Movies Reviewed: "A Complete Unknown" and "Nosferatu"

"A Complete Unknown" is the new Bob Dylan biopic starring Timothee Chalamet and Edward Norton, and written and directed by James Mangold. I'll admit, I was dreading it based on the trailer, but it turned out to be pretty good. The cinematography is nice, most of the acting is solid, and it's well paced. It does fall into cliche at times, but if you enjoy music biopics, they probably won't bother you too much.

The issues I had with the film didn't have much to do with the film at all, but rather a handful of outside references. Firstly, it's hard not to compare it to "Inside Llewyn Davis", a Cohen Brothers film starring Oscar Isaac (in his breakthrough performance) which was a brilliant film that followed a fictional contemporary of Dylan in the Greenwich Village music scene of the early 60's. James Mangold is a fine director, but he doesn't reach the highs of the Cohen Brothers, I'm afraid.

I also recently read the memoirs of Dave Van Ronk, who was a non-fictional contemporary of Bob Dylan (and who "Inside Llewyn Davis" is loosely based on). Van Ronk's memoir is a demystifying tome-- he brings all the big names of the Greenwich Village music scene down to Earth, and we see them as just a bunch of off-the-wall artists trying to get along as best they could. Dylan does appear in the memoirs, but isn't mythologized-- he comes off as another ambitious, creative hustler, albeit with an excess of talent. I adored this book, and I would love to see it adapted into a movie. "A Complete Unknown" isn't that movie, and that's not its fault. 

The other point of reference is that I'm part of a thriving (though much smaller) music scene along the Colorado Front Range. I've met a ton of interesting artists and experienced some truly sublime musical moments, but they were simultaneously smaller and more moving than anything in "A Complete Unknown". I can't relate to wild fame of the second half of the film, but the first half, when Dylan is working his way up, just didn't feel familiar to me. 

Ultimately, the movie fell into mythologizing its subject more than I would've liked. But it's hardly surprising that they'd take that approach with a personality as culturally pervasive as Bob Dylan. I suspect most people will enjoy this film. 

***

"Nosferatu", a film by Robert Eggers, is a fabulous updating of gothic horror movies like the original "Nosferatu" (1922) and "Dracula" (1931). So much of it harkens back to the German Expressionist movement, but it's done with all the production values of modern movie making. It's glorious! The story is operatic, and the actors chew the scenery with aplomb; Eggers' cinematic style is perfectly paired with such an over the top story. 

Eggers' films sometimes sacrifice pacing for artsiness, but that's not a problem here-- this movie is entertaining throughout. I wouldn't be surprise if it ends up being a breakout hit for the director, leading to opportunities with the big studios. That has ruined many a great indie film director, so let's enjoy Eggers while he's in the sweet spot. 

It also makes me a little worried for the future of the Dreamworks' attempt to revive the Dracula story with 2023's "The Last Voyage of the Demeter". That was a perfectly fine film-- very pretty, though not terribly exciting. "Nosferatu" is so much better while covering so much more territory, it could kill that franchise before it starts. Then again, if "Nosferatu" is a hit, it might supercharge their efforts. We'll just have to wait and see.

Whatever the case, it's a good time for classic horror. 

MRwOS Reviews "Civil War" and performs "The Scales"

Looking for a movie to stream? You might want to consider "Civil War". Listen to my review, along with my original song "The Scales", on MRwOS: Movie Reviews with Original Songs.

Welcome to Movie Reviews with Original Songs, aka MRwOS! I am your host, David Coile, and I’ll be reviewing a movie I’ve watched recently, then pair it with one of my backlog of original songs.

If you enjoy the program, I encourage you to like, follow, and share, or to support the program by subscribing to patreon.com/davidcoile or by making a contribution on Venmo to @DaveCoile.

In this episode, I’ll be reviewing the film “Civil War” followed by a performance of my original song “The Scales”

Movie: Civil War

“Civil War” is the new film by auteur writer-director Alex Garland, previously known for the excellent sci-fi movies “Ex Machina” and “Annihilation”. In this film, a small band of journalists (played by Kirsten Dunst, Wagner Moura, Cailee Spaeny, and Stephen McKinley Henderson) make their way through a war-torn America in hopes of interviewing the U.S. President (played by Nick Offerman) in a besieged Washington, D.C.

Those looking for an insightful extrapolation of our country’s current political divisions will be disappointed. Instead, this movie critiques the role of journalism when covering conflict. What is the value of war reporting? What does it mean to be impartial? When, if ever, should a journalist intervene? Should the press be protected in a war zone? The fact that the film takes place in extremely familiar locations should be jarring to American audiences, with an overall message that once things go this far, the line between the good guys and bad guys is quite blurry.

The acting is universally great, the cinematography excellent, and the story and themes will challenge you. Be sure to see it with friends so you can have a vibrant discussion afterwards.

Song: The Scales

I wrote “The Scales” back in 2020, before the COVID pandemic really hit the U.S., but while President Trump was facing impeachment. The song was a bit inspired by that, and so I thought it would be appropriate to pair it with this film and its embattled Trump-like President.

MRwOS reviews "Thelma" and performs "Walk on my Hands"

 MRwOS Episode 7: Thelma (Walk on my Hands)

Welcome to Movie Reviews with Original Songs, aka MRwOS! I am your host, David Coile, and I’ll be reviewing a movie I’ve watched recently, then playing one of my original songs that has similar themes.

If you enjoy the program, I encourage you to like, follow, and share it with your friends, or to support the program by subscribing to patreon.com/davidcoile or by making a contribution through Paypal or Venmo @DaveCoile. 

In this episode, I’ll be reviewing the film “Thelma” followed by a performance of my original song “Walk on my Hands”

***

“Thelma” is a charming caper comedy about a nonagenarian who falls victim to an over the phone scam. When the police and her family won’t help, Thelma decides to track down the scammers on her own and demand her money back. 

Thelma is played by June Squibb, who I know from scene stealing supporting roles in the films of Alexander Payne, such as “Nebraska” and “About Schmidt”, and she does a bang up job in her first starring role. She’s joined by Richard Roundtree as her friend Ben, who reluctantly gets drawn into the whole affair. In many ways, this film could be a geriatric sendup of the type of films Roundtree used to star in, specifically the blaxploitation classic “Shaft” from the 1970s. The two sneak around, search for clues and confront the bad guys in familiar ways while trying to overcome elderly obstacles.

At first I was concerned that it was being too hard on the older generation, but other generations get skewered just as much, including Thelma’s ineffectual grandson (played by Fred Heckinger) and his  overconfident parents (played by Parker Posey and Clark Gregg). 

Though the filmmaking isn’t especially innovative, the plotting is tight– pay attention to the details, because they pay off in the end. Writer-director Josh Margolin based Thelma on his own grandmother, who nearly fell victim to a similar scam. The love and affection he has for her is pervasive, and it makes for a very entertaining film. 

***

I wrote my song “Walk on my Hands” back in the early 2000s, and it was written from the perspective of a young adult crying out for independence from his parents. But I think it shares some common sentiments with the elderly, who often get treated like children, even when they’re still fairly capable. 

***

That’s it for this episode of MRwOS! If you enjoyed the program, I encourage you to like, follow and share it with your friends, or support the program by subscribing to patreon.com/davidcoile, or maybe just throw a tip my way via Paypal or Venmo @DaveCoile. I’ll see you next time with another movie review and original song. Until then, Fade Out, Everybody!

MRwOS reviews "Furiosa: A Mad Max Saga". Plus, original music with Cheyenne Dane!

 Going to a movie this weekend? Have a listen to my review of "Furiosa: A Mad Max Saga". Plus, I play an original song with guest Cheyenne Dane!

Furiosa: A Mad Max Saga (If You Can See Me)

MRwOS is BACK!!!!

 I've been retooling my movie review show to be more of a succinct audio podcast. Check it out and let me know what you think!

MRwOS: Movie Reviews with Original Songs

Ep. 3: MRwOS - “Late Night with the Devil” and “Be Remembered”

 

I review a film about a Late Night Talk Show host willing to do anything to be famous, followed by a song about the sacrifices we consider in showbiz. Enjoy!

Ep. 2, MRwOS (Movie Reviews with Original Songs) - Dune, Part 2/ In Your Blue Eyes

 

If you liked Dune, Part 1, you'll LOVE Dune, Part 2!

Ep. 1: Movie Reviews with Original Songs - "Perfect Days" and "So Afraid"

 In this episode, I give my thoughts on the Wim Wenders directed Japanese film, then play a simple but anxious tune of my own!

Dave & Ashley Review "Won't You Be My Neighbor"

It's back! My movie review show has been on hiatus after losing my co-host, but I'm now working with a rotating cast. This time my friend Ashley Albiniak (and a couple special guests) joined me to review the recent Mister Rogers documentary. Enjoy!

Passengers

I knew Passengers was getting mixed-to-bad reviews, but I really like Chris Pratt and Jennifer Lawrence, so I decided to see it anyway. As it turns out, it was a pretty solid film-- the performances are great and the plot, about two people waking up 90 years early on an interstellar trip, is thought-provoking.

I should mention up front that I believe the previews for this film are misleading. In one of the trailers, Chris Pratt's character says, "There is a reason we woke up early." That line is no where in the film, and it implies a certain twist or mystery that doesn't quite figure into the story. In fact, I don't think this film has any real twists. One of the things I liked about it is how it lays things out step-by-step lets us watch the consequences unfold.

The crux of the story revolves not around the ship's malfunctions or any cosmic machinations, but rather around an extremely selfish act performed by one of the main characters. It informs all of their interactions going forward, even when things get weird. I really enjoyed the ethical dilemma and the questions it raised, and I was a bit shocked to find out afterward that this was the source of many bad reviews-- many believe that the film doesn't handle the issue with enough gravity. All I can say is that the characters seem to act in a plausible way under extraordinary circumstances.

Sci-Fi fans should also know going in that Passengers is not really about the special effects, even though there are some good visual moments. After seeing Passengers and Rogue One within a couple days of each other, it really highlights how much Science Fiction isn't a genre so much a medium or setting. Star Wars is an adventure serial, Arrival is about witnessing the impossible, Inception is a psychological mystery, and Passengers is a meditation on loneliness. 

I enjoyed Passengers. There's probably a more sophisticated take on the same material, but some films are good not for the answers they give, but for the questions they ask. I suggest bringing a friend of a different gender and going out for coffee afterwards to discuss.

I'm interested in hearing opinions about Passenger's central conflict in the comments section, so anyone reading beyond the review, please consider the comments section a spoiler zone.

Rogue One: A Star Wars Story

Over New Year's weekend, I finally got to see Rogue One: A Star Wars Story. For my money, this is the best installment since Return of the Jedi. The film has a stronger ensemble cast than any other Star Wars film-- Felicity Jones, Ben Mendelsohn, Mads Mikkelson, Forest Whitaker, Diego Luna and Donnie Yen are all either Oscar-level thespians or global super stars; Alan Tudyk is the lowest profile actor in the main cast, yet is still beloved of sci-fi aficionados everywhere. The series as a whole is plagued with clunky dialogue, and this installment is no exception, but Rogue One probably has the most fluid scripting since The Empire Strikes Back. And aside from some questionable attempts to revive dead actors with CGI, the special effects are top notch.

Despite all this, the movie still manages to disappoint, mostly because it doesn't feel quite like a Star Wars film. The original trilogy was objectively B-movie material, but what it had going for it was brutally efficient storytelling-- they were simple stories extremely well told. They trimmed the fat, while Rogue One has an entire middle-section that feels unnecessary. Furthermore, in their attempts to add moral complexity to the more recent films, I feel that they've diluted the charm of the original stories. There were times when Rogue One reminded me more of Dune (with Saw Gerrera's extremists) or of the relatively recent Battlestar Galactica reboot (with the social stratification and political squabbling within the Rebel ranks). Mind you, I like Dune and love Battlestar Galactica, but they occupy a different corner of the Sci-Fi multi-verse. I'm okay with Star Wars sticking to archetypal characters and themes, relying more on adventure and a sense of wonder.

One aside: I loved the characters of Chirrut Imwe and Baze Malbus. The idea of a wannabe Jedi with a buddy who keeps saving his ass is great! I'd love to see a film just about them. The other thing I liked about this duo is how, instead of being a call back to earlier Star Wars movies, it's a shout out to the Akira Kurosawa films that inspired the whole series in the first place.

One of the problems with the current trend toward extended universes is that blockbuster films have a harder time standing on their own. If it weren't a Star Wars film, I'd have fewer issues with it. Rogue One is solid, sci-fi entertainment, and would be even if it wasn't a prequel.

What's Wrong With Cinematic Comedy?

So, I went to see Office Christmas Party. I really like all the actors involved, and the basic premise sounded cool, but it ended up being just another mildly amusing film comedy. It had some good energy at times, but it never really got as bawdy or as outrageous as would've been nice. It was fun without really being funny.

But it got me thinking-- what's wrong with big screen comedies, anyway? On television you have sitcoms that go through season long arcs being absolutely hilarious, while 90 minute movies can't seem to make it through the third act without some hokey car chase or criminal hijinks that turn the film into a thriller for some reason. You'd think all those great TV joke writers would have screenplays lying around, but the good stuff doesn't seem to be making it to the silver screen.

I don't mean to say there aren't good film comedies out there, but they're often good for reasons other than their humor. This is especially true of indie comedies, which are really more light-hearted dramas. I loved Hello, My Name Is Doris and liked and respected Don't Think Twice, but I don't recall guffawing. I guess most animated films are technically comedies, and many of them are excellent, but more for their whimsical storytelling than for how funny they are. And, of course, when you do get a "good" comedy, it's often because they throw so many jokes at you that at least some have to hit, if only because it's a statistical certainty (this is the situation with most Will Ferrell films).

What bothers me is that we're actually going through a comedy renaissance right now. Louie, BoJack Horseman, Broad City, Rick and Morty, People of Earth, You're the Worst-- all of these sitcoms are funnier than any film comedy I can think of from the last few years. We also have a host of podcasts, talk shows and sketch comedy programs floating around that are consistently laugh-out-loud funny. Why is the movie industry lagging behind?

I'm open to being convinced I'm wrong on this. If you know of any gut-bustingly funny film comedies from the last five years, please post them in the comments section.

Short Reviews: Tarzan Infiltrates the Swiss Army Shallows!

They've been making Tarzan films forever. Way back in the 30s and 40s, Johnny Weissmuller's take on the character was hugely popular, spawning several sequels and giving us the definitive Tarzan call. But after that, there weren't any terribly memorable Tarzan films until the 80s, when you had the critically panned Tarzan, the Ape Man (with Bo Derek, no less) followed a few years later by the better received Greystoke: The Legend of Tarzan, Lord of the Apes (I remember this fondly because I had a crush on Andie MacDowell at the time). But the most prominent Tarzan in recent years has been the Disney series, starting with the 1999 animated film and followed by several direct-to-video installments. Now comes a new live action version, The Legend of Tarzan, that attempts to resuscitate the franchise.


It's a diverting film, if not quite an inspired one. One of the things it does right is jump into the main story without dwelling much on the character's origin-- Tarzan's storied past is shown via periodic flashbacks; just enough to frame the larger tale. It certainly looks good, with adequate special effects; and I'm not sure how many effects it took to make the 67 year old Samuel L. Jackson look so spry and youthful-- he's clearly going to be a scene stealer into his 120s. Chistoph Waltz also does a typically exceptional job as a mustache twirling villain. The biggest problem with the film is its stars. Alexander Skarsgard is a capable actor (I really liked him in The Diary of a Teenage Girl), but here he gets cheesy-- his every movement is portentous as he stares deep into the soul of the world (do apes not blink? Is that what I'm supposed to get from this?). Margot Robbie (who I liked in Whiskey Tango Foxtrot) puts on this girlish American accent that I had a hard time taking seriously. The plot is somewhat confusing, but it's really just a set-up for its absurd-yet-entertaining climax. If you're looking for a summer adventure, this'll get the job done, but I'd rather watch The Jungle Book a few more times.

In Breaking Bad, Bryan Cranston played a chemistry teacher turned drug dealer savant (while starring in maybe the greatest TV show of all time). In The Infiltrator, Cranston gets to play the other side, this time as an undercover cop trying to bring down famed drug kingpin, Pablo Escobar. Cranston does an expert job in a role that requires several overlapping performances. The film itself is not quite so elegant, as it breezes through the plot points without giving us a chance to really get to know many of the important supporting characters. The film ultimately lacks some emotional weight, but it's worth seeing just for Cranston's performance.

Swiss Army Man is the strangest film I've seen in a long time, which shouldn't be surprising since it's about a suicidal man whose life is saved by a farting corpse. As the corpse, this continues Daniel Radcliffe's string of interesting post-Harry Potter roles-- some of them are so odd, it makes me wonder if he's trolling his fan-base. Paul Dano plays the suicidal man with his usual manic energy, which is 100% appropriate for this role. The two go on a journey from a deserted island back to civilization, with many lessons learned along the way. It is a truly odd film, but also quite thought-provoking. At this point, I'm not even sure it's a comedy. Where does reality begin and fantasy end? Is it a metaphor? Or just one man's fever-dream before dying? My first thought was that it was about accepting yourself for who you are no matter what society says-- but then I thought it might be a parody of those kinds of films. Whatever the case, take a friend with you because you'll have a lot to talk about afterwards.

I wasn't a big horror fan as a kid, but I've grown to appreciate how cinematic it can be. The Shallows is a solid entry into the killer shark genre. Blake Lively does an expert job as a medical school drop-out honoring her mom's memory by surfing an uncharted bay in Central America. The movie sets up the stakes visually in a clear and concise way, then unveils the horror of the situation with clockwork precision. It's the not the scariest film out there, but it doesn't throw cheap scares at you, either. Aside from a slightly confusing ending, I thought this was a great film. Genre-fare done extremely well.

Surprise! Ghostbusters isn't as good as Ghostbusters

The all new, all female Ghostbusters has finally hit the theaters, following a production rife with controversy. For the record, I've been a fan of Melissa McCarthy since she was on the Gilmore Girls, and I've enjoyed all of Paul Feig's directorial efforts since Bridesmaids (not to mention his great cult TV show, Freaks and Geeks); Their collaboration has produced some of the best movie comedies in recent memory. It's always risky to reboot a beloved franchise, but at least they were doing it with top notch talent; and with the massive, premature backlash the film has received, I've been really rooting for them to show up the haters.

I'm sorry to report that the film is merely so-so. That it doesn't rise to the level of the first Ghostbusters isn't a surprise-- even the original cast and crew fell short with their 1989 sequel, and they were all certified comic geniuses. But it also fails to rise to the lofty standards set by previous Feig-McCarthy collaborations.


It's not quite fair to compare this Ghostbusters with the 1984 version-- they were filmed in different eras with different comic sensibilities; but it's interesting to see where the differences lie. I'm surprised at how restrained the original film seems in comparison to the reboot. Part of that was by necessity-- special effects were both lower quality and way more expensive back in the early 80s than they are today; they were forced to develop gags more through the characters and story. But it's shocking to see how much broader the characterizations are in the new film. Kristin Wiig is the closest thing to a straight character in the reboot, but she's probably crazier than all of the original cast, save for Rick Moranis and (possibly) Bill Murray.

I do think it's fair to compare it to other Feig-McCarthy films, however. The last big ensemble movie Feig did was Bridesmaids, with both McCarthy and Wiig, and the relationships between the characters were strong and heartfelt. In Ghostbusters, they seemed a bit cursory-- just enough to get the story going. Both The Heat and Spy were female takes on classic male-dominated genres, and they did a great job of spoofing their source material. Ghostbusters could have used a bit more of that spirit; there were occasional references to the sexist backlash to the production, but I would've liked it to really cut loose with meta-commentary on the whole affair. My suspicion is that, even if the filmmakers wanted to do it, the studio wouldn't have let them. Anyway, spoofing a comedy that never became cliched is harder than parodying entire genres.


I thought the pacing of the film was questionable. Just as the characters were too consistently goofy, so were the scenes in the film-- there wasn't enough time spent setting up the jokes; they just came one after the other. I wish Feig had brought in a few lower key actors he's used in his previous films-- Rose Byrne's subtlety was sorely missed, especially with Kate McKinnon's constant mugging at the camera. The film also spent too much time chasing references to the original movie, while neglecting one of it's best original gags (I don't want to give it away, but they set it up in the third act, dropped it, then brought it back during the credits in a much less satisfying way).

That being said, there are some really funny moments in the film, along with some great special effects sequences. It's a disappointment, but you could do a lot worse at the cineplex this summer.

***

Bonus Content: Back in 2014, I picked my dream cast for an all-female remake (not a reboot or sequel). My picks were as follows...

Mila Kunis - Petra (Peter/Bill Murray role)
Mindy Kaling - Ramona (Raymond/Dan Akroyd role)
Felicia Day - Eberta (Egon/Harold Ramis role)
Jessica Williams - Winnie (Winston/Ernie Hudson role)
Chris O'Dowd - Dana (Dana/Sigourney Weaver role)
Kristen Schaal - Louise (Louis/Rick Moranis role)

Short Movie Reviews (In which I reluctantly admit that Ethan Hawke and Kate Beckinsale do some great work)

I've never been a big Ethan Hawke fan. Maybe it's his public persona, or maybe it's the roles he chooses, but I've always avoided seeing his films. But, like Tom Cruise with blockbusters, he's become an actor I reluctantly associate with high quality indie films. A short list of more-than-excellent films he's been in: Predestination, The Purge, Sinister, Before the Devil Knows You're Dead, and, of course, Dead Poet's Society. I may have my reservations about him, but some great directors do not, most notably Richard Linklater. Linklater and Hawke have teamed up for seven films, by my count, and most of them have been amazing.

Probably their best collaboration has been the Before Sunrise series, which details the repeat encounters between Jesse and Celine (Hawke and Julie Delpy, respectively), each separated by nine years. I've seen these in completely the wrong order. I started with the most recent one Before Midnight (2013), which completely bowled me over-- despite the movie being just one long conversation, it was mesmerizing. So I decided to check out the original film, Before Sunrise (1995), which I was a little disappointed by. It's the same structure, but the discussion topics felt a lot more juvenile... but juvenile in exactly the way I was at that age. If I had watched that film when it first came out, I probably would've fallen in love with it. So, this week I finally finished the trilogy and watched the middle film, Before Sunset (2004), which I found to be nearly as brilliant as Before Midnight. I like dialogue, but I think a lot of films over do it, or try too hard to be clever, but this series manages to capture the charm and poetry of an inspired conversation-- the type you have with a new lover or a best friend, the kind that you never want to stop. I can't wait for the 2022 sequel, Before Noon/Dawn/Twilight/Tea Time/Whatever...

But Ethan Hawke's stamp of quality goes beyond Linklater films. He stars with Greta Gerwig and Julianne Moore in the lovably quirky Maggie's Plan (2015) about a young woman who poaches another woman's husband, then schemes to give him back. This is more your typical indie comedy, with quirky-rather-than-funny characters and plot contrivances, but Gerwig is always charming, Moore is very fun with a French accent, and Hawke is always best when he's playing a cad.

Gerwig is an indie film darling and has been associated with several great directors, too. One of them is Whit Stillman, who is one of the best writer-directors of dialogue in the business. His last film, Damsels in Distress (starring Gerwig) was a bit of a disappointment, but he's back in top form with Love & Friendship (2016), an adaptation of Jane Austen's novella, Lady Susan. Kate Beckinsale stars as Lady Susan and gives a riveting performance as a scheming society woman. Nothing I've seen her do before suggested she could be this nimble and convincing with dense dialogue (not even her previous collaboration with Stillman, The Last Days of Disco), but she whips out the words with gusto. The film is quick witted and cutting and I thoroughly enjoyed it-- probably the most fun I've ever had watching Jane Austen on screen.

Short Reviews: Mutants, Avengers and Nice Guys Singing with Gangsta Cats...

X-men: Apocalypse - Overall, a big disappointment after Days of Future Past and First Class. The first two films in the reboot focused on the competing ideologies of Professor X and Magneto with Mystique stuck in the middle, and that made for a compelling conflict. In this installment, they pay some lip service to the triangle, but mostly focus on introducing new characters and a generically realized villain. Aside from the design work done for some of the new characters (Storm, Psylocke and Nightcrawler look pretty awesome), the film is muddled and shallow. And if you're a comic book purist, you'll be thoroughly upset with the liberties taken with some of the characters.

Sing Street - Director John Carney has made headlines lately after trashing Kiera Knightley's work in his previous film, Begin Again. While I also had trouble with Knightley's casting in that film, Sing Street shows that Carney bears plenty of responsibility for his missteps. Like Once, this film is set in Ireland, but it's about a teenage boy in the 80s who starts a band to impress a girl. There's a certain sweetness and local flavor that lifts it up, but the songs are as mediocre as the ones in Begin Again and fail to fully support the rebellious stance taken by the story. The film is a pleasant, but fails to rise above the level of unreflective adult nostalgia.

The Nice Guys - Shane Black was once the highest paid screenwriter in Hollywood, having penned the highly influential Lethal Weapon series. More recently, he's been directing his own scripts, most notably the massive blockbuster Iron Man 3, but also the cult favorite Kiss Kiss Bang Bang. The Nice Guys follows in the vein of that small, neo-noir buddy film, but doesn't quite match its lofty virtues. The film makes some confusing choices at the beginning and then the last third of the film just sort of happens. However, the chemistry between Russell Crowe, Ryan Gosling and Angourie Rice (stealing the show as Gosling's character's daughter) is glorious and alone probably worth the price of admission. I'm not sure if there's going to be a sequel, but I'd love to see this crew again in a better film.

Captain America: Civil War - For my money, the Captain America series has been the highest quality Marvel Studios franchise to date, and Civil War keeps the streak alive. I'm in awe of the Russo brother's ability to keep a movie this big this balanced. Every one of the huge cast of characters gets their moment in the sun, but unlike other superhero films, Civil War knows which ones are the stars and which ones are merely the supporting cast. The themes of the film are interwoven masterfully with personal motivations, and you also get the best mass superhero battle of all time! Highly recommended. See it again and again...

Keanu - I really enjoy Key and Peele's sketch comedy show and was looking forward to a feature length treatment of their sensibilities. But greatness on the small screen doesn't always translate to the big one, and in many ways Keanu feels like a comedy sketch stretched from 5 to 100 minutes. There are some very funny scenes, and Key and Peele put on some tremendous performances, but there's just not enough to carry you all the way through.

Review: My Big Fat Greek Wedding 2

In 2002, My Big Fat Greek Wedding was a surprise blockbuster. It earned $240 million at the box office, and ended up as the fifth top grossing film that year (ahead of Signs, Austin Powers in Goldmember and just behind Harry Potter and the Chamber of Secrets). With that kind of haul, you would've expected a sequel right away; instead they attempted to follow it up with a sit-com version that fizzled out after 7 episodes.

I understand why they would go the sitcom route-- the sense of humor in the original and in 2016's My Big Fat Greek Wedding 2 is very much what you would expect from a sitcom. It's contrived and built on unlikely coincidences and communication failures that should be easy to work out; the only thing missing is a laugh track.

So the comedy is unsophisticated, but the characters are cute and charming, and that's all that really matters. Like the first film, it's got a strong sense of family and compassion that most films lack. I'm not sure if there's the same cultural yearning in 2016 for that kind of connection as there was back in 2002, but I think it's safe to say that if you liked the original, then you'll enjoy the sequel.

Review: Batman V Superman

I would say I'm disappointed, except that Batman V Superman was almost exactly how I imagined it would be. The idea of pitting Batman against Superman is great, and it should've been a wonderful movie, but in their attempt to jump-start the DC Cinematic Universe (to compete with Marvel's ultra-franchise), they crammed too much in and killed the pace of the film.

Now I like Zach Snyder. He's prodigiously skilled at crafting cinematic spectacle, but he also wants to make movies with meaning (even if he sometimes lacks the nuance to pull it off). He's Michael Bay with a conscience. Unlike many critics, I really enjoyed his take on Superman in 2013's Man of Steel. It wasn't terribly faithful to the comics, but we've already seen that version with the Richard Donner films of the 70s and 80s. Snyder is all about exploring how a truly godlike being can affect our humanity, and I think that's a fascinating approach. My favorite parts of this film showed how mind-bending the existence of Superman would actually be. Every time he arrives on scene, he seems strange and inhuman.

And Superman is not the protagonist of this film; instead, we get mostly Bruce Wayne's perspective. I confess, even though I admire Ben Affleck's directorial skills, I think he's kind of a bad actor. Normally he sleepwalks through his roles, but he brings an intensity to Bruce Wayne that I've never seen from him before.
This is actually one of my favorite depictions of the character. The design of the Bat-suit is fresh and I really appreciated the voice modulation (let's be honest, Christian Bale's gravelly whisper was the worst thing about his Batman films). I definitely approve of this new take on Batman. When it focuses on Bruce Wayne and Batman's reaction to Superman, this is a pretty good film.

I have some quibbles. Jesse Eisenberg plays an interesting villain, he just has no business being called Lex Luthor. It feels like they unnecessarily burned through one of the more important DC villains (Dr. Doom can relate). If you're going to deviate from a character so much, why not just use a different character? There must be some supervillain from DC that has a similar act as Jesse Eisenberg.

Wonder Woman is introduced in an interesting and mysterious fashion, but seems just thrown in during the climax of the film (though Gal Gadot does a great job in a small role). There are several dream sequences that seemed unnecessary. There are a lot of plot building moments that somehow manage to be both plodding and rushed at the same time. The final battle is not as momentous as it wants to be. And, of course, the set-up for the next film feels a bit forced.

All in all, it's a good, but not great, film. If you like grittier takes on superheroes, you'll probably enjoy this. It may try your patience at times, but when it delivers, it delivers well.

88th Academy Awards: Dave's Breakdown and Picks

The most prestigious awards in filmdom will be handed out Sunday night. I didn't get to see as many of the nominated films as I would have liked, but I did manage to see all eight Best Picture contenders (not among them is my favorite film from 2015, Me and Earl and the Dying Girl). Below I give a detailed ranking of the Best Picture nominees, along with my picks for some of the other major categories (my favorites will be bolded in italics and nominees from films which I failed to see will have a strike-through). 

Best Picture: 

Spotlight - Some films get nominated not because they're especially well done, but because they touch on important topics. This year Spotlight is that film. It's competently directed and the acting is solid, but it doesn't even stand out as a great entry in its own genre.

The Martian - I love the trend of hard sci-fi films becoming blockbusters, and The Martian was a very entertaining film. The film was inspiring, but not really awe-inspiring, and hardly ground-breaking. Plus, the previously nominated Gravity was a much better film, and it didn't win.

Bridge of Spies - Stephen Spielberg and Tom Hanks teamed up to prove that they're the Frank Capra and Jimmy Stewart of their generation. While I appreciated the sure hands of the Hollywood veterans, there was probably a bit too much schmaltz for it to be the best picture of the year.

Room - Room had great performances, sophisticated direction and touched on an important issue. The biggest knock against it is that it's in no way an entertaining film. If it's not too depressing to win an Oscar, it's indie sensibilities are enough to sink it.

The Big Short - In some ways, this is the artiest film of the bunch. The story is disjointed, non-linear, it breaks the 4th wall several times, and it also aims to inform its audience. It's like a documentary with very entertaining dramatizations littered throughout. I greatly admired The Big Short, and I think it's an important film, but it's too far outside of the Oscar norm to get the statue.

Brooklyn - What makes Brooklyn great is also what makes it an Oscar loser. It's completely lacking in flash or melodrama. The acting is focused and restrained. The most entertaining scenes take place during discussions at dinner tables. It feels like a real story about real people, with all the twists and turns that real life musters. It's a near flawless film, but it doesn't demand attention, and that's why it won't win the award.

Mad Max: Fury Road - Yes, it's a post-apocalyptic chase movie, but make no mistake-- this is a brilliant film that will stand the test of time. No other film looked better last year, and no other film had such brutally efficient storytelling. It even had a focus on women's rights, which created quite a stir when it was released last summer. It would probably win if not for the fact that it's a post-apocalyptic chase movie...

The Revenant - No director has ever had two films win back-to-back Best Picture awards, but I think it's going to happen this year. Birdman was a pretty artsy film to win the award in 2015, and Alejandro Inarritu's follow-up is in the same vein. There are several scenes in the film that will wow the audience, and it succeeds both on technical and dramatic merits. Unlike Fury Road, The Revenant is a slow and ponderous with punctuated scenes of great intensity; despite some very violent moments, it is full of beautiful and poetic imagery. Of the nominees, it's probably touches on the fewest socially important topics, but somehow it feels more important than all of them. It may not be the best film of the year, but it's pretty damn good, and worthy of being an Oscar winner.

Best Director: Aside from Tom McCarthy, I think all the nominees in this category did brilliant jobs. Still, I suspect the Academy will reward Inarritu as Director along with Best Picture.

Alejandro G. Inarritu (The Revenant)

Adam McKay (The Big Short)

George Miller (Mad Max: Fury Road)

Lenny Abrahamson (Room)

Tom McCarthy (Spotlight)

Best Actor: I didn't see some of the performances in this category, but I was completely charmed by Bryan Cranston's portrayal of Dalton Trumbo during the Hollywood blacklist era. Matt Damon was great in the most Matt Damon role ever, but his performance didn't go beyond that. And, honestly, I don't think DiCaprio should get an Oscar for breathing heavily for 3 hours.

Bryan Cranston (Trumbo)

Matt Damon (The Martian)

Leonardo DiCaprio (The Revenant)

Michael Fassbender (Steve Jobs)

Eddie Redmayne (The Danish Girl)

Best Actress: I saw even fewer performances in this category, but I'd love to see Saoirse Ronan win for a subtle, nuanced performance in a category that can over-celebrate flashy roles.

Saoirse Ronan (Brooklyn)

Brie Larson (Room)

Cate Blanchett (Carol)

Jennifer Lawrence (Joy)

Charlotte Rampling (45 Years)

Best Supporting Actor: Sylvestor Stallone was great in Creed, but if he wins it's for nostalgia only-- everybody else in this category was better than him. Christian Bale was overly mannered and Mark Ruffalo was nothing special. Mark Rylance did an exceptional job in the Bridge of Spies, but I really think the Tom Hardy should win-- his performance in The Revenant was so casually amazing, it's one of the reasons it deserves to win Best Picture.

Tom Hardy (The Revenant)

Christian Bale (The Big Short)

Mark Ruffalo (Spotlight)

Mark Rylance (Bridge of Spies)

Sylvester Stallone (Creed)

Best Original Screenplay: Bridge of Spies had really great dialogue, and a tight structure. The other scripts had great concepts, but didn't seem as well executed.

Bridge of Spies 

Ex Machina

Inside Out

Spotlight

Straight Outta Compton

Best Adapted Screenplay: If there was ever a film that felt like it came from a book, it's Brooklyn. The other nominees were wonderful, but Brooklyn's script was perfect.

Brooklyn

The Big Short

The Martian

Room

Carol

Best Production Design: The production design in Fury Road was just awe-inspiring. Its post-apocalyptic world was fully realized and believable, and it made the film.

Mad Max: Fury Road

Bridge of Spies

The Martian

The Revenant

The Danish Girl

Best Film Editing: The Revenant deserves praise for its hide-the-cuts approach to filmmaking, but everything that made The Big Short work was how it was edited. 

The Big Short

Mad Max: Fury Road

The Revenant

Spotlight

Star Wars: The Force Awakens

Best Visual Effects: Some of the effects in Ex Machina and The Martian looked cheap to me, and some in The Force Awakens were too damn cartoony. Fury Road probably has better visual effects throughout the film, but nothing beats the bear attack in The Revenant.

The Revenant

Ex Machina

Mad Max: Fury Road

The Martian

Star Wars: The Force Awakens