Images

1972 psychological drama

Rating: 15/20

Plot: A woman spends some time with her imaginary friends.

This is a less coherent version of Polanski's Repulsion, but I still really liked it. It's not necessarily what you'd expect from Robert Altmann. It's moody, taking place almost entirely in one claustrophobic location--the main character's psyche, one of those pseudo-horror movies without any real monsters or ghouls but is nonetheless frightening. The quick disintegration of York's character's mind and her loosening grip on reality is shown in a way that is horrifyingly absurd. You know you're in trouble when you're hallucinating your own doppelganger, right?

Susannah York is great as the protagonist, and she also co-wrote the whole thing. She's seemingly in every shot of the movie and effortlessly carries the story and all of its abstract layers on her shoulders. It's a good performance, mostly because it doesn't seem like a performance. There's subtlety and realism rather than flashiness or bombast, and I think the movie's better because of it.

The real star of the show is the cinematography. Sure, there are too many shots of random knickknacks, especially during the opening credits which juxtapose York with a voiceover talking about unicorns with shots of various baubles around her house. I wasn't sure how the text of a children's book she was writing fit allegorically or metaphorically with what was happening in the movie, but that might just be because I lost interest and stopped paying close attention to any of that. But back to the cinematography. There are great shots where there's a choreography with these "ghosts" and human characters. Altmann uses the space of the house well. There's also a great sex scene, fuzzied by a mirror.

John Williams did the score, and it's good stuff--lots of atonal, unidentifiable noises that sound like instruments being dropped on a studio floor. It's not the type of thing he's usually associated with, but it definitely works with what's going on visually here.

I'm not even sure I knew this movie existed. Some Robert Altmann fan I am.

Blade Runner 2049

2017 sci-fi sequel

Rating: 15/20

Plot: One of Hollywood's Ryans tracks down replicants, including one that is apparently the actual offspring of two others.

Whether you like the story or the nearly six-hour running time or not, this movie looks and sounds fantastic. I'm not sure there's anything visually here that hasn't already been seen in tons of other sci-fi dystopian movies made in the time between Blade Runners, but director Denis Villenueve and his special effects team pull it all off so spectacularly here. It's definitely a spectacle, and with the Hans Zimmer and Benjamin Wallfisch score, it's a great experience for at least two of the senses.

I watched the original Blade Runner yet again to refresh my poor movie memory before seeing this sequel, and I still just don't love it like I think I'm supposed to. I think the main reason, other than hating it as a kid because I expected it to be something else, is because of how cold it is. It's just a chilly movie. That's probably the way it's supposed to be, and it's likely the appropriate tone a noirish sci-fi movie needs to have. But it just feels a little flat and lifeless. This sequel has a bit more heart, and I think that's why I ended up liking it more than its predecessor. I'm not sure I'm supposed to like it more than the first one or how I feel about that.

I'm not sure what to make of Jared Leto, some extraneous nudity (Villenueve must be a butt guy), and some implausible action sequences. I liked the new femme villainous badass Luv played by Sylvia Hoeks, some genuinely trippy effects, the CGI world-building, and both Harrison Ford (who's not in this as much as you might think) and whichever Ryan that is. There's also a wonderfully erotic scene that is a prelude to off-screen lovemaking that I thought was ingenious. Villenueve's made a sequel that is consistent with the 1982 Ridley Scott movie with its lugubrious tone, it's laborious pacing, and it's lumbersome length. I doubt this movie is going to seem nearly as original in 2017 as the original Blade Runner must have in 1982, but in order to succeed, the movie didn't really need to do anything original. It needed that consistency, and it needed to tell a story that seemed worthy of a sequel. I think it did both of those. It's not the greatest storytelling, but those visuals and sounds make up for that.

Ryan Gosling, Ryan Reynolds, crocodiles, and alligators. If Reynolds and Gosling ever are involved in a project where CGI alligators and crocodiles fight, I'm going to stop watching movies.

The Overnight

2015 comedy

Rating: 12/20

Plot: New-to-the-city parents make some new friends and spend the evening together.

I've never seen a pair of actors wear fake penises so enthusiastically.

There are likable things about this comedy, but it doesn't feel complete.

Silent Saturday: Wings

1927 romantic war drama

Rating: 16/20

Plot: War and romance! And Clara Bow's boobs.

Clara Bow partial nudity and the screen's first man-on-man lip action! What's not to love about this first Best Picture award winner?

Clara Bow's hair is a lovely mess in early scenes. Here's a confession: The only real reason I watch so many silent movies is because I like the look of the women in them. I fall in love with an actress in almost every silent movie that I watch.

There's nothing special about the story--all love triangles and dogfights and 1920's melodrama--and the overly dramatic intertitles and the fact that I had trouble telling the two male leads (nondescript white dudes) apart bothered me, but I sure like the look of this film. There's some dopey, dated dogfight stuff, but there are also some really cool, creative shots. I loved the look of planes submerged by clouds and plane shadows, an almost dizzying shot of characters swinging, some neat split-screen war action, and a great tracking shot over the tables in a French bar. I'm not sure what I thought about a special effect that added superfluous bubbles, however.

Those bubbles did lead to my favorite intertitle in this: "Come wiz me--we will find ze mos' beautiful bubbles in ze worl'"

This was the first Academy Awards Best Picture winner, and it was also the only silent movie to ever win the award. Sunrise and Metropolis also came out in 1927 and were both better than this.

Captain Underpants: The First Epic Movie

2017 animated comedy

Rating: 11/20 (Buster: 20/20)

Plot: Two friends use creativity, pranks, and their writing and artistic talents to escape a mundane first-grade existence. Their tyrannical principal tries to break up their friendship, and they accidentally bring the titular superhero to life and use him to help save the world from a goofy-named villain.

I'm going to let Buster write this entry for me.

I like this movie because it's funny. when they find out the villans real name its funny. I learned that some people don't like laughing. The movie is like the books.But only some parts.

Well, that's as good as anything I'd write, I suppose. The only thing I'd add is that there's a lot of potty humor in this movie. I kind of like what the movie's about--the power of friendship and creativity--but I don't like seeing adults disrespected so explicitly.

Buster reads these books, and apparently, they've hurt her ability to write complete sentences, spell words correctly, and use apostrophes. She can, however, appreciate a good fart joke.

The Big Sick

2017 romantic comedy

Rating: 15/20 (Jennifer: 16/20)

Plot: A struggling comedian from one of the countries ending in -stan meets and falls for a heckler at a club, but his family's cultural background gets in the way of their relationship. Then, she gets sick, and he realizes that she's even hotter when she's in a coma.

I've been more emotional than usual the last month or so as I approach another birthday that I wasn't supposed to even have. I was supposed to die at 42, after all. I'm not sure if it's a third midlife crisis or if it's because my wife buys too many mugs, but I've been in lots of situations lately where I've just felt like crying for no good reason. I was in a grocery store a week and a half ago, and the sight of an overly-excited little girl clutching a box of fruit snacks nearly brought me to tears.

So this movie, borderline artificially sweet, got me a little weepy. I fell in love with the flaws of all of these characters and couldn't help but root for all of them. Though this is apparently only loosely based on the real story of Kumail Nanjiani and his wife Emily, there are enough universal truths within the movie's story to touch on ideas about love, cultural differences, family, relationships, and the importance of humor in dark times.

Ray Romano and Holly Hunter. I can't stop imagining these two getting it on.

This is the second movie I've seen the past year with a bunch of comedians as characters. They're not all central characters in this like they are in Don't Think Twice, but there's a lot of backstage riffing, etc. in this one. I think I've decided that I couldn't spend too much time with comedians.

Gerald's Game

2017 drama

Rating: 11/20

Plot: Kinky sex turns nightmarish as Gerald has a heart attack, leaving what's-her-face handcuffed to a bed with only a hungry dog that doesn't understand the safe word to keep her company.

This movie has a really dopey ending and treats child sex abuse in a juvenile way. I didn't like it. I spent most of the movie wondering about how many times she would have shit or peed the bed.

I also wondered if any of my sexual experiences were as good as this one.

It also has a scene that made me squirm, probably one of the most difficult things I've seen on the screen in a long time.

Colossal

2016 monster movie

Rating: 10/20

Plot: An alcoholic woman, after being kicked out by her boyfriend and moving back to her hometown, discovers that she somehow controls the movements of a monster wreaking havoc in Seoul.

Heavy-handed metaphors and questionable character motives angered me as it seemed like the movie thought I was some sort of dumbass. Nacho Vigalondo, the guy who did one of my favorite time-travel movies, disappoints again with a creative idea that is poorly executed and doesn't really have enough actual story to go along with it anyway. I didn't like Hathaway, and I don't think I ever like Jason Sudeikis who might as well be Bill Paxton because they have the same head shape and tendency to walk around with facial stubble.

It's labeled an action/comedy/drama, but it's too much of a mess to work as any of those. The monster effects are fine when the pair of monsters--the thing on the poster and a giant robot--aren't doing anything. Most of the scenes show them not doing anything in a darkened locale, likely due to budget limitations. There's more action with Sudeikis and Hathaway slapfighting in a park. I find it hard to believe that this is a comedy at all, and the drama is just too obvious to work. I never really felt anything for these sketches of characters anyway.

A more subtle approach could have taken this original spin on the giant monster genre somewhere. This, unfortunately, is just clumsy.

Silent Saturday: Peter Pan

1924 silent adventure

Rating: 14/20

Plot: A dangerously irresponsible man-child flies off with three impressionable children and takes them to Michael Jackson's ranch, a land filled with stereotypical Indians and effeminate pirates. Adventure ensues!

Fun special effects in this one with Tinkerbell, the construction of a house, and all that flight. Some scenes with static camera use were almost unbearably long, but there was a lot to enjoy with the effects. You also have to appreciate John's top hat, the crocodile actually eating Captain Hook (sorry for the spoiler), anti-medicine propaganda, what might be the first lesbian kiss in cinema history, some mermaid action, and the inexplicable appearance of an American flag. There's also a wonderful concluding intertitle that makes a claim about children being "Innocent, gay, and heartless." Heartless? What the hell?

Betty Bronson plays Peter Pan, this little incarnation of irresponsible joy. I suppose a woman has to play the titular fairy boy because it was part of a tradition, but I don't think it's something that Trump would be happy about.

There's a part of this movie that nearly made me drop it 10 full points to a 4/20. It was a breaking-of-the-fourth-wall moment where Bronson tells the audience to start clapping so that Tinkerbell doesn't die. I don't want my movies treating me like I'm a toddler watching an episode of Blue's Clues, and I refused to participate. In fact, I'm surprised that Tinkerbell didn't die. Luckily, it didn't seem like her life actually depended on my participation.

What saves this movie is Nana the Dog, a character played by a guy in an unblinking dog costume. It was fucking awesome! I looked up the name of the actor who played him, and the guy's name is George Ali. George Ali played Nana the Dog in Peter Pan and nothing else. He was also married to Helen Jerome who was an actress appearing in one television movie in 1946 and nothing else. I'm not sure if that's interesting to anybody but me, but here it is on the shane-movies blog.

Battle of the Sexes

2017 sports movie

Rating: 13/20

Plot: Former tennis great Bobby Riggs, desperate for attention, challenges #1 female player in the world and a woman who was not one of Michael Jackson's lovers to a tennis match. It's as classy as anybody would think it would be.

I was excited about this one even though I never understood what this whole tennis match proved. So Billie Jean King was able to beat a guy who was well past his prime? Rather than having any actual significance in a feminist sort of way, it just seems like it was nothing more than a goofy publicity stunt. The movie struggles with what to make of the whole ordeal, too. There's a clumsy mix of comedy and drama, and neither character's off-court issues--Riggs' addictions and marital troubles and King's experiments in lesbianism--aren't developed in a way that makes them real. In fact, King's lesbian relationship seems almost exploitative, like directors Valerie Faris and Jonathan Dayton--but probably especially Jonathan Dayton--just couldn't wait to have Emma Stone and Andrea Riseborough suck each other's faces.

Steve Carell is an actor whose name I'm never quite sure I'm spelling correctly. Two R's? Two L's? What's going on there? I questioned the career this guy would have after The Office, but he's got a little more versatility than I expected. This is a role he was born to play as he looks exactly like Bobby Riggs in end-credit photos. He's good enough here, but there's nothing in this character or script that really stretches him. Unless that's really him playing tennis in all these scenes because he does pull that off. Emma Stone looks just like Billie Jean King, too, and her performance is fine. I'm just not sure these characters have the combined charisma to carry this movie.

This tries to tack on the lesbian story and roaring females, but it just doesn't have the heft and just ends up an uneven though inoffensive look at this silly minor moment from the 1970s.

American Made

2017 true-life action movie

Rating: 14/20

Plot: A bored pilot gets himself a new hobby.

Didn't care for all the stylistic choices in this, including a great effort to give this the feel of something from the late-70's or early-80's, but this effervescent stranger-than-fiction true life tale of Barry Seal and the Iran-Contra Affair is entertaining throughout. Doug Liman directs Tom Cruise again, and though it's not as original as Edge of Tomorrow, it's got a perfect mix of humor, action, and intrigue that makes it worth checking out. Tom Cruise is effortlessly charming and boyish as an anti-hero. Or maybe his charm isn't effortless. Maybe he really has to work on that. I just know my charm, similar to Cruise's in a lot of ways, comes effortlessly. But anyway, I really enjoy seeing Tom Cruise almost all of the time, and I don't think it's just because I find him sexually attractive.

What kind of name is Domhnall anyway? Although I'm sure Domhnall Gleeson was picked on as a child, I like him, too. And that's a good thing because it seems like he's in nearly every movie these days. I'm not sure why I typed that because he's not. He's in a reasonable amount of movies.

This is one of the entries that I've written for this blog.

Rio Bravo

1959 Western

Rating: 15/20

Plot: Ranch thug Burdette is pissed when his brother is arrested for murder and decides to bust him loose. John Wayne, a guy named Stumpy, an alcoholic, and a cocky kid have to fend them off. And some floozy named Feathers is also involved.

I saw this one at my local theater. Before the movie, there was a brief introduction in which a guy said that there wasn't a bigger star in Hollywood than John Wayne. At that, an elderly guy behind me answered, "That's damn right!" There was loads of appreciation with almost all of Wayne's lines from that guy. He also repeated a lot of Walter Brennan's lines, something that I really appreciate in a trip to the theater.

Why the hell isn't Walter Brennan on that poster, by the way? This movie got itself a bonus point because of him! He takes pedestrian lines and turns them into gold with his deliveries.

I enjoy the writing with this one, succinct lines delivered by tough characters. There's not many words wasted here, and although I might have thought about cutting out the romantic subplot entirely, there's not much in the 2 hour and 20 minute running time that feels superfluous.

I really enjoyed the Dimitri Tiomkin score. It's boisterous where it needs to be, and it's completely silent at a couple of key moments, too, just about perfectly. And since they had Dean Martin and Ricky Nelson, they just had to include a pair of back-to-back musical numbers where they sing "My Rifle, My Pony, and Me" and "Cindy," the latter with Brennan joining in. You could argue that that whole scene is a complete waste of everybody's time. John Wayne, standing around watching it all with nothing to do, appears to think it was. But I kind of liked it.

I liked John Wayne in this, too. He was a larger-than-life movie star anyway, and on the big screen, he seems even larger. There's a humor to his characters that I think I appreciate more and more as I get older. His delivery never changes, and as an actor, he had almost no versatility whatsoever. But the delivery for the lines he's given in this Howard Hawks movie is really perfect, and Sheriff Chance was just a character I could believe in. Dean Martin and Ricky Nelson were also good, though Brennan really did steal the movie.

The guy who introduced the movie said this movie was Hawks and Wayne's response to High Noon, a movie I really love, because they didn't think a sheriff should be begging the locals for help with a threat to the town. I'm not sure how I feel about that, but I think it would be the kind of attitude that would really appeal to Trump voters. I did read once that High Noon was one of Bill Clinton's favorite movies.

I would have bumped this up another point if there would have been more attention placed on Angie Dickinson's legs.

Oh, I almost forgot to mention the little Hispanic guy played by Pedro Gonzalez Gonzalez. I loved him. Really, I wanted to pick him up and hold him.

Anyway, I enjoyed this movie, especially on the big screen and with commentary by the old guy behind me. I really did think that he was going to start Paul Reubens-ing some of those shots where John Wayne. It's why I moved over a few seats actually.

The Bad Batch

2016 dystopian love story

Rating: 10/20

Plot: A girl with missing limbs tries to find friends in a dystopian wasteland.

Ana Lily Amipour's follow-up to A Girl Walks Home Alone at Night is disappointing.

Amipour's visual sense is still on display as she takes advantage of desert landscapes and litters each shot with trash, giant boomboxes, and ravens. Like with the cat in he debut, she shows off an ability to direct animals. This time, it's giant black birds. They might be crows actually. Like alligators and crocodiles, which I famously can't tell apart, I have trouble with my black birds.

A lot of this movie works without dialogue, and it's likely more effective when it's free of spoken words. Visually, this movie is almost a success.

Everything else, however, is a failure. The characters are flat. Keanu Reeves plays a sort of post-apocalyptic prophet called The Dream, but the character is lackadaisically realized, and you never really understand or even care to understand what he's going on about. There's more star power with Jim Carrey. He plays a filthy hermit, and he actually doesn't say a word during any of his scenes. The character didn't need to be played by Jim Carrey. It's not that he was distracting. It's more to do that his presence in the credits made me expect a little more from the character. Jason Momoa gives me no hope for the Justice League movie in which he plays Fish Man because he's almost unintelligible and oddly shaped and has almost no charisma at all. And speaking of no charisma, how about Suki Waterhouse, the actress who plays the character who I guess is supposed to be the main character? Early in the movie, cannibals eat one of her legs and one of her arms, and I think they must have eaten most of her personality as well.

Really, a lack of personality might be the biggest issue with this movie. It's not just the characters; it's really the entire movie that just doesn't have a personality. It definitely doesn't have much of a plot, more a series of things that happen that are sort of related. I can handle a lack of plot, but added to that lack of personality, it becomes a little more of a problem.

I had high hopes for this one because of the director's feature debut and my love of movies involving cannibalism and giant boom boxes, but it's definitely what you'd call a sophomore slump. Hopefully, Amipour can continue to take chances and bounce back.

Kingsman: The Golden Circle

2017 action sequel

Rating: 9/20

Plot: Terrorists blow up most of the Kingsmen and their headquarters, but the bald guy and the kid from the first movie make it out alive. They then seek the aid of the American version of the Kingsman--the Statesmen--in order to take down a dangerous criminal organization and save the world.

There were things I enjoyed about the first movie in this series, and there were a lot of things that really annoyed me. I enjoyed previews for this movie, previews which promised more high-tech gadgets, creative and cartoonish violence, Frank Sinatra songs, and Jeff Bridges. I thought this second installment might be like a Planet of the Apes or Fast and the Furious thing where I fell in love with sequels for movies I didn't care for much. I shouldn't have been fooled because while this constantly teases, it's also guilty of just trying way too hard, completely lacking any real emotional impact, and hammering at my skull with an oppressive soundtrack.

Generally, I don't complain about special effects, and to complain that sketchy CGI effects made something as far-fetched as these spy shenanigans unbelievable almost seems ludicrous. But you know what? The sketchy CGI effects were just about bad enough to make all of this unbelievable. If you want to make a spy cartoon, just go ahead and make yourself a spy cartoon.

As with the first movie, this Golden Circle nonsense and Matthew Vaughn aren't short on ideas. Unfortunately, a lot of the ideas are just really bad ones. Take Elton John's too-frequent appearances, for example. I can almost imagine a situation in which an appearance by Elton John could have been humorous, but this was one overcooked cameo. After a flashy and nearly-entertaining bit of sharply-edited fisticuffs and an effects-enhanced car chase, did we really need to see the main character--like a cardboard Bond, one of the most nondescript action heroes I can remember seeing--covered in shit? And how about Julianne Moore's 50's pop-culture-loving villainess? Although I'd never criticize her whimsical use of cannibalism to control her minions, the 50's thing just seemed completely pointless, and she had almost zero charisma as an antagonist. No amount of robot attack dogs--which, thanks to the special effects, also looked stupid--or guys with robo-arms could make those bad guys cool.

Colin Firth, whose character was shot in the fucking head in the first movie by Samuel L. Jackson, is back for this one, and yes, he's playing the same character. You'd think that would be a spoiler, but it was in every preview I saw for this and even on one version of the poster. I'm not sure it would have had quite the surprise factor or emotional impact as a great sequel twist like The Empire Strikes Back, but it does seem like something they should have kept a secret.

The new characters don't add much. Channing Tatum plays the type of character you'd expect him to, Jeff Bridges just looks kind of lazy, Halle Berry doesn't get much to do at all, and Pedro Pascal and his bullwhip, although they have their moments, wind up a little predictable.

Leave your logic at the concession stand, and don't walk into this one hoping for good storytelling because you won't get it. This movie reminds me of candy. There are times when you eat a bunch of your children's Halloween candy or something and regret it an hour or so later. Your tummy hurts, and you knew the stuff was bad for you anyway. This is the kind of candy that you regret eating while you're eating it. You end up hating yourself, knowing that you're probably going to start losing teeth any minute.

I'm not sure if I'll see a third Kingsman movie or not. I really kind of hate these movies, but I know that preview is going to come out and somehow convince me that there's something interesting going on. I'm a total sucker, I guess.

Bad Movie Club: Die Hard Dracula

1998 horror-comedy where the comedy is horrifying and the horror is comedic

Bad Movie Rating: 3/5 (Josh: 4/5; Fred: 3/5)

Rating: 5/20

Plot: A mopey guy travels to Europe after his girlfriend dies in a boating accident. While there, he encounters Dracula and assists Crispin Glover's dad in defeating him.

The credits told me that "Other Creatures" were played by "Real Things," and I'd love more clarity on that one.

I'm actually wondering if Bruce Glover can be considered a "real thing." Resembling a chunkier version of his son, Glover seemed to be taking this seriously at the start but gradually lost interest. That's assuming this was filmed sequentially. I have to assume it was because it seemed to start out as a more serious attempt at a vampire movie and became progressively sillier as it went. The tone is about as inconsistent as any movie in recent memory. The dopey title, some goofy performances by the guys playing Romanian locals, and oddly-timed comic relief all make you think you're watching pure satire, something in the ballpark with Scary Movie or something. I don't usually enjoy bad movies that were intentionally made to be funny, but I'm not sure this fits with those. Even if it does, the comedy is so poorly done that there's still something endearing about it all.

This is poorly written, and the special effects are simultaneously laughable and sad, but the real star of this bad movie show is the bad acting. Glover delivers memorably, and no less than three different guys play the titular vampire, all poorly. I don't know which was which, so they can't get any kind of end-of-year award, probably something that's at the top of their list of career regrets. Kerry Dustin plays the protagonist's first girlfriend and his Romanian love interest, giving her more movie roles for her career than she has movies. And the variations of her Romanian accent give her more accents than most performers try out in their entire careers. My favorite performance, however, was John Slavik's as a stuttering dentist. I just like to imagine Slavik ruining any potential career by suggesting, in his first movie role, that he give his character a stutter and then doing what he does here.

I'm going to feel terrible if John Slavik really has a stutter and ends up reading this.

I have a feeling Die Hard Dracula would make diehard Dracula fans angry as it seems to confuse monster lore (silver bullets?) and give the monster powers that he doesn't normally have. I mean, I know he can turn into a bat, but shooting purple Emperor-esque lightning bolts from his fingers? I'm not so sure about that one.