MRMOVIESETC
REVIEWS:
“The LEGO Movie 2:
The Second Part” (2019)
SPOILER: The trailers for this film were a lie. The
events that took place had nothing to do with Taco Tuesday.
0/10
***
Bring some caffeine. You’re going to need it.
“The LEGO Movie 2” is a lot, and by that, I mean stuffed
and crammed with a pinch of sensory overload.
In my recent review of the latest “How To Train Your
Dragon” film, I talked about how some animators really like to show off their prowess
by going nearly batshit bonkers with every trick in the book that a film of
this kind will allow. Seeing as, at its core, “LEGO 2” is a simple and warm
story about growing up and all the changes that occur therein regarding social
behavior and pop culture sensibility (without giving it all away), there’s a
balance to be struck in order to reach a wide target audience. The younger
crowds will likely appreciate the catchy music and breakneck pace with about as
much colorful filler as one could ask for, whilst older kids and adults will be
more tuned into the nostalgic toy references and tongue-in-cheek humor.
The voice actors are clearly still game for what the
series is selling, and the addition of always-charismatic Tiffany Haddish as
Queen Watevra Wa-Nabe added some needed flair. Not all of it always works, per
se, with the film getting too busy at times for its and the characters’ own
good, but considering this is already the fourth one of these in fewer than six
years, this LEGO film series continues to push ahead with enough creative,
entertaining force to be a staple in the genre. More importantly, even though it takes the
silliness of the first film to a whole new level, it didn’t forgot how to keep
things fun.
“The LEGO Movie 2: The Second Part”: 8/10
“The Wife” (2018)
It makes my heart happy to see a talent as wonderful as
Glenn Close continue to kill it on screen after decades in the business. Ironically,
happy isn’t an emotion often projected in “The Wife” with a narrative rooted
deeply in a lifetime’s worth of anger, resentment, and regret caused by the
person her character devoted her life to, and society’s attitudes towards women
being the lesser species in the literary world for no other reason than that –
gender.
To watch Close’s Joan Castleman expertly begin to slowly unravel
from the inside during what is supposed to be a celebratory occasion for her
husband, Joseph Castleman (the also great Johnathan Pryce), it is nothing short
of dramatic excellence. Between her performance and Jane Anderson’s engaging
screenplay, the audience cannot help but cheer when she finally becomes
liberated from her ghosts.
If there are a few shortcomings, and it is truly only a
few, one would be that the ending is rather cliché in an old school way, and I
really didn’t buy into the couple’s son, David (Max Irons), whom is so whiny
and entitled that he’s almost insufferably distracting. Granted, he serves as more of a device to
expose Joseph’s character flaws, but even those weren’t enough to be of any
real significance compared to Joan’s memories.
Nonetheless, “The Wife” is an exceptional film that
deserves to stand out as one of the best dramas from last year. One that certainly
makes me want Glenn to never retire.
“The Wife”: 9/10
“The Nutcracker
and the Four Realms” (2018)
Taking into consideration how many good, and even great,
films that Disney puts out, I’d wager that there’s no other studio currently in
existence that releases quite as much high budget meh as they do. True to
form yet again, it’s the live-action holiday fare that has been CGI/green
screened to death that gets the next spot on the dusty shelf. Sure, some of it
looks good thanks to Disney money, but having so much of it sucks the life
out of the film.
Don’t get me wrong, it’s not terrible – if you’re in age
group that falls below ten-ish. Should that be the case, by all means, knock
yourself out; I’m sure the troop of legitimately freaky clowns will help you keep
your grateful parents up all hours into the night. On the flipside of the coin,
however, adults are going to see any little twist coming ages ahead of their
delivery, which isn’t inherently a bad thing if done in a clever way, but bad
news bears, clever is in short supply in the Four Realms. Some of the comedy
isn’t too bad, but maybe it felt that way because it was rare and added some
life to the plastic.
The best thing about the movie – creepy clowns aside – is
the acting. Nothing less should be expected seeing that Morgan Freeman, Helen
Mirren, Kiera Knightley, and Mackenzie Foy are entirely too good for the
material. Then again, Disney likely pays pretty well , so one can hardly blame
them for agreeing to breeze through this while in some fun costumes. Speaking
of Kiera, did anybody else who has seen this know her voice could do that? I
sincerely took me a moment between that and the makeup to realize it was her,
and for the life of me, I can’t decide if that’s a good thing or not.
Eh, yet another cog that has been the amusingly uneven
directing career of Joe Johnston. Try as he might, at least he can never go
lower than “Jurassic Park III”, am I right?
“The Nutcracker and the Four Realms”: 4/10
“Widows” (2018)
Well, this was rather disappointing.
To expand on that, “Widows” is
disappointing for a Steve McQueen film. After solid projects like 2011’s “Shame”
and 2013’s “12 Years A Slave”, McQueen this time adopts a heist thriller with
an intriguing twist that should have worked bar none, and I guess it kind of
did work, but it didn’t leave much of an impression either. I suppose it could
serve as a good problem to have if a drama/thriller like “Widows” would be
considered a win for a filmmaker still cutting his or her teeth, but only so-so
for an “A”-class director like McQueen.
The whole cast does a great
job – Viola Davis is magnificent as always, even if she’s had better roles in
which to shine; Daniel Kaluuya is quite the intimidating badass; Robert Duvall’s
minor role was effective enough for anyone to want to punch in the face by
design; and Elizabeth Debicki may have had the best the bunch as the portrayed “underestimated
ditzy blonde”. All of these actors really riff well off of each other and make
for a pretty solid First and Second Act.
It’s really in the Third Act
that kind of strips the guts out and makes the film miss its landing. Sure, the
plot can truly be more about the women facing down the odds in a situation
where men are all in power and said men assume these women are utterly helpless
lambs. Be that as it may, all the build-up to the climax promises are a stout
finale; instead, it wraps up cleanly and quickly, and all I could really think
was “That’s it?”
To be sure, McQueen’s
fingerprint is still evidently all over this film, and he brings some adequately
stylish shots and a few twists to the foreground. Perhaps the screenplay could
have used a few more re-writes to have reached the caliber everybody knows he
possesses.
“Widows”: 7/10
“The Girl in the Spider’s
Web” (2018)
Alright, if Fede Alvarez can’t make this material
worthwhile anymore, then it’s time to stop.
If we’re being honest with ourselves, the only thing that
stands out about the original Millenium trilogy by Stieg Larsson is Lisbeth
Salander. “Dragon Tattoo” – both the Swedish version and David Fincher’s
American remake – is a fine, densely textured mystery-drama that Noomi Rapace
and Rooney Mara bring compellingly to life in their respective renditions of
Salander. “Played With Fire” and “Hornet’s Nest” began a steady decline in
mystique, and ultimately lead to a lackluster conclusion of the trilogy.
Unsurprisingly, since the money factory has to keep
chugging away, multiple Salander sequels have continued to be released in print
well after Larsson’s death in 2004, and now we have America’s first crack at a
sequel to “Dragon Tattoo” that, I think, stands outside the original trilogy? Eh,
this is Hollywood, and clearly they don’t care about timelines, so why should
we, right? Although, judging by the box office, it would appear American
audiences gave even less of a shit about this than they did in blasphemous
fashion with Fincher’s cut.
This time, at least, audience disinterest was
well-founded as “Spider’s Web” is the hollowest dud of the lot so far. I’m not
going to say there weren’t some cool scenes, especially towards the end, but other
than that, this film has absolutely nothing of substance to add. It takes no
new risks and it continues to lie on its rape-y laurels to make it gritty. In
doing so, this feature manages to kill whatever Lisbeth had left to make her
exciting. Not only that, sad to say, Claire Foy was a poor fit for this role.
She’s a good actress and has proven that multiple times; however, she doesn’t
have that natural hard persona that worked so well for Noomi and Rooney. Every
time she was on screen, try as she might to hit Lisbeth’s mannerisms, the whole
act felt forced.
Luckily of her, she wasn’t alone. Sverrir Gudnason
brought nothing to the table for Mikael Blumkvist, though nobody can touch
Michael Nyqvist’s original performance (may he rest in peace), and Lakeith
Stanfield was dreadfully underused in a one-dimensional role that he couldn’t
save no matter what he did.
Outside of that, the plot is basic with no decent payoff,
and I don’t really need to ramble anymore because one should just simply skip
this like most people apparently did.
“The Girl in the Spider’s Web”: 3/10
“A Private War”
(2018)
Rosamund Pike is frustratingly underrated and
underappreciated, is she not?
I thought for sure she was going to blow up after “Gone
Girl”, and yet after more stellar performances in “A United Kingdom” and now in
“A Private War”, nothing much has changed. I don’t know. Maybe she prefers it
that way? Or studios are too dumb to promote her properly? Both are feasible,
in my estimation.
Anyway, Pike stars in this biography about war freelance reporter,
Marie Colvin, and her journeys into extremely violent and war-torn territories,
such as, Sri Lanka, Libya, and Syria, in a passionate effort to show the world
what is really going on to civilian lives. What makes her story both beautiful
and tragic is that she never sees fit to back down from her job, despite being
terribly injured in an explosion that leaves her blind in her left eye, and the
devastating PTSD-like effects it’s leaving on her between missions that she can
only calm through alcoholism. The film clocks in at less than two hours, so the
time lapses between assignments move rather quickly and it shows how rapidly
her body is deteriorating away from all the abuse. In a way, this serves as the
film’s main weakness. There were multiple scenes that I wanted to get more out
of before it moved on.
Specific kudos also needs to be given to Director Matthew
Heineman, whom was a natural choice for the project given that this sort of subject
matter has been his claim to fame from previous documentaries he has shot. His expertise
in the field is clear during the more suspenseful scenes on the battlefield,
and fortunately, he was able to transition over to the quieter moments with the
same amount of grace.
I know war films are not everybody’s cup of tea, and even
if that’s case, I’d still highly recommend checking this out solely for Pike’s
performance. This is a drama that should not be allowed to float under the
radar.
“A Private War”: 9.5/10
No comments:
Post a Comment