Tag Archives: 2021

Movies or shows released in 2021.

Movie Reviews

Ghostbusters: Afterlife (2021) Review – A Worthy Sequel

Leave a comment
Advertisements

Ghostbusters might be one of the most random movies that became a franchise in Hollywood’s history. If you go back and rewatch the original Ghostbusters (1984), you will notice how it just tells you one singular story with a couple of quirky, sometimes inappropriate characters. It’s an excellent movie, don’t get me wrong, but to me, this is the perfect example of how movies can be and how some “random” films can start a franchise. And before we move on any further, I also like Ghostbusters II (1989), and when I was growing up, it was my preferred of those two films. I think I just liked it better because it was funnier to me (at least at that time). Now, I can see its flaws more clearly, but I still enjoy it for what it is.

Before moving on to Ghostbusters: Afterlife, let us discuss the elephant (or a ghost in this case) in the room (or a ghost trap?) The 2016 Ghostbusters film is a kind of a reboot, kind of a sequel where they (Ghostbusters) already existed, and yet all the original cast members are not playing themselves…? Yes, I was one of the many who didn’t like this film. But not because they were all women. I said even at the time, if this movie got made with the original cast, it would have still flopped because the script was awful. It had some of our brightest and funniest actresses, but unfortunately, they were all told to do the same thing, or at least that is how it came across. One day, I might rewatch it and make it into a full review, but for now, I wanted to clarify where I stand on that weird semi-reboot/semi-sequel that is neither. Another reason I mentioned the 2016 film is simple – in Ghostbusters: Afterlife, the filmmakers made some choices (almost like the studio has learned their lesson?), and most of them worked. To an extent, they had an “easier” job as they could see what people didn’t like about the previous film.

Ghostbusters: Afterlife is first and foremost proper sequel. Yes, we follow brand new characters but they have clear ties with the original films, so that’s one confusion cleared up from the get go. Also, it’s new, young generation and perfectly cast lead. And no, I am not talking about Carrie Coon even though I liked her in this film a lot. As to me, the lead of this film and the movie stealing performance was by Mckenna Grace. Her Phoebe is the perfect blend in between awkward humour and her showing us how brilliant and smart her character is. I don’t think it’s a spoiler to say Phoebe is granddaughter of the late Harold Ramis’ character in this film and she couldn’t have played it more perfectly. Mckenna plays her just perfectly on the edge of homage to Harold’s character (you can see his sense of dry humour, she is as intelligent as her granddad, possibly even more intelligent) and making that character something new and unique to her. I have enjoyed her performance and I hope this is the future of any potential Ghostbusters films, shows or whatever else they will throw at us. As long as Mckenna Grace is there as Phoebe, I am in.

This movie worked well for its overall majority as it was trying to establish itself first, rather than relying on the legacy of the previous films. That was until it stopped doing that. And for me to discuss it properly, I need to get to some spoiler territory, so…

Beware, SPOILERS are coming!

Ghostbusters: Afterlife really tried its hardest to reference the previous movies only when needed at first. At least that was what I got from the beginning; it felt like it was only referencing the past films for us to understand who was who and how they were related to the original movies. That got slightly overboard in the last 20 minutes, where we, of course, not only get all the living Ghostbusters back but they are also suited up. And not just that, but we also get Harold Ramis’ ghost. Yep, you read that right. And that was the decision I still go back and forth on. Because the first moment he appears in the film, helping his granddaughter fight the final ghosts, that moment was kind of sweet. But his CGI ghost definitely felt a bit weird later on, not talking, just kind of being there. I understand it was supposed to be a delightful tribute to a colleague and a friend who died too soon (and his family gave the filmmakers their blessings so they could “revive” him), but ultimately, I don’t like when films bring back dead actors. But again, in this case, I could see at least some argument being made about how it wasn’t about anything else but paying tribute to a friend. That doesn’t change the fact his ghost was there for a bit too long.

Believe it or not, I would be totally fine if all living Ghostbusters didn’t show up (in their suits nonetheless) for the finale. If you want them in your movie, sure, get them before that, maybe a phone call or something like that where they can impart some words of wisdom to the “young guns”, but let the young guns have their moment, their finale. That was the only thing that “spoiled” the film for me a bit – I understand why they did it, but I wish we could have had our main heroes going up against “the big bad” all by themselves. Because this entire film tries really hard to make Mckenna, Finn Wolfhard, Logan Kim and Celeste O’Connor into the new team, and for what it’s worth, they work pretty well together. But it’s almost like there was this fear of them handling the finale “a bit too well on their own”, so we needed the old guys to come back for one last hurrah. As much as I love the first two films, I would prefer if they stayed on the sidelines.

But as a potential new chapter, a new story with new characters to play around with, in this Ghostbusters world, I liked it. I hope we all got the “fan service” out of our system, and if we ever get a sequel to this film, it will be all about our new protagonists. No more “old” Ghostbusters, they had their time, and they were great. If you want to make more Ghostbusters films, it is now time to build on the new characters without delving too deep into the nostalgia.

Overall, Ghostbusters: Afterlife was a fun ride that managed to establish new characters and, until the last 20 minutes, avoided the unnecessary over-reliance on the previous movies and characters. This film works because of its young cast, and, this can’t be overstated enough, Mckenna Grace might be one of the best casting decisions in recent years. Jason Reitman did the best he could, and I hope if there is a sequel, he gets the chance to return with just the “young guns”, Carrie and, yeah, Paul Rudd could return too, as he is always a delight to see. Also, I wondered why Gozer looked like Olivia Wilde, only to discover that was really her. What a weird yet oddly great decision.

Rating: 4.5 out of 5.

That’s all for this one! Did you see it? What did you think about it? Let me know!

Until next time,

Luke

Movie Reviews

Mass (2021) Review – The Oscars Truly Messed Up

Leave a comment
Advertisements

I fully understand this won’t be my most read review, as Mass still feels like this almost “underground” film only a few movie nuts have heard of. That is strange, considering everybody who has seen it can confirm three things. The less you know about this movie before going is better, it’s a brilliant movie, and all four lead actors should have been nominated for Oscars in their respective categories. Yep, this is how I have stumbled upon this film; I heard this is a “shoe-in” for all four performers. What a surprise it was when neither actor got nominated. I think this might be one of the Academy’s most colossal and noticeable mishaps in the last decade.

I have challenged myself to write this review without spoiling anything. Everything I had read about Mass before going in was so perfect; I will continue in this as I strongly believe this is one of the rare films that works without you knowing the main idea of the film. All I will tell you is this – the movie is about two couples coming together in a church to discuss something, a tragedy that has affected both of their lives. That is the only thing I knew about this film, and please do not search for anything else as this movie’s pacing is so deliberate it reveals all the answers in its own time. The movie wants you to be a bit confused first to possibly sympathize with all involved before knowing what the tragedy is because that is where the cookie crumbles. Once you know what is happening, you will form your opinions about who is right or wrong… except you might struggle, as I have too, to label either right or wrong. Mass is almost a perfect film about how tragedy affects everybody, so it’s hard to judge any one person as being wrong here.

As stated above, Mass is mainly a performance piece for four brilliant actors. Jason Isaacs, Martha Plimpton, Ann Dowd and Reed Birney. It rarely happens, but I can’t name my favourite performance because all four performers have their specific roles to play, and they play off each other so well that one can’t work without the others. They are a true ensemble where you can’t lift one without mentioning the others. They each get a moment to shine, but it never feels forced. The movie felt so natural regarding this aspect; all four performers talk like regular people would. Sometimes they talk over each other, sometimes they struggle to formulate what exactly they mean, but it always felt “right”.

I know it’s almost cliché to write: “How come Academy did not nominate person X, Y or Z? What a travesty.” But in this case, it really felt bizarre as all four performers put everything they had into their roles. I could also imagine a script getting a nomination, as, without that, there isn’t a movie to celebrate. And again, this script is so clever, revealing the story slowly, letting you get in the mood and get to know everybody before we understand why they are there in the first place. And especially with this story and topic, what a genius (and I don’t use that word lightly) execution. This film should be showcased in movie writing classes as a bright example of enabling your viewers to follow the story naturally as it unfolds. I imagine most films of this nature would want the audience to be one step ahead. But Mass lets us make discoveries for ourselves without any “interference” or playing favourites.

The only “tiny” problem I had with this film and the reason I can’t give it the maximum rating is I have seen movies like this (people talking for an hour and a half), and those managed to suck me in a bit more. I don’t know why I was, at times, detached from this film, but that is what happened to me. Maybe it was due to me not having to experience what they are talking about (and I am hoping I will never have to live through something like it), and that is why I could not have imagined what the characters were going through? Possibly. I will give you an example, one of my favourite “nothing happens, you just watch people talk about everything for 90 minutes” films is The Sunset Limited (2011). I would be surprised if many people have even heard about that film, let alone seen it. But it’s directed by Tommy Lee Jones (who also plays a character only known as ‘White’) and co-starring Samuel L. Jackson (playing the other character, called ‘Black’). If that doesn’t intrigue you enough, let me throw this into the mix, it is based on a play by Cormac McCarthy (go through his filmography if his name alone doesn’t ring any bells), and it shows. And that movie grabs you and doesn’t let go until it’s over. Mass captures you too, but there were moments (even if not that many) where I felt not 100% in the story. It will be fascinating if I ever re-watch this film and whether I will feel the same way or not.

Overall, Mass is a near excellent film that will stay with you for a while. You will think about everything that is said by all the main characters; you will try to imagine how would you react if you were on either side and how awful would that be. And even if there were some tiny moments where I felt slightly disconnected from the film, I wholly admit that might have been just a “me problem”, and your experience may vary. Mass is 100% worth searching and seeing, for the performances, the screenplay, and to give you something (albeit dark and uncomfortable) to think about. It’s definitely not a movie you put on if you want to chill and relax. Please see it and go into it as blindly as possible to fully experience this film on its terms.

Rating: 4.5 out of 5.

That’s all for this one! Did you see it? What did you think about it? Let me know!

Until next time,

Luke

Movie Reviews

Coming 2 America (2021) Review – The Story of Two Films

1 Comment
Advertisements

It seems we are not “out of the woods” yet, regarding these “30 years later sequels” to classics. Yes, I don’t think it’s a controversial opinion, but I consider the original Coming to America (1988) one of the comedy classics of that time and a movie I must have seen at least four or five times. That might not sound like much to many people, but I rarely re-watch films as there are too many I haven’t seen yet. Anyway, when Coming 2 America was announced, I was, like many, sceptical. And even the first trailer didn’t convince me, so it took me over a year to finally watch this film. And I won’t lie, the first half was terrible, but surprisingly, the second half was much better.

While I was watching this film, there was something bothering me, but I couldn’t put my finger on what it was. I knew something was wrong, but I couldn’t put it into words until finally, it hit me. Coming 2 America doesn’t feel confident in itself. So we not only get many references to the original film (which was expected but still, they somehow managed to reference almost everything), but we literally get some scenes from the first movie playing a couple of times. Some were altered to justify/retcon this film into existence, and some were full scenes just lifted from the first movie! It mainly happens in the first half, and that felt weird. It almost felt like the filmmakers behind this sequel felt the need to justify it or apologize for the mere existence of this movie. Like they were saying: “Look, we know you’d rather watch the original, so here’s this scene you liked! And this character is back! And the barbershop!”

One thing I didn’t expect to write about this sequel – I could have used less of the original crew and more of the new actors. Yep, as much as I adore Eddie Murphy, Arsenio Hall or Shari Headley, they all felt not as excited to be back. I would say Shari was the one who felt most natural. I wish the movie would have focused more on the new characters, whether it was Jermaine Fowler, Wesley Snipes (playing a crazy but funny general), KiKi Layne or Nomzamo Mbatha; this “new blood” felt just right. When the story was focused on them, mainly the relationships between Jermaine’s character with his new sister (played by KiKi) or him getting closer with Nomzamo’s character, I thought the movie shined more brightly in those scenes, and I was actually in the story. Every reference to the original film pulled me out of it, but these talented young actors managed to pull me back in.

Another thing I need to mention is the soundtrack, full of hip-hop and R’n’B. I won’t pretend I recognised all the songs or artists, no. But I have recognised Meghan Thee Stallion, and that was a pleasant surprise hearing her voice (if anyone is interested, the song I am talking about is I’m A King by Bobby Sessions featuring Megan Thee Stallion). I would definitely recommend checking the soundtrack out if hip-hop and R’n’B is your thing.

I can’t forget to mention another thing that bothered me – the CGI. IMDb states the estimated budget for this sequel was around $60 million, but most of it must have gone to actors’ salaries, and therefore, not much was left for the CGI, and it showed. I understand many production people work long hours and can only do so much with the resources they have been given, so this is not against them. This complaint is more about the movie not saving enough money for those CGI shots of Africa because Jesus… Talk about something taking you out of the film.

I must mention one more thing – Leslie Jones is in this film. And I don’t know whether that’s her schtick or whether she has been stereotyped to do this in every single movie she is in, but just because you can be loud doesn’t mean you are funny. The reason I am saying that is not to be hurtful but quite the opposite. Because Leslie’s character starts this film as this loud persona that is so annoying; but in the second half of the film, she has some “quieter” moments where she manages to deliver some decent jokes; and that is the Leslie Jones I would love to see more of. I know it’s not just her many other comedians subscribe to this school of thought (“I will YELL all my lines!”), but it rarely works because this has been done so many times now that it’s downright annoying. Can we stop it, especially if the performer (in this case, Leslie) can actually be funny without yelling? Cheers.

Overall, Coming 2 America is not as bad as I feared, but it’s still a few “steps” below the original film. If the movie had the balls not to repeat every single joke that worked in the original, literally play entire scenes from the original and focus more on the new characters rather than the old cast, we might have had something here. I would say (maybe foolishly) that if the film was split 80/20 (we would spend 80% of the movie’s runtime with the new cast and the old cast occasionally pops in), I think we might have had something not as great as the first movie, but a worthy sequel nonetheless. But in its current form, Coming 2 America is very slightly above average. And it’s due to the young cast. Also, remember the name KiKi Layne – I feel we might have a future star on our hands that would be in many movies to come.

Rating: 3 out of 5.

That’s all for this one! Did you see it? What did you think about it? Let me know!

Until next time,

Luke

Movie Reviews

Fast & Furious 9 (2021) Review – Space, Cars… Zombies?!

3 Comments
Advertisements

I love films. I love clever films, but at the same time, I love “dumb” films. I strongly believe in judging any movie based on its merits rather than comparing a comedy to an Oscar-winning drama. For this reason, I tend to rate movies higher than your stereotypical movie critic because I am not a movie critic. I have always called myself a cinephile, a movie lover. With that being said… fuck this film. I can have fun with “dumb” action movies (after all, I grew up on those cheezy action films from the 80s and 90s). But if the ninth film in a franchise becomes “all bets are off” kind of a movie, and there are LITERALLY no stakes to any action happening on the screen, that just infuriates me.

Fast & Furious 9 (or F9) embraced the ridiculous premise of fans all over the world, who were pointing out how this franchise evolved from fast cars and racing to heists and “family” and asked: “Well, what are they going to do next, go to space?” And filmmakers behind this movie went: “Hold my Corona.” And they did. Look, I know you wanted to be cheeky, but Jesus… As with everything, too much of one thing can kill you or make you not like that one thing. Take pizza; I often think how I could eat pizza every single day, except when you truly think about it, that’s dumb, it wouldn’t make sense, it wouldn’t be healthy for me, and also, after some time, it would no longer be my favourite food. I’d get sick by just looking at pizza. And that’s how I felt about Fast & Furious 9. Where I could have found fun with the first three or four movies, the moment Dwayne ‘The Rock’ Johnson joined this franchise, it officially jumped a car, a helicopter and then a submarine. With each new episode, I found myself having less and less fun. But holy shit, was he helping to keep this franchise afloat as this film without his charisma struggles. Yep, as much as I like Vin Diesel and admire what career he’s made for himself, he isn’t as charismatic as Dwayne. But the lack of Dwayne isn’t the main issue, no. The main problem is the lack of any stakes. You could rent the world’s best and most advanced microscope, and you would still struggle to find at least any hints of something remotely resembling stakes.

Some of you might be thinking: “Damn, it only took you eight films to realise there are no stakes in these films?” And to those people, I would say, no. I always knew the stakes were low to minimal in this franchise, but they existed. What F9 has done differently from its predecessors was it turned into a full-on telenovela and removed those tiny stakes which existed. I won’t even mention that we have yet another “long lost family member” in this film again. That has been spoiled even in the official trailers, but just in case you haven’t seen those, I will put the spoiler tag because we need to talk about this…

Beware, SPOILERS are coming!

This franchise has been dealing with one thing on a pretty consistent basis – its hatred for The Fast and the Furious: Tokyo Drift (2006) as that was, what I would argue, the last “proper” Fast & Furious film. Because that movie is mostly about racing, there are no international problems that somehow only a team of racers can solve. Racers who somehow can pull off anything they put their minds to. Well, that’s the American way. Anyway, another reason this franchise hates Tokyo Drift – they killed Han. How dare they kill that one character we didn’t know would be so… crucial to the story previously? As they, of course retcon him to the movies after the fact, making Tokyo Drift (for the longest time) the future one. That is already bit too convoluted for a franchise whose sole focus should have been fast cars, but ok. Anyway, when it seemed that we were finally over it, this #JusticeForHan thing started, and yet again, filmmakers decided: “You know what? That character WAS the heart of this franchise; we need to bring him back.” And they did. Han lives. After being dead since 2006, but appearing in some films since then because they were technically in the past… he’s officially back and alive as they YET AGAIN go back and retcon Tokyo Drift so effectively that film no longer matters. And why would it? What do you want for choices to matter? Get the fuck out of here…

See what I mean by Fast & Furious 9 killing even that last bit of stakes? Now not only you don’t have to be afraid about anybody dying in these films ever again but even if they somehow do, don’t worry, they will be back again! Well, except for Paul Walker because he is literally dead. But guess what? That doesn’t stop this film from talking about him and even making somebody pretend to be him in the last scene, where his car shows up. I swear, I wouldn’t be surprised if, for the next sequel, they actually bring him back using CGI. Because that seems like the respectful thing to do, rather than… I don’t know, maybe retire his character where he is living the life or something like that. No, we need to dangle him in front of the audience because of… family? Money? Yeah, it’s money.

Do you feel despair? Because this film made me honestly desperate. What makes me the saddest/maddest about this situation is how they were talking about Fast & Furious 7 (2015), how that was for Paul and all that, and they actually somehow managed to give him a pretty sweet send-off in that film, despite the odds. But now they literally waiving his name and car in your face again cause “family”? And I wasn’t a big Paul Walker fan, but I thought he seemed like a chilled dude, and of course, I was sad when he died.

To be fair, it’s not just this Han/Paul Walker stuff that bothered me, no. The movie was irritating to me before that as all the set pieces are so unbelievable, it’s genuinely hard for me to “switch my brain off and have fun”. When all the stunts are CGI because they must be CGI, it’s hard for me to feel any excitement. Or where people use literal cars to break somebody’s fall, more than once. Yes, you can break someone’s fall using a car but not without breaking their spine, bones; you know, the entire body in the process. And that’s just one example of how lazy this franchise has gotten. A movie with no stakes is where any tension goes to die.

The only thing I semi-enjoyed was the sequence in Edinburgh, as I’ve been there on a few occasions, so it was fun seeing the streets I walked on being in a movie like this. Because as much as I didn’t enjoy this film, it’s still a Hollywood blockbuster, no doubt about that. And it made money too less than what was probably expected but still enough to warrant a few more sequels until they go… where can they even go next? The moon? The sun? All bets are off for this franchise, and in this case, it’s not a compliment.

Overall, Fast & Furious 9 is a film I didn’t enjoy at all. It didn’t work on any level for me. For a “dumb” action film, it was too dumb and wanted me to suspend my disbelief way too much; for an “end of the world” film, the stakes were non-existent to start with, so of course, that aspect and the entire plot of this film is boring. Yep, for a movie about fast cars, double-crosses, and people going into a space, I was bored. And that’s “probably” not a good thing, being bored while watching an action film. I wouldn’t waste my time on this film if I were you.

Rating: 1 out of 5.

That’s all for this one! Did you see it? What did you think about it? Let me know!

Until next time,

Luke

TV Show Reviews

Yellowjackets Review (Season One) – Plane Crash, Mystery, Cannibalism and… Melanie Lynskey!

1 Comment
Advertisements

Before delving into this amazing show, I have a confession to make. The way I watch TV shows has changed over the years as I tend to wait for them to finish, so I can delve into them and, more importantly, know whether they are worth it. As TV people know, many shows start amazingly just for them not to stick the landing. Hence why I tend not to watch as many new shows anymore; I am always waiting to see whether most seasons get the “seal of approval”. But I’ve heard from a few people about Yellowjackets and how this could be Lost (2004 – 2010) for today’s generation. And after finishing the first season, I can see the comparison, and the show feels “lost-y”, but if I were to compare it against another show, it might be Breaking Bad (2008 – 2013). Let me explain why. Even though the buzz (pun intended) is there for Yellowjackets, it still hasn’t broken through where I would be hearing more people talking about it. And if the creators really have a plan for five seasons, as stated, I could see this show breaking into public consciousness more around season three or four, the same way Breaking Bad did. But let’s stop with these comparisons, and let’s focus on this show alone because it deserves it.

Yellowjackets‘ premise is simple yet delicious (get it?) as the story is about a girl’s football team, who were on their way to the nationals, but they crash land in the Canadian wilderness instead. Some girls die in the plane crash, but most of them survive. What would seem like a straightforward plot gets twisted very fast when you see the scenes of some of them sometime later, hunting one of their own and eating her. Yep, cannibalism is making a comeback. Also, there might be something else mysterious, ominous happening with possibly their surroundings or some of the girls. That’s one of two of our main stories. The second one takes place in the present, where we follow the survivors of that crash who are back in civilization. The show states early on that they spent 19 months in the wild, and we get to see some adult characters, what they are up to now and mainly how that experience affected them. And it becomes clearer with each episode, cannibalism might be the “least” problematic thing they did during those 19 months, as no survivor wants to talk about any details?

I won’t pretend I was hooked from the first episode, as it can be a bit overwhelming; not only you need to try to remember all these names, you also try to remember who is who when following those two timelines. But once you get used to it and become familiar with all the main characters, the show hooks you and doesn’t let go. I was trying to remember when was the last time any show hooked me so much with so many intriguing characters, mysteries, storytelling… Because Yellowjackets has it all. The younger cast was brilliant as, in addition to looking like their older counterparts (at least the ones who survived), they did a stellar job. It’s hard to single out one actress out of the young cast as they were all firing on all cylinders. But regarding the adults, I have a preference, as my title suggests, and that is Melanie Lynskey. Now excuse me while I swoon all over her (that came out wrong)… performance (saved it!)

Her Shauna might be the most interesting character to me as she might be the one who can hide how much that crash affected her. At first, she seems like the “most normal” out of the remaining survivors we are introduced to, only for the show to slowly peel away her character to see how broken she is. And based on what we see of her character in the past always was…? In the hands of a less capable actress, this character could have been “just” a villain. Delightful, intriguing but villain nonetheless. But Melanie’s earnest approach to Shauna, a character who is self-aware of her flaws and is trying her best to keep her family together and her secrets hidden, takes this character to new heights. By the end of the first season, I knew she was my favourite character because of her complexity. And she does it while looking stunning. That might be a weird thing to write, but unfortunately, I feel like I have to say this due to some reports coming out regarding her look/weight.

As somebody who has been morbidly obese for most of his life and only recently managed to get down to a reasonable weight, here’s my two cents – leave Melanie Lynskey alone. She finally gets her chance to be a leading lady after being in Hollywood for almost three decades (!), and people are trying to change her into something they think she should be. Fuck that. Melanie looked stunning, and if we are being honest, she looked like a textbook definition of a MILF. I mean, there is a reason her character gets the most “action” in this show (without going into the spoiler territory), and that is because she looked absolutely gorgeous. It’s insane that we are still having these conversations about talented actresses in 2022. Jaysus.

Back to the character of Shauna, I also loved how this show didn’t take the obvious route. Yes, I am talking about the storyline with her husband. It’s hard to talk about it without delving into spoilers, so let’s say this show knows how to use an unreliable narrator/character. Because her character makes us believe in something so well, we believe her (again, all credit must go to Melanie’s brilliant performance), only to have the rug pulled from underneath us towards the end.

And that is something I admired about this show; nothing is as it seems. There are so many things hinted at throughout the first season you get so deep into it. There is a mystery element to Yellowjackets as we saw some hints as to what happens, but we don’t know for sure, or we don’t why. There are some horror elements in this show as well; particularly in the third episode, there is a scene featuring one of our character’s grandma dying. The way it happens and what that character sees… I can’t remember the last time something gave me chills like that. Very well done.

I really hope Yellowjackets won’t be known as “that show with cannibalism” because even though it has that element in the story, the show is about much more. But there is so much more meat here to chew on (pun intended). It’s a sweet coming of age story when we watch the young girls; despite everything, they have some genuinely charming moments. It’s also a compelling mystery and gripping drama about how survivor’s guilt plus keeping many secrets about what exactly happens out there can and will affect you. And we have the powerhouse that is Melanie Lynskey in the middle of it. When I say this show is multilayered, I mean that in the broadest sense of that word because it is that and so much more. I am on board, and I hope the creators have a five-season plan; they know how this will end, and they will deliver us with a great show. I am on board with whatever happens next.

Overall, Yellowjackets is a show with plenty of promise. I can’t guarantee you will love it or it will end satisfyingly. But the first season got my attention, and just the acting talent alone, mixed with this layered story, has me hooked enough to let myself be a full-on fan and cheer for this show. I will become the annoying guy who won’t shut up about Yellowjackets, hoping that the future seasons won’t disappoint us. So far, I am cautiously optimistic as the writers seem to know (or claim) how the story ends and where it will go, and I have faith in them. And this talented cast, that is ruled by Melanie motherfucking Lynskey. Honestly, I couldn’t be happier for her.

Rating: 5 out of 5.

That’s all for this one! Did you see it? What did you think about it? Let me know!

Until next time,

Luke

Movie Reviews

The Eyes of Tammy Faye (2021) Review – Jessica Chastain. That’s It.

Leave a comment
Advertisements

No matter how hard I try, I can’t imagine a movie that, on paper, looks less appealing to me than The Eyes of Tammy Faye. I am not religious, and to be perfectly honest with you, I despise televangelists. So I should hate this film, right? Well, that’s where I was so surprised. The Eyes of Tammy Faye is a film that understands the world it presents to you and looks at all the “players” involved… fairly. Of course, you never take your history from movies, so I would encourage looking up more information about the actual Tammy Faye. But, if I put that aside and focus solely on the story this film is trying to tell, it’s easy to see the rise and fall of not only Tammy but her husband. And (if the movie is to be believed) she was always trying to be her best.

As my title suggests, this is the part of my review where I will admire Jessica Chastain for a while. I had seen this film just a few hours before the Oscars, where she finally won her first one. Yeah, besides the slap, some people actually ended up getting awards; would you believe that? Anyway, it was between Jessica and Kristen Stewart, and it could have gone either way. And as much as I enjoyed Kristen’s performance in Spencer (2021), I was rooting for Jessica. And for two reasons – first of all, she carries the movie. In The Eyes of Tammy Faye, you have a stellar cast of actors such as Andrew Garfield or Vincent D’Onofrio, to name the biggest names. And Jessica somehow manages to overshadow them in the best way possible. Without appearing “screen-hungry”, she did it almost by default. To be clear, Andrew Garfield gives a superb performance also, but honestly? I don’t think anybody will mention his name after the credits start to roll, and there is a reason for that as Jessica is going off the chain, so to speak and gives one hell (or heaven in this case) performance.

The other reason I was rooting for her at the 2022 Oscars is simple – she has been steadily excellent for the past 11 years now. She is shaping to be the female equivalent of Denzel Washington. What I mean by that is Denzel is one (if not THE) of the best working actors we have and has been for a while. He might star in mediocre movies from time to time, sure, but he is always the best part of those films. He never “just” takes a paycheck, phones his performance and calls it a day. And Jessica has been the same. I saw her in many films now, some better than others, but I have yet to see her miss or be terrible. Yes, occasionally, she might only be as good as the film/role allows her to be but lately, I have been looking up her name in movies because she is my constant same as Denzel. If the film isn’t great, I know I can rely on her to deliver.

Now, let’s take Jessica’s stellar performance, Andrew’s superb performance and make-up and hairstyles (Stephanie Ingram, Linda Dowds and Justin Raleigh also deserved those Oscars) aside for a second. This film is your average “cradle to grave” biopic about somebody who is “controversial”, to put it mildly. I don’t think it’s a spoiler to say Tammy is no longer with us, as she passed away in 2007. But you might remember Jim Bakker (her husband, portrayed by Andrew Garfield) from not that long ago, as he was the televangelist who tried selling silver supplements against COVID-19. I have heard about that story, not knowing his history or who he was, as to be perfectly honest, I don’t care to know who’s the “new and hip televangelist some people love to send their money to”. And that would be my other point against this film (besides it being quite a stereotypical biopic as mentioned above) – showcase these people for who they are/were. The film managed to do it well enough, where every time we saw their better side, we would quickly be reminded that their actions had consequences, especially regarding Jim Bakker, still have. And we shouldn’t forget who they were, and again, we shouldn’t take our historical facts from a movie.

Overall, The Eyes of Tammy Faye was a surprise for me. Sure, I “knew” Jessica would deliver, but I didn’t know how well. I knew Andrew was a great actor but didn’t know he was that great (what a year he had, this film and his nomination for tick, tick…BOOM! (2021, my review here), talk about firing at all cylinders). And I knew I (probably) would not like this film, and I had ended up liking it despite my views about the topic. I have managed to put those aside and try to enjoy this film, and I did. Would I recommend it? For Jessica and Jessica alone, 100%. The rest of the film? I don’t think you will regret your time, but don’t expect anything mind-blowing story-wise; it is your cradle to the grave biopic. And once you see one of them, you’ve seen them all. This film is lucky to have Jessica and the make-up crew behind it, and they are giving it their all and then some.

Rating: 4 out of 5.

That’s all for this one! Did you see it? What did you think about it? Let me know!

Until next time,

Luke

TV Show Reviews

The Falcon and the Winter Soldier Review (Season One) – Art Imitating Life

Leave a comment
Advertisements

Sometimes it’s good to watch a movie or a TV show after some time has passed. Take The Falcon and the Winter Soldier. Ever since it finished, I’ve been hearing more or less from everyone and their mum how it’s the weakest out of the current MCU shows. And to a certain degree, I can’t blame people for thinking that. WandaVision (2021, my review here) had some flaws but was pretty beloved. Then came Loki (2021 – ?, my review here) and that was pretty much beloved from the start due to Tom Hiddleston alone. Hawkeye (2021, my review here) was the most “chill” of the MCU shows to this date; it was not asking much from you except to have a good time. And each of these has dealt with something different. WandaVision was all about grief and letting go, Loki about dealing with your past while focusing on the future. Hawkeye also deals with grief, yet differently, while showing us what it would be like for an Avenger, who is “just” human. And then, we have The Falcon and the Winter Soldier, a show that tackles race and ideas of what it means to be good or bad and how intertwined those can sometimes be. It also talks about history, putting this in context and looking at everything critically without going into cynicism. And this is what I loved about this show. I know this won’t be my most popular opinion, but this might be my favourite MCU show to date.

You can judge The Falcon and the Winter Soldier purely based on the “entertainment” value. If you want to, you can look at it without the political and race commentary (you shouldn’t, but you can). So let’s do this now because I have to go to spoiler territory to write about this show in a meaningful way. Even minus the commentary, I was entertained. Sure, the first episode might be the “worst” one, as this show takes a bit before it finds its footing. But even that has some great action sequences. Look, are all the actions sequences done well? No, some are your Marvel “let’s cut 20x in five seconds” deal fans have been vocal about from more or less the start of MCU. But more often than not, I’ve noticed how Kari Skogland (who directed all six episodes) tried her hardest to make each fight sequence stand out. Some are pretty impressive with a limited amount of cutting. So, I would say well done here.

The primary duo (Anthony Mackie and Sebastian Stan) worked for me. And I am saying this as someone who didn’t care for either Falcon or Bucky before this show. But you can say that about all of these MCU shows. I knew who they were, I remembered their characters, but both were… meh. I am sure I’ve mentioned this before in my other reviews for these MCU shows, but that is that one thing they did 100% correctly -giving these side characters shows, so if we wanted, we could spend more time with them and get to understand them better. It’d be so easy for MCU to make a show with one of the main characters, but why? Because of these shows, I’ve grown to appreciate almost every character who appeared in them as they give them material, character growth and something to chew on. These two gentlemen worked for me; I thought their banter was all right. I didn’t feel there was anything forced.

Before going into spoilers, I also need to mention one more thing I appreciated about The Falcon and the Winter Soldier. And that is that they don’t rely on other MCU characters (too much). Yes, some other characters from the MCU make an appearance in some episodes, but they managed to avoid cheap cameos. All those who come back make sense within this show’s world and story and, most importantly, have some ties to our main characters. Ok, let’s move on to spoilers.

Beware, SPOILERS are coming!

I have heard that The Falcon and the Winter Soldier addresses race, but even I didn’t expect how much or how complex the themes would be. The overarching theme of this show is: “What if Captain America was a black man?” At the end of Avengers: Endgame (2019), when Cap handed the shield over to Falcon, I didn’t think anything of it except: “So, he’s the new Captain America. Cool.” And the show addressed how even this well-meaning gesture comes with so many issues due to American history, how some people will hate him simply because he is the one lifting that shield.

Let’s talk about this shield. I loved how the screenwriters made the shield representative of Captain America, not just “a person” but the entire institution/idea behind it. An institution/idea that should represent “good” but started on shaky grounds. The show made me think of the shield as almost the USA itself – a melting pot of people from different backgrounds that should represent something great but historically started very questionably. And not just started, but over the years still has many things (injustices) to deal with and is struggling to deal with even today. Or even address it with appropriate terms without “some” people getting offended.

I thought this entire show got beautifully summed up with one line from one episode that went like this (paraphrasing here): “It used to be simpler, used to be good guys and bad guys. Everything is much more complicated.” It was that quote that made me think of this show in a different, more nuanced way. Take, for example, the Flag Smashers. They would have been portrayed as terrorists, cut and dry, not long ago. But now you could see and understand the point they were trying to make and maybe, for the most part, agree with it. As Sam himself says in one episode: “Look, I agree with everything you’re saying; I just don’t agree with how you go about it.” This radicalization theme ends justifying the means, has always been part of pop culture, and if used well, it makes for a good drama. I’ve felt like this show used the Flag Smashers well enough. Sure could I do without Erin Kellyman‘s “we do our thing no matter what” approach? Yes. I understand that was what must have happened for her character to be wrong (killing people, just to get your point across), and the show even acknowledges that she’s too radicalized, but I’d love to have seen somebody like that with a moral compass. Standing for the same ideals as her, minus the killing, bombing etc. That is what I was slightly missing from making her a proper complex villain. But again, I understand why they’ve made the decisions they have.

Let’s talk about John Walker, the “new” Captain America. First of all, I loved the performance by Wyatt Russell as he seemed to be on the same path as Karli’s character (Erin Kellyman), and he probably still is, but in the heat of the battle, in those crucial moments that define us, he makes the right decision. But I don’t think the show was trying to say: “Ok, you saved those people here where you could have let them die; we forgive you for killing that one dude while the entire world was watching.” On the contrary, he might be the ultimate example of how the times have changed, as I thought of him (and this might be controversial) as this is who Steve Rogers would have been if he had been born about 30/40 years later. Think about it his character even says this about his medals:

Yep. Three badges of excellence to make sure I never forget the worst day of my life. We both know that the things that we had to do in Afghanistan to be awarded those medals felt a long way from being right.

John Walker

How many times have we heard something similar from real-life soldiers? That fact they not only don’t feel like heroes but the things they had to do “for democracy, for the USA” have crossed the line? He, to me, was the modern-day soldier who has been through nonsensical wars, did unspeakable things and then came home being celebrated for those things. His character arc tied it well with the show’s theme of “there are no longer just good vs bad guys”. You could even take it one step further. I could argue Steve fought in the last “fair” war. I know this term is dumb (what even is a “fair war”?), but I can’t explain it in any other way. America has been involved in how many wars since World War II? Korea, Vietnam, Iraq, Afghanistan… how many of them had soldiers do unspeakable things to civilians, let alone the other soldiers? And how many black soldiers came back home from those wars and faced more problems at home?

The entire subplot with Carl Lumbly‘s character Isaiah was quite powerful. And unfortunately, it was due to how consistent it was with the USA’s history with race. Rather than talking about it, I would strongly recommend watching a powerful movie about this very issue (black soldiers coming back home from World War II and the challenges they were facing) called Mudbound (2017). A superb and beautifully shot film about awful things.

The more I think about The Falcon and the Winter Soldier, the more I realise I don’t love it because it’s clever. I love it because it has the balls to point out these unpopular issues and put them front and centre in this massive TV show. And I guess that is what some people didn’t appreciate about it? Not to say: “everyone who didn’t like this TV show is racist”. No, that’s dumb. I understand some reasoning why you might not like this show; maybe the metaphors were too clunky or potentially obvious for you, or the characters didn’t work. And that’s fair, after all, art is subjective, and that is why there will never be one “universal” truth about what constitutes good art. However, it feels like this show has amassed a more than usual amount of criticism, and I don’t think most of it is warranted. Especially the themes the show is wrestling with; I thought they had done a marvellous (pun kind of intended) job. Given even Sam, once he finally takes the mantel and becomes the new Captain America, you can tell he is still conflicted about it. Because he understands what he is in for and how it won’t be easy. He also understood how ironic it is for him to take it from a historical point of view (Isaiah’s plotline), but he needs to try to shape his own future. And I hope this theme won’t get dropped from Captain America 4 (no date yet). I am not saying we have to make all Captain America movies political from now on; no, but it would feel a bit disingenuous not even reference this show at least a tiny bit.

Overall, The Falcon and the Winter Soldier is a show I went in expecting mediocre fun. What I got instead of that was a show that was not afraid to openly discuss race, American history, and their roles within “an institution of hope” that was supposed to be Captain America. And how difficult that conversation can be, how even the best ideas can start on bad/shaky grounds or how “one man’s terrorist is another man’s freedom fighter”. And how that line between “good vs bad guys” gets blurrier and muddier. Yes, if you go into this show expecting popcorn entertainment, you are in for a disappointment. Sure, you can focus on the popcorn element of the show and still have a decent time with it, but I wouldn’t. Or better said, I can’t imagine how can you watch a show like The Falcon and the Winter Soldier and “blank out” the heavy elements, as that is the entire point of this show. “I can’t wait for the next Captain America movie” is a sentence I thought I would never write, but here we go. And if you are like me and were putting this show off because you’ve heard how mediocre it is, give it a shot and see for yourself.

Rating: 5 out of 5.

That’s all for this one! Did you see it? What did you think about it? Let me know!

Until next time,

Luke

Movie Reviews

Don’t Breathe 2 (2021) Review – 2 Breathe 2 Serious

Leave a comment
Advertisements

When I learned a sequel for Don’t Breathe (2016, my review here) was coming, I was confused. I understand we live in the age of sequels, prequels, cinematic universes and whatever DCEU is trying but still… this film? Then, I’ve checked how much it made in the box office and holy shit. On a budget of just under ten million dollars, the movie made almost 160 million dollars worldwide. Talk about a great return on investment. Now I am wondering how come it took them so long? Anyway, you did not ask for this film, but here it is. And… it’s pretty much the same yet slightly worse?

Don’t Breathe 2 has two significant issues going up against it. First, the novelty factor is gone. You can’t throw us into the same world with the same character and expect us to be vowed again. That “gimmick” (a blind man who isn’t as defenceless as he seems) no longer works here because we know him. And that takes me to the second issue – we know him. We know now what he has done. As stated in my review of the first movie, I don’t mind having complicated, even straight-up evil characters as protagonists; it doesn’t bother me not having anybody to root for. But many film fans did mind, hence why they had a hard time connecting with this film. And I can’t blame them. But, Don’t Breathe 2 is self-aware of these issues, so what do they do? They… introduce somebody even worse, to turn the complicated character/antagonist of the first film into a hero in this one.

Yep, that happens. Before going into massive spoilers, Don’t Breathe 2 takes place eight years after the first movie. We see the Blind Man (who has a name now, Norman Nordstrom) raising a daughter. In any other film, that’s fine, but knowing what we know about our character from the previous movie, that reality raises questions immediately. And some audience members might get the unfortunate turkey baster flashbacks. Everything gets explained eventually, and we get more into the story. And this is where the filmmakers had a choice. Either try to redeem the character or just introduce somebody roughly ten times worse where Norman looks “saint-like” by comparison. I don’t know, but for a series of films that try to explore the very grey area between right and wrong, that seemed like a bit of a cheap move. I don’t think I can discuss this any further without at least alluding to some scenes/characters that might give away a few surprises, so…

Beware, SPOILERS are coming!

If you haven’t seen this film yet, but you had seen the first Don’t Breathe, you are probably asking: “Who can possibly be morally worse than the Blind Man?” That’s a valid question because this movie felt the need to come up with villains who not only are junkies not only are the daughter’s actual parents (yep, Norman found her on the street when she was young and just took her) but also they only want her back so they can remove her heart. Her mum needs a new one because she needs to cook drugs for her crew. Yep, can you see the morality questions from the first movie disappearing? Me too, as Don’t Breathe 2 thinks it is still doing that but not really. The characters are more black and white here. And as mentioned before, Norman is now our hero.

I am sorry, but how dumb their plan is? The daughter (played by Madelyn Grace) is around 14 years. Now, I am not a doctor, let alone a surgeon, so I might be talking out of my ass here, but I am 99% sure her adult mum (a woman in her 40s) couldn’t take the implant from her daughter even if that operation was done in the hospital with a top-notch surgeon. Again, I might be completely wrong, but that doesn’t seem right. But I know movie’s gotta movie.

Also, I didn’t like how the people behind this film felt the need to make the parents and their group be “super evil”. Well, maybe except for that one guy who is against the operation. For example, there is a moment when the doctor tells them he can’t even put her to sleep. Something about the heart must still be fresh, beating, so he needs to cut into her while she is awake…? And the parents say yes, no problem. See what I mean by making them “super evil”? It’s almost like the writers felt the first film wrote them into a corner where they felt like: “Sure, he’s evil. But come on, there are much worse people running around want to see?”

What also started to annoy me was how good Norman was. I get that in the first Don’t Breathe, and even in the first half of this movie, he knows his surrounding very well. But the moment Norman breaks into the building the junkies occupy, I am sorry, but he should be dead within the first ten minutes. Sure, he’s a NAVY Seal; he is an incredibly clever person, I get that. That said… How can a blind person navigate a building he’s never been to where there are people around and in total silence? Where the previous film shined by not making him into a superhero too much, this film does the opposite, mainly in the movie’s second half.

But the movie still has things going for it; a couple of scenes were shot very well, I liked Madelyn’s performance, and the film never bores you. The runtime is a solid 98 minutes, so the movie is paced well, and I enjoyed the first half, even though there was no new ground being broken. The second half was where the cookie crumbled more and where the film felt like making him more likeable was the way to go. For most audiences, possibly, but honestly? I don’t know… Think about it for a second. Those who had a problem with his character wouldn’t bother seeing the sequel, so those who come for the sequel don’t need this “he’s better by a mile if you only compare him to these guys.” That is why it’s still so weird that this film got a sequel.

Overall, Don’t Breathe 2 is a decent enough sequel to a film that didn’t need a sequel in the first place. It’s a movie of two halves where the first one feels familiar yet different, and you are on board. And then, there is the second half that swings this film into the supernatural/superhero territory and makes Norman this unbeatable and (based on the very last scene) unkillable bad-ass. And it’s only up to you whether you are on board with a bad-ass with more than a shaky history, especially since we have seen it in the first film so well. If you liked the first Don’t Breathe, I would cautiously recommend this one.

Rating: 3 out of 5.

That’s all for this one! Did you see it? What did you think about it? Let me know!

Until next time,

Luke