishing, genre material, science-fiction, fantasy, and horror is often cast out to a ghetto. All too often the entity of the genre is judged as no better than its worst example. For EEAO to overcome that bias is a true achievement. EEAOwore its genre proudly on its sleeve. There was no fuzziness about its categorization with terms like, ‘elevated horror’ or ‘psychological thriller’ deployed to justify celebrating a horror film such as The Silence of the Lambs. This movie shouted its geekiness and its absurdity while pulling tears from our eyes with the truth that merely living is simultaneously both joy and agony.

We can quibble and debate which person should have won this or that award but for the moment let’s just celebrate that for this brief shining moment genre is seen as equally worthy of respect as any ‘normal’ dramatic tale.

Share

Streaming Review: Wake in Fright (1971)

 

Adapted from Kenneth Cook’s 1961 novel of the same title Wake in Fright is a psychological horror set in the vast Australian Outback, centered on machismo as a smokescreen for insecurity.

John Grant (Gary Bond) is a young, timid, and naive man teaching school in the isolated settlement of Tiboonda. As a condition for receiving a college education from the Australian government John posted a $1000 bond pledging to serving two years as a teacher in the arid, isolated, Outback. During the scorching Christmas break John leaves Tiboonda on his six-week holiday with visions of Sydney, beaches, and Robyn filling his dreams. During an evening’s stopover in the somewhat larger city of Bundanyabba, dubbed ‘The Yabba’ by locals, John crumples under peer pressure to drinking and gambling. He awakes to find that he has lost all his money, cannot fly out to Sydney, and must survive the Yabba and its drunken, rowdy, men.

Wake in Fright is a study of men without hope, without futures, for whom the entirety of the universe has collapsed down to a singularity of drink, gambling, and violence with even sex relegated to a mere after thought. John’s timidness and naivete and his attempts to break the cycle of drunkenness fails utterly under to social pressures of burly men who measure their manliness in the ability to drink and fight. There are few women that John encounters in the Yabba, barmaids and counter clerks, with the exception being Jeanette, a woman for whom the men of the Yabba have scarred and who seems more of a shattered shell than a fully realized person.

The themes and metaphors of Wake in Fright come crashing together in the Kangaroo Hunt. John, having drunkenly boasted of his shooting skills, accompanies two rowdies and the Yabba alcoholic doctor (Donald Pleasence) into the wilds to hunt kangaroo. This is no measure, careful display of skill and wilderness craft. It is men nearly too inebriated to stand, tearing through the arid landscape in a battered automobile, slaughtering the animals they encounter. It is not for food or sustenance but a display a savage cruelty inflicted on the helpless.

(It should be noted that this sequence will be very disturbing to many people as it is not a simulated kangaroo hunt but one that the filmmakers captured from reality, save for the Kangaroo wrestling sequence in the evening. The Kangaroo Hunt is the most controversial aspect to the feature and weather is finds the filmmakers intended purpose of revolting the audience against the practice or glorifying it will reside in the mind of the viewer. It has been reported that the film crew engineered a ‘power failure’ to stop the hunt. Personally, I found it revolting but believed it could have been achieved by less cruel means.)

Director Ted Kotcheff and Cinematographer Brian West have achieved an admirable effort in capturing the dusty, isolating, and scorching heat of the Australian Outback. The audience is as alien to the setting as John Grant. Even in the comfort of my living room on a cool evening the photography and setting felt hot, dry, and oppressive. West utilized wide lenses, just shy of being fisheye, to not only capture the vast panorama of nothing that is the Outback but also inducing a mild edge of frame distortion that kept the film unreal and unsettling.

Gary Bond is credible as Grant but at 30 perhaps just a bit too old for the recent college graduate and naive character. Pleasence chews up the scenery as the drunken, chaotic, and destitute doctor. The doctor is a character who has abandoned all pretense that he might become a better person, and instead has surrendered himself to his vices, addictions, and fleeting whims.

Wake in Fright is a searing indictment of toxic masculinity long before that term took hold in popular culture. Not a traditional horror film, perhaps not even a folk horror, Wake in Fright‘s lies in the human heart, the condition that pushes men to surrender to their worst impulses and desires. Surprisingly free of sexualized violence, this film and its theme is about the violence we do to ourselves when we surrender out self-control.

Wake in Fright is currently streaming on Shudder.

Share

Movie Review: Ant-Man & The Wasp: Quantumania

 

 

The Marvel Cinematic Universe released its 31st feature film with Ant-man & The Wasp: Quantumania boasting an impressive cast, a fantastic adventure, a realty-twisting setting, and lacking in emotional weight.

As shown in the trailer, our heroes as pulled into the fantasy setting of the Quantum Realm by an ill-advised experiment and there must discover a way home while dealing with a new threat to the MCU.

Directed by Payton reed who helmed the previous two, and quite enjoyed, Ant-Man entries into the MCU, and written by Jeff Loveness, as his feature film screenwriting debut, Quantumania has action but feels empty. The element that had elevated MCU movies above other attempts at silver screen adaptations of comic book heroes is the devotions to characters and story. Even,

Disney Studios

or perhaps more importantly, the lighter films such as the Ant-Man franchise have never forgotten that it is related characters with relatable issues that engaged the audiences. In the first film Scott Lang certainly battles and defeats villainous characters but it is in healing his relationship with his family that mattered. In the second movie family again is at the heart of the story with the rescue of Janet from the Quantum Realm and the found family of Bill Foster and Ghost.

Quantumania has no such theme. The characters enter and exit their adventure unchanged, showing no arc, no growth, no emotional scars for their challenges. This movie, like a bad Bond, is all plot (How do we escape? How do we win?) and no story (Who are we and what does this matters to us?).

Screenwriter C. Robert Cargill who wrote the first Doctor Strange film when asked about how much integrating he was told to do for that movie reported that the directive was write the best Doctor Strange movie he could, and the studio would worry about how it all fit into the MCU.

Quantumania feels the exact opposite of that. It is all set-up, exposition, and establishment for further franchise forays and sacrifices everything on the screen that might resonate with an audience for that overarching goal.

When I walked out of Quantumania and had lunch with my sweetie-wife I placed this film in the third quarter of the MCU’s feature film but as the days have passed and less and less of the film remains in my head to any impact, I must categorize this is belonging in the lowest quarter of the MCU. I have seen worse big budget massively produced movies but for Marvel this is a miss.

Share

Movie Review: Cocaine Bear

 

 

June 1975 saw the release of Jaws, the film that sky rocketed Steven Spielberg into directorial superstardom and launched a slew of imitators as animals of all types terrorized small communities as defiant individuals stood against the local corruption and greed to save lives and defeat the beasts.

Most of these movies are terrible, torturous to watch, and were taken by their creators far too seriously.

Cocaine Bear, directed by Elizabeth Banks, written, by Jimmy Warden, and produced by Lord and Miller, understood exactly what they needed to make. Little screentime is devoted to deep character study, traumatic backstory, or insane reasons for not ‘closing the beaches’ but rather movie’s 95-minute running time is focused on what was promised in the trailer; a rampaging, coke-fueled bear killing in gruesome and exaggerated manner an eclectic mix of victims.

 There is a bit of character development and backstory, just enough to hang a little flesh on the people but no more than that. Some things are left unexplained, such as the reason the character in the opening decided or was forced to dump the cocaine from the plane. The audience doesn’t need to know. We all came to see the bear, high as the sky, and on a rampage. Once you’ve given us the narcotics from the sky, we have no further need for exposition. This is the brilliance of Cocaine Bear. Just enough to set characters and events in motion then let it play out in all its farcical and gory fun.

And this is a gory film. Mauled to death by a bear in reality would be a bloody affair but Banks walked the line with the violence and blood just cartoonish enough that it provokes excitement rather than horror.

Cocaine Bear is a movie to watch in a crowded theater or with a noisy room with friends, not alone and contemplative. Go see it.

Share

Variations on a Theme

 

Spoilers for The Menu

I thoroughly enjoyed the feature film The Menu. Recently I discovered that there was a rumored to be a deleted scene where the critic Lillian Bloom is waterboarded with the broken emulsion Searchlight Picturesshe clocked during the breadless bread course. I couldn’t quite work out where in the film such a scene would fit, and I searched out the script online.

It was easily located and a very good read. (For screenwriters it is always wise to remember that a script must first be a good read before it can become a good movie.) Rather than search out the waterboarding scene I simply enjoyed the script from front to back.

I would hazard to guess that 90 percent of the script is up there on the screen. There are minor tweaks here and there, a few lines cut short in the final edit and a couple of beats dropped. I do miss that there are a couple moments that would have clued the audience in faster on Margot’s and Tyler’s relationship. In particular there’s a bit where Tyle is concerned that Chef is mad and won’t like him and Margot points out that Tyler is paying for Chef to serve him, and it doesn’t matter if Chef likes Tyler or not. There’s a beat where it’s clear Tyler then puts together two and two and wonders just how much Margot likes him since ‘ding dong’ he’s paying her to be there.

The waterboarding scene took place in the third act while Margot had been dispatched to retrieve the large barrel. During her absence Lillian is tortured with the broken emulsion and the nameless famous actor player by John Leguizamo is force fed nuts by his assistant Felicity, coerced by the staff, activating his allergy.

Frankly, I agree with this sequence being cut from the final film. First and foremost, it’s a level of barbaric cruelty that feels at odd the cultured cruelty Chef Slowik engrained for the rest of the evening. Thematically it doesn’t fit. Secondly it violates the film’s point of view. The entire film we are with Margot as she experiences the horrors of the strange sadistic diner. To witness the explicit torture required violating that POV on a very serious level.

Reading the script is a wonderful exercise in understanding the necessity of editing. Ideas that felt so right and proper when written have a very different feel when filmed or show or even read in context in the final draft.

Reading the script enhanced my appreciation of the film and the talented people behind it.

Share