Tag: sci fi

ABSOLUTELY ANYTHING – CUTE BUT FORGETTABLE SIMON PEGG COMEDY

SHORT TAKE:
Broadly comic, but largely forgettable morality tale of what happens when a well meaning schlub gets a shot at ultimate power.

WHO SHOULD WATCH:
Mostly more MATURE audiences for: language, some nudity, and high school level sexual humor, though no sexual activity is ever seen.

LONG TAKE:
If you take Bruce Almighty, (albeit without the brilliant theological underpinnings), add a page or two from Hitchhiker’s Guide to the Galaxy, add a touch of The Twilight Zone’s amusing “Mr. Dingle, the Strong”, a smidgeon  of Bedazzled and package it all in Simon Pegg’s unique brand of wry humor, you get Absolutely Anything…. I don’t mean you can get “absolutely anything” as a description of the literal resulting outcome of this combination, but refer to the title of the movie: Absolutely Anything.

Despite disagreeing with much of Mr. Pegg’s philosophical opinions, I am a fan of his witty banter in his often clever film ideas (except for the occasional temper tantrum religion bashing, like Paul). Most of his repertoire, such as Shaun of the Dead, Run Fat Boy Run, his tech expert Benji in the Mission Impossible films, his Scotty in the reboot “Kelvin” version of Star Trek movies, his alcoholic desperate-to-relive-his-youth Gary King in the bizarre sci fi The World’s End, his adorable voicing of Reepicheep in Voyage of the Dawn Treader, and even his stint as The Editor in the Eccleston incarnation of Dr Who in “The Long Game” as well as many others, all benefited from Pegg’s gentle, self-deprecating, comic-timing master persona.

Pegg excels best when he portrays a nobody who rises to the challenge of a truly bizarre situation to overcome seemingly insurmountable odds: a fat layabout in Run Fat Boy Run, who trains for a marathon to convince the mother of his child to stay in country.A burnt out idle human parasite who pulls himself together to defend his friends from invading robot aliens in The World’s End.

In Absolutely Anything, directed by Monty Python veteran Terry Jones and written by Jones and Gavin Scott (the latter of whose resume consists mostly in kids’ versions of classic stories), Pegg’s Comic Champion once again plays out as reliably as Bruce Willis’ one-note but reliably entertaining Action Hero – nothing new or particularly surprising but an expected and fun formula, as satisfying as a tub of movie theater popcorn – nothing especially substantial to digest but delightful of which to partake.

SPOILERS

Pegg’s Neil is a well meaning, average, albeit lazy teacher who longs to be a novelist and pines unrequitedly for his next door neighbor Catherine (Kate Beckinsale).

A group of bizarrely colorful aliens voiced by the surviving members of the original Monty Python’s Flying Circus:John Cleese, Terry Gilliam, Eric Idle, Terry Jones, and Michael Palin, decide it is Earth’s turn to be tested for existence-worthiness by choosing a random human to see what he will do with complete power for 30 days.

If he chooses wisely Earth will not be destroyed. If he does not perform the way they think he should ……

Mayhem quickly ensues when misspoken, imprecise and casual remarks suddenly become reality, such as his frustrated snarky wish for the extraterrestrial destruction of the unruly middle school children he is assigned to teach, or that his love-smitten friend, Ray, (Sanjeev Bhaskar from Paddington 2 and Drunk History) acquires the devotion of the girl of his dreams. Of course, at first, thinking he is going insane, he can’t decide whether he should give up drinking or take up a LOT more of it. But, it doesn’t take long for Neil to begin testing his new “gift”.

It’s a one trick pony joke stretched out to a feature length movie. The special effects are B grade, it’s filmed like an uninspired TV movie, and the music sounds like it was pulled off a shelf of standards for fluffy comedies: forgettable light background phrases, bassoons for the punchlines – nothing particularly memorable or identifiable.

It is Pegg’s comic timing and lovable putz persona, the delicious ad-libbed nature of the Python-ized aliens and the complete balmy silliness of the situation that make this movie watchable.

Disappointingly, Robin Williams, in his last film appearance, is truly wasted as the voice of Pegg’s dog, Dennis. Unlike William’s genius Genie, or his merry Mork, or his dubious Doubtfire, or most any one of dozens of other roles, Dennis is sweet but uninspired and could have been done just as well by any of a hundred other comics. William’s unique brand of quick witted brilliance was simply missing. Not that he was bad in the role but he just wasn’t – Robin Williams.

But what Absolutely Anything truly lacks is what made Bruce Almighty such a worthwhile piece of memorable cinema – the learning curve for the protagonist that wisdom comes from humility. The awareness that absolute power in the hands of the limited creatures that we are leaves us with – absolutely nothing.  That what will bring true happiness is genuine altruistic love for others of God’s Creatures, and submission to a power greater than ourselves, submission to God, who loves us infinitely … and who is a LOT more qualified to handle absolute power than we are.

Now while there IS a moral – as such – in Absolutely Anything, it is short-sighted and focused mostly on Neil’s recognition that HE isn’t really the person to wield this much ability. Sort of the way liberals portray Socialism to us – not that NO human being should have this much power over others but that it’s just the RIGHT people have not yet bludgeoned the rest of the world with it.

The “moral” espoused in Absolutely Anything is Neil’s recognition that HE is not suitable, implying that it just is not in the right mortal hands. Dennis, actually makes the decision which gets closer to the truth.

While Bruce Almighty is the far worthier choice in a comic examination of whether humans are fit for “God-like” power, if you’re just looking for a brainless, fairly harmless 85 minutes of forgettable adult silliness, you could do worse than Absolutely Anything ——— and I mean the movie, not as advice.

AGENTS OF SHIELD – SO LONG, FAREWELL

SHORT TAKE:

Popular TV show spin-off from The Avengers movies, Agents of S.H.I.E.L.D. finishes with class and grace after a seven year run.

WHO SHOULD WATCH:

Most episodes are appropriate for any age. But there are a few which include: loose sexual relationships, scenes of violence and/or death of regular characters, and disturbing familial dysfunction. So, as always, more mature guardians should be the gatekeepers here, though expect that most shows will be family viewing.

LONG TAKE:

SPOILERS AND SPOILERS – IT’S INEVITABLE WHEN DISCUSSING A SHOW THIS LONG RUNNING

My father was a science fiction fan extraordinaire. He had closets full of paperbacks, all alphabetized for easy reference. He had an incredible collection of really old large format pulp magazines from the 1930’s and 1940’s like Astounding and Amazing. They were not made for longevity but quick sales and even though he lovingly preserved them in zip lock bags, by the time I was around they were so brittle, just turning their pages risked their crumbling to pieces.

My Dad could rattle off and speak with some authority on authors like Heinlein, Asimov, E.E. “Doc” Smith, and Burroughs. And he would always have one of his favorites, like Smith’s Skylark or Lensmen series, in his back pocket to pull out and keep him company. They would companion him in a dental waiting room or while eating lunch or stuck in traffic or even just drifting off to sleep at night. He said re-reading these classic gems were like “visiting old friends”.

There are sci fi shows I feel this way about too, such as Tennant’s Dr Who, and Star Trek both TOS and Next Generation. Another one of those series which has, over the years, garnered both my respect and affection is Agents of S.H.I.E.L.D. A spin off show based upon the secret organization officially led by Nick Fury (the eye-patched Samuel L. Jackson from The Avengers) but managed, in fact, by the ultimate super hero wrangler –

Phil Coulson (Clark Gregg). Coulson “died” in The Avengers. Coulson was, to quote Coulson “shanked by the Asgardian Mussolini” (referring to Tom Hiddleson’s Loki), and his purported death was used by Fury as a catalyst for the unification of the disparate, bickering mighty warriors. The murder of their “mascot” inspired them to forge a united front which was breakable only from within their own ranks later in Civil War.

However, the character of Coulson was so popular among fans that the brothers Whedon decided to create a show with him in the lead. AOS was clever, occasionally self-aware, followed storylines that had to scramble to keep up, sometimes at the “last minute” in the wake of the Marvel super hero movies, and accommodate to the needs of their big screen siblings – such as the dissolution of S.H.I.E.L.D. after the Sokovia Accords and the discovery of HYDRA agents embedded within S.H.I.E.L.D. AOS rolled with the punches. It featured inventive bad guys, martial arts women in leather outfits, space ships, laser weapons, alien artifacts, dangerous A.I.s, clever quips and a flying car. But their greatest strength was never taking themselves too seriously. One of the opening scenes of the pilot helped set the mood for the rest of its seven year run. Maria Hill (Cobie Smulders), while interviewing Grant Ward (Brett Dalton) for a position with S.H.I.E.L.D. asks Ward what S.H.I.E.L.D. stands for. He replies: “Strategic Homeland Intervention, Enforcement and Logistics Division.” She follows up with: “And what does that mean to you?” To which Ward quips: “It means someone really wanted our initials to spell out “S.H.I.E.L.D.”

AOS dealt with the unlikely to the ridiculous: from gravitonium powered anti-heroes to the supernatural

Ghost Rider (Gabriel Luna). From mutants with super powers to Nazi hold overs. From aliens to time travel. And the writers never backed down from even the most preposterous situations. They addressed them head on, usually with some pithy comments from Coulson. They respected their material and treated the situations seriously but never ignored or took for granted the fact that sometimes the circumstances were, indeed, bizarre.

While their strength was in humor their charm was the familial feel they brought to their team. While Coulson was never without a “Dad joke”, appropriate for the paternal figure he came to be, he ensured there would be fairness and discipline in the ranks.

Coulson’s right hand, stalwart back watcher, friend and sometimes Jiminy Cricket conscience was the beautiful but dour faced Agent Melinda May (Ming-Na Wen). Reluctantly carrying the nickname “The Cavalry” she was the protector, and S.O. or supervising officer for the new recruits.

Then there was Fitz-Simmons, actually two geniuses:

Leo Fitz and Jemma Simmons (respectively, Iain De Caestecker and Elizabeth Henstridge), a techie and a biologist, best friends since school whose relationship later blossomed into romance.

Ward was the big brother muscle and

Sky (Chloe Bennet) the little sister with more skill than common sense. At least this is how they started.

Another virtue of the show is they never let their characters stay put. Lack of routine was the norm. True to the Whedons – never get REALLY attached to any character as you will eventually lose them in surprising and shocking ways – either from death or personality development, but that is part of the creative attraction to the show. You were never allowed to get comfortable with a character, even if they DIDN’T do a Whedon and get killed off unexpectedly.

Reliable, boring, by-the-book,

Ward turned out to be a

double agent for HYDRA (the bad guy new age Nazis) barely holding his psychosis in check.

Fitz, the mousy tech hid a ruthless

Mengele-like aspect to his personality, inherited from his father and which, in one time stream, led him to be a megalomaniac super villain and in another time line, a savvy pragmatic leader.

Sky started out as an anti-establishment computer hacker,

who turned out to be the daughter of a powerful enhanced villain but then used her new found powers to become a top agent in the organization she initially tried to expose.

The enhanced

Jeffery Mace (Jason O’Mara), who led S.H.I.E.L.D. briefly after Coulson stepped down, turned out to be a chemically boosted fraud intended as a PR stunt.

Mack (Henry Simmons), the devout Christian mechanic, happy with being in the background, later became the head of S.H.I.E.L.D.

Elena “Yo-Yo” (Natalia Cordova-Buckley), a mistrustful independent street fighter whose hyper human speed would have given Flash a run (literally) for his money, became a cyborg and one of S.H.I.E.L.D.’s top agents.

And then there’s Coulson.

Coulson just kept – well, coming back. He was stabbed through the heart and brought back with alien blood. After succumbing to a degenerative side effect FROM the alien blood he then returned as the subconscious embodiment of an invading alien scout. Cut in half by Melinda May he returned as an L.M.D. (computer A.I.). Blown up he appeared once again in a digitized fashion as a

Max Headroom homage, then was graced with a new

L.M.D. body courtesy of Simmons. He died dozens of times during a time loop but because he, alone, could remember all of the loop incarnations was able to stop that merri-go-round. Talk about not being able to keep a good man down! As Coulson put it: “Dying, it’s kind of my super power.”

Then there were the characters who worked their way into the group but then were snatched away by the writers, by death or unavoidable circumstance: the optimist Trip, the unlucky Rosalind (Constance Zimmer) Coulson’s romantic interest, the Koenig triplets, the married

Bobbie and Lance Hunter (Adrienne Palicki and Nick Blood) who, while devoted to each other, made the Bickersons look happily married.

AOS went on for seven seasons. Like any show it had its good and bad installments. But overall AOS, when looked at all in one piece, was a single story of: fortitude in the face of seemingly insurmountable odds, self-sacrifice, altruism, protection of freedom, and defense of the weaker and innocent. Basically the fundamental motto of the Grandaddy of all Superheroes – Superman: Truth, Justice and the American Way.

And I loved the fact that, like the characters in Galaxy Quest, they believed: “Never give up! Never surrender!” And like Kirk and Spock, characters from (assuming you could be from another galaxy yourself and not know who they are) the Star Trek Universe, (the show on which Galaxy Quest was based), the characters on AOS never accepted a no-win scenario and never lost faith in the possibility of an alternative solution no matter how dire the situation.

Agents of S.H.I.E.L.D. plays out like one long – very long (99 hour) – movie. Each season has a distinct arc, mission to accomplish, challenge to overcome, and puzzle to solve. And no matter the unusual challenge:

enslaved by Kree in outer space, trapped in a virtual evil alternate universe, or simply dealing with an “epidemic” of new “enhanced” people, the core characters remain familiar but never grow stagnant or stale. They grew and evolved, like a kaleidoscope whose colors are always the same but evoke dynamic patterns.

The science fiction is solid, relying on the tech we have now but anticipating advances,

like “icer” guns which are more advanced tazers, androids and Chronicoms which anticipate human looking A.I.s, and planes which can negotiate space as well as atmosphere.

The theme music and soundtrack by Bear McCreary and Jason Akers, brass heavy and heroic, have the familiar Marvel Universe feel.

The final season was a doozy. Knowing they were winding up almost a decade of storylines, the writers

Joss and Jed Whedon, and actors simply had WAY too much fun. Time travel was the name of the game and with each passing decade the show immersed itself in wonderfully eccentric ways with tongue VERY firmly planted in cheek. For example,

the show set in the 1930’s was black and white with accompanying narrative, the affectation ultimately given a scientific explanation.

The season set in the 1970’s not only featured the tacky clothes and grainier film quality particular to that time period but adapted its intro to include the trademark cheesy technique of actor-turn-reveal-pose-credit used in every show from The Love Boat to Perry Mason and spoofed at the end of Galaxy Quest. The 1980’s featured a song in a not so subtle but simultaneously nostalgic and funny way.

There’s even a split second nod to Back to the Future.

One of the most distinctive elements of Agents of S.H.I.E.L.D. was the way the cast radiated a sense of fun. Every character was given moments to shine and each conveyed a sense of loving their character and running with the often crazy new aspects to their characters. Nothing deterred these guys. They faced death, acquired superpowers, were absorbed into a virtual world within a computer model made of the hopes and fears of the agents, traveled time, encountered the supernatural, and in a couple of notable scenes even met Nick Fury himself.

There were side characters compelling enough to deserve their own shows, but sadly, never got them: Bobby and Hunter – the married and bickering killer agents, Enoch

the put upon android (Joel Stoffer) who wanted to fit into this ersatz family, Deke (Jeff Ward) the under appreciated tech genius sucked out of an alternate timeline who was (probably) Fitz-Simmons’ grand child,

Calvin (Kyle MacLachlan) Sky’s mad scientist father who was contented with a mind wipe and job as a veterinarian,

Sousa a heroic figure rescued from a historic death and whisked off secretly in S.H.I.E.L.D.’s time traveling ship,

Trip (B.J. Britt) who endeared himself to everyone then was summarily Whedonized, Ward who was transformed into an alien supervillain, a set of identical triple agents (Patton Oswalt), Mike (J. August Richards), a cybernetically enhanced father who longed to return to his son, a stranded Asgardian, Chronicoms, the supernatural Ghost Rider, and an evil Russian agent who became a disembodied head remotely operating an LMD version of himself, among many others.

I wish I had time to mention all the entertaining cast members that popped into AOS over 136 episodes but there were literally hundreds of supporting members of the company, most of whom made an interesting impression.

This was a show to look forward to but never have to take seriously. Agents of S.H.I.E.L.D. was a world of fantasy which rarely succumbed to the political correctness so debilitating to creativity today. I shall miss the prospect of new shows but think they went out with class and style, completing character arcs and homaging the heck out of their and other universes but never losing sight of the themes of: family, patriotism, heroics, courage, self-sacrifice, constantly striving to do the best with the gifts God has given you, coping with massive challenges, and a “Never give up, never surrender” (thank you again Galaxy Quest) attitude.

Agents of S.H.I.E.L.D. was a world any superhero would have been proud to call home and a place, I think, my Dad would have enjoyed visiting.

So long, farewell.

MOON – AN EXAMINATION OF WHAT IT IS TO BE HUMAN

SHORT TAKE:

Thoughtful, low key and intriguing sci fi exploration of the definition of a human.

WHO SHOULD WATCH:

Adults only for language, graphic depictions of radiation sickness and the topics of death, loneliness and the marketing of human life.

LONG TAKE:

Sam Rockwell is an amazing actor. I have sung his praises in other outings like Three Billboards Outside Ebbing, Missouri, (SEE RADIO SHOW HERE and the REVIEW HERE) and his stint as Bob Fosse in the miniseries Fosse/Verdun. But my favorite performance of his will always be the first one I ever saw him in, Galaxy Quest, the parody / love letter to Star Trek.

SPOILERS BUT AS FEW AS POSSIBLE

So I was duly intrigued by a story that would see Rockwell go back out into space. In Moon he does just that. Moon is a tour-de-force, almost a one man show.

I warn you I’m going to be a bit disingenuous about this movie because I do not want to spoil it anymore than I have to for the sake of the following analysis. Moon is about a man and a clone. I will tell you that the cleverly written script leaves “Easter eggs” around giving hints.

Set in 2035, the story initially explores an examination of how one copes alone on a solitary mission for an extended period of time. Moon then, by turns, becomes an examination in psychology, a mystery, a buddy movie, and eventually a thoughtful consideration of what it means to be a human with the soul. This last led me to realize that Moon could easily be, whether that was on the mind of the filmmaker or not, an analogy for the in vitro created embryos, especially those abandoned as excess or unwanted by the sperm and egg donors who should have accepted their responsibility as parents.

Sam Bell is alone on a space station. His mission contract is for 3 years, monitoring the mining output of extremely valuable *helium-3 from the Moon.  Sam’s only connection to Earth is from one-way video messages of his wife and baby daughter. His only companion or foil for his comments is GERTY who looks more like a Welcome Wagon than even a robot and is voiced by the now infamous Kevin Spacey, who’s measured tones, (giving the devil his due), attempt to offer Sam what limited comfort of which it is capable.

Unlike other writers who agonize over choosing just the right name for their characters, Jones did not, apparently, give it much thought. Lest you were wondering, GERTY is not an acronym but just a name, perhaps, as has been speculated by admirers of the film, chosen for Christopher E Gerty, a NASA aerospace engineer, or perhaps for its similarity to the first five letters on the top line of a standard keyboard – QWERTY.  Sam, the main character’s first name, is the actor’s first name. The harvesters are named after the four authors of the Gospel: Matthew, Mark, Luke and John, which one might think brings a gravitas of meaning, but Jones, himself, has said they were only chosen because he wanted four names that went together.

Sam Bell becomes desperate for any kind of human interaction, longing for personal communication, but forgets that one should be careful for what one wishes as information can be as heartbreaking as it is educational.

Rockwell does a terrific job, even landing his performance in a list of one of the top 10 most egregious Oscar snubs. Rockwell’s Sams are at once the exact same but completely different. One Sam is simply further down the road than the other and Rockwell does a magnificent job of making them completely distinguishable, while at the same time leaving the door open for alternative interpretations, such as: is Sam Bell really only losing his mind? (Rest assured, the movie will eventually answer all the pertinent questions). But during the course of the movie Rockwell’s dynamic performance leaves all possibilities viable (pun intended).

The scenes on the surface of the Moon are well done and very believable, especially when considering Moon‘s mini budget of $5,000,000 and scant shooting schedule of 33 days in Shepperton Studios. The director/writer Duncan Jones preferred models to CGI so employed Bill Pearson, the supervising “animator” for Alien, who was happily at loose ends because of a writers’ strike, to create the rovers and harvesters .

First time feature director, Duncan Zowie Haywood Jones’ only other claims to fame up to this time were being a commercial director and the son of famous rocker David Bowie. The film even opens with the line: “Where are we now?” the title of one of his father’s songs.

Jones wrote Moon as a vehicle for Sam Rockwell. Jones had been interested in casting Rockwell as a villain in another film, Mute. While Rockwell liked Mute and was tempted, he was tired of playing bad guys. So Rockwell challenged Jones – that if Jones wrote something of the same quality which would trust him, Rockwell, in a leading role, he would do it. So Jones did — and Rockwell agreed.

The soundtrack by Clint Mansell is reminiscent of Philip Glass. Dissonant string chords, heavily rhythmed but mostly without regular tempo, are occasionally interspersed with simple childish tunes which would be at home in a child’s jewelry box. The effect is one of both low level, anxiety driven tension and what a quiet but hostile space environment might sound like were it anthropomorphized to conduct an orchestra. The overall result is both unsettling and lulling.

In philosophizing about where on the spectrum of humanity lies clones, there must come a reckoning as to the significance of other “artificially” created human life. As the conclusion in the favor of those not “born of woman” becomes more and more obvious, there is an inevitability for any thought conscientious person to reach the same judgement concerning those children whose conception took place in a petri dish – the in vitro embryos bred and then left discarded as “extras” and “backups” then ultimately … forgotten to death. The “where” one obtains life is not important. They – both clones and science-driven and conceived embryos – are undeniably human.

When Edward Rutledge protests against John Adams’ assertion that slaves are Americans, John Adams points out, appropriate to that particular historic juncture, in the brilliant musical 1776: “They are people, and they are here. If there’s any other requirement, I haven’t heard it,” regardless of how they arrived. Similarly, I would point out, the only prerequisite to being considered human, with all of the attendant God given rights and dignities, is to be — a human. Doesn’t matter how you arrived: sexual interaction, artificial insemination, petri dish, cloning, or (in the case of extended sci fi examples) transporter accidents – a human is a human and should be treated as such.

Moon makes this point beautifully and with great understatement. And Rockwell is the classy and compelling purveyor of that message. So to paraphrase Horton: A person’s a person, no matter how he got here.

*Helium-3 is a real thing – also called tralphium or helion, it is a light stable isotope of helium which is rare on Earth but is speculated to be more abundant and mineable from the Moon.

VIDEO VARIATIONS TO VIEW WITH YOUR VALENTINE

 

AUDIO OPTION FOR MY ARTICLE ON VALENTINE’S DAY 2020 MOVIES: VIDEO VARIATIONS TO VIEW WITH YOUR VALENTINE

SHORT TAKE:

Four delightful “off the beaten track” love stories for adults.

WHO SHOULD WATCH:

More for the adult crowd because of scenes, in the various movies, of: unmarried intimacy, open discussions of alternative lifestyles, drug abuse, cartoon violence, and some profanity.

LONG TAKE:

Despite my friend’s assertion that every movie can be described as a “love story with a twist” there really ARE some love stories…with twists. And I’m going to recommend four of my favorites: a cult sci fi classic, a pinnacle of political incorrectness, a bizarre rock opera, and a more traditional rom com.

Starman (1984)

There are two Jeff Bridges. Most people know him now for his roles as the rough tough cowboy in movies like Hell or High Water, R.I.P.D., and Kingsman: The Golden Circle. But long before Bridges was old enough to step into John Wayne’s shoes as the eye-patched Rooster Cogburn in the Cohen’s Brothers truly and brilliantly inspirational remake of True Grit, Bridges was more male model than macho with a mustache. One of these gentler outings, in particular, rose above the rest as a sci fi cult favorite – Starman.

Karen Allen (Raiders of the Lost Ark) is Jenny, a young, deeply grieving, widow living alone out in the country. An alien space ship crashes near her home. The surviving alien force (Bridges) grows a living breathing body from the DNA of her deceased husband, then persuades her to drive him to an unknown destination with SETI hot on their heels. Part sci fi, part buddy movie, part romance, Starman is both darkly witty and schmatzy, but with enough sci fi to keep the nerd in your relationship engaged in the story.

A Different Story (1978)

Now here’s a movie to truly infuriate the politically correct. And if that is not enough incentive for you…well it should be. A Different Story IS just that. Unique. You’re not likely, especially in this quick-to-be-offended liberal mentality culture, to find another one like it.

Meg Foster is Stella, a successful real estate agent who takes in Albert (Perry King), an acquaintance, when he loses his job. They begin to become fond of each other as Albert becomes her house cleaner and live-in chef. The “different” part is that Albert is gay and Stella a lesbian. But when Albert, who is from Belgium, is threatened with deportation, Stella marries him and they manage to fall in love. This is where the real story begins as they learn to tread the waters of a normal marital relationship with all of its acmes of joy and pitfalls of mistakes.

Phantom of the Paradise (1974)

And now for something REALLY different. For those of you under 50 who are probably not aware that a diminutive musician/actor/singer/writer named Paul Williams penned most of the award winning and Top 40 pop tunes of the 1970’s and 1980’s, this is a one-of-a-kind.

You’ll either love or hate this comic rock-horror-musical, loosely based on Faust and Phantom of the Opera. As Hail, Caesar! took a broad affectionate jab at many established film genres, Phantom pokes a sharp stick at many of the cliched musical trends of that day: country, hard Goth rock, pop, folk, Beach Boys ‘50’s retro, and rock opera. And keep in mind Phantom PRE-DATED Rocky Horror Picture Show by a YEAR!

Phantom is populated with a number of actors who MIGHT be vaguely familiar, INCLUDING the voice of Rod “Twilight Zone” Serling, who does a brief narrative intro over Swan’s company logo.

Paul Williams is Swan, a music guru and tycoon, former child music genius and star, who oversees his music empire, Death Records, with “almost” supernatural power, both anticipating and controlling the emerging popular trends. William Finlay is Winslow Leach, the frustrated composer of a cutting edge rock opera who is unjustly thrown into prison by Swan. Jessica Harper is Phoenix, a beautiful talented songstress. Gerrit Graham is Beef, the hilarious scene stealing heavy metal rock star whose tough on-stage persona is the complete opposite of his off-stage proclivities.

The music, all by Williams, is a series of diverse genre, very catchy songs which fit into the venue of this rock-scene story as rehearsals for, and stage event performances of, Swan’s new hit musical. Everything was written by Paul Williams. The story is, at turns: tragic, funny, creepy, romantic, grotesque, and philosophical, occasionally all at once – walking a VERY thin tightrope between slapstick comedy and Gothic drama.

The Beautician and the Beast (1997)

Combine The Odd Couple, Beauty and the Beast, The King and I, and The Sound of Music (without – uh – music), make it a comedy and you have this delightful, funny, charming and (mostly) family friendly movie. Fran Drescher is Joy Miller, a hair dresser who, mistaken for a science teacher, is hired to be the nanny and tutor to the children of President Boris Pochenko, an Eastern European dictator (Timothy Dalton). The yin and yang of the New York comedienne Drescher with the classically trained Shakespearean Dalton blend with adorable chemistry in a perfect example of that old saw about opposites attracting.

So there’s my list for this year: a sci-fi, a twist, a rock opera, and a rom-com. But no matter the movie you pick, remember to watch it with someone you love.

 

AD ASTRA – A VERY DIFFERENT KIND OF SCI FI

SHORT TAKE:

Journey by a son in search of his father, set in space.

WHO SHOULD GO:

Older teens minimum for some language but mostly scenes of violence and the resulting dangers one might expect in tackling hard space. There is no sexual content.

LONG TAKE:

Ad Astra (meaning “to the stars”) directed by James Gray, one of the writers, is a very interesting movie but not about what you might think. Ad Astra could have taken place as a western, underwater, in a haunted abandoned funhouse, a post-apocalyptic wasteland, in any normal day of a big city, or climbing a mountain. The writers James Gray and Ethan Gross chose to place this well told story in space and it is as good a backdrop as any of the others would have been. Combining allegory with pragmatic and brutal realism, Ad Astra plays out more like the Greek epic of discovery, The Odyssey or the Christian parable Pilgrim’s Progress, than a conventional science fiction story. Gray, writer/director, himself has compared his story to Conrad’s Heart of Darkness.

SPOILERS – BUT MINOR AND OBLIQUELY AS I CAN

The story is about Roy McBride, a top-flight astronaut, played by Brad Pitt (most recently in the wonderful role of a protective stuntman in Once Upon a Time in Hollywood), whose father, Clifford, disappeared 16 years before. Roy’s father played by Tommy Lee Jones (Men in Black, The Fugitive, Captain America) is a brilliant scientist who went in search of evidence of extraterrestrial intelligence, then fell off the radar after leaving Saturn.

A series of catastrophic electronic storms have recently begun to devastate Earth. The Surges, as they are referred to, seem to be emanating from Neptune, and are suspected to be linked to Clifford’s disappearance. Roy is sent out to investigate with his father’s old partner, Thomas Pruitt, played by acting veteran Donald Sutherland.

As an aside, I am a big fan of Donald Sutherland. Sutherland’s career dates back almost six decades. Playing opposite the likes of Robert Duvall, Helen Mirren, Orson Welles, Gene Wilder, and Julie Christie, his career includes an incredibly eclectic collection of almost two hundred entries, ranging from comic to horror to personal drama. His resume includes everything from classics like Hamlet and Pride and Prejudice, to monster movies like the bad  Dr. Terror’s House of Horrors and the brilliant Invasion of the Body Snatchers, military black comedies like M.A.S.H. and Kelly’s Heroes, deeply emotional personal dramas like Ordinary People, the modern dystopian franchise The Hunger Games, screwball comedies like Start The Revolution Without Me, straight war movies like The Dirty Dozen and Eye of The Needle, and avant garde suspense like Don’t Look Now – the list goes on and on, and it was a pleasure to see him again even in a small character part.

Rounding out the cast is Ruth Negga (the prickly – in more ways than one – antagonist in Agents of S.H.I.E.L.D.) as Helen Santos, an ally who appears, like a messenger from a Greek myth, to provide Roy information he needs to urge him along his quest. Another character who hands Roy along like a baton is Colonel Levant played by Sean Blakemore. Liv Tyler (Lord of the Rings, Armageddon – so not Tyler’s first rodeo as a character enamored of a space cowboy) is Eve (to Roy’s Adam? – perhaps representing all mankind and their errors) the girl Roy leaves behind as Roy seems compelled as a lemming, without his father’s guidance, to repeat his father’s mistakes.

However, Ad Astra is not really about the search for Roy’s father, but ultimately an insightful, honest and frank inner journey undertaken by Roy to conquer the demons left behind by Clifford’s abandonment of Roy’s family.

Modern culture tries to expunge the need for a father in the home. Ad Astra highlights, at least in part, the fallacy of this destructive philosophy.

The tone of the film reminds me of, and owes a lot to, Stanley Kubrick’s groundbreaking but ethereally distant 2001: A Space Odyssey, which created a mythology about mankind’s leaps of progress. In contrast, Ad Astra is relatable, in that it is told from the intimate point of view of one man’s personal evolution. The pace of Ad Astra is very slow and deliberate, arguably even sometimes dull. But such adagio of movement is necessary for the contemplatively atmosphere necessary for this pensive tale.

The events that transpire during the course of the film are anything but boring. The theme of obstacles structure the story and manifest in every way you can imagine: verbal, bureaucratic, intentionally hostile, the indifference of nature, clandestine, emotional, instinctive brutality, and the simple fact of the mind-numbingly immense distances required to complete Roy’s journey.

The cinematography is magnificent. The depiction of the outer planets is stunning and awe-inspiring and brilliantly conveys the overwhelming majestic size of space itself, underscoring the enormity of the pilgrimage that Roy undertakes.

And pilgrimage Roy’s trip truly is. A pilgrimage of discovery. The pilgrim nature of Roy’s quest is underscored by the occasional but respectful and deliberate references to traditional Christian theology and belief. The spiritual nature of Roy’s expedition is also demonstrated by the way the writers strip Roy, piece by piece, of his armor plating – literally and figuratively, physically and emotionally – until he must confront his destiny as any questing knight must – face to face and alone. Roy’s progress is cleverly documented by way of periodic psychological tests he must take and pass in order to continue his journey. This serves as both a practical plot device as well as a metaphysical manifestation of Roy’s inner progress.

The music by Max Richter is both triumphal and eerily beautiful, contributing to the contemplative feel of this mystery.

Ad Astra is not for everyone. It’s not properly a science fiction story, though it is set in a pragmatic future vision of human-conquering space. But it is far more violent than the average audience for a movie which primarily deals with inner analysis.

So go see Ad Astra if you are of the right age and want to see a thoughtful, meditative but dangerous odyssey. But go without any preconceived notions, for it is not the kind of science fiction movie you might expect, but approach it as you might a friend mulling over a retreat inspired epiphany which he wants to share.

ALITA – BATTLE ANGEL – A WELL TOLD, BUT ADULT, TALE OF A CYBORG HERO IN A DYSTOPIAN FUTURE SOCIETY

AUDIO PODCAST OPTION OF ALITA: BATTLE ANGEL REVIEW

SHORT TAKE:

Fascinating animation/real action mix story based on a long-running Japanese manga series,  about a cyborg girl reconstructed and “adopted” by a human and the dystopian society they both must navigate to survive.

WHO SHOULD GO:

Older teens/young adults minimum for language, and extreme violence.

LONG TAKE:

BEYOND HERE BE OCCASIONAL SPOILERS

This first heads up is more of a warning than a spoiler. Alita: Battle Angel is nowhere near a completed story. James Cameron takes a page from Peter Jackson’s playbook – giving us great character introductions, wonderful interpersonal relationships, interesting and fearsome enemies, exciting battle scenes …. and an abrupt unfinished ending. OK – technically the titular director is Robert Rodriguez but with James Cameron as the scriptwriter you know many of the decisions in the filming of this movie were done as a collaborative effort.

A musical analogy would liken it to ending a symphony on a dominant chord instead of the tonic chord, meaning a note that does not feel complete. Another way to look at it would be to begin the phrase ” shave and a haircut…”

Anyone who has seen the brilliant three-part Lord of the Rings series or the bloated Hobbit trilogy knows that Mr. Jackson likes to end his first story not exactly with a cliffhanger but with a temporary break in the action, taking Donald O’Conner’s advice to: “Always leave your audience wanting more,” to heart. Jackson ends his movies at about the place where one might choose to hit the pause button in the middle of the movie after one has had too many sodas.

And Mr. Cameron and Robert Rodriguez have done exactly the same thing with Alita – starting with an involving, well told story which then drops off a cliff. To be fair, this is on purpose.

HOWEVER, this is not surprising as Alita: Battle Angel is based, in whole and in part, on the first four of a NINE VOLUME manga series written between 1990-1995 by Yukito Kishiro called Gunnm (translated literally as “Gun Dream”). Alita: Battle Angel, the movie, like the manga series before it, is about a cyborg girl rescued from a dumpster and reconstructed by a cybernetics physician in a dystopian society set about 500 years from now.

The CGI was astonishing. James Cameron, who has been enamored of this manga series for about 10 years, said that he was waiting for the technology to become advanced enough to meet the demands of how he saw the film should be made. And he does not disappoint.

Rosa Salazar who plays the eponymous character is quoted to have said: “I’m a walking piece of technology, so that made it actually quite easy to fall into the physicality of a cyborg.” Photos of her show her dressed literally from head to foot in motion capture, including the unusual addition of two cameras on her face. Watching the behind-the-scenes was amusing as the actress would have to subtly duck and weave around the other actor’s head when coming close to avoid clobbering them with the extra headgear (which technology was, of course, CGIed out in post production). But the slight dance goes smoothly in the final product due to Ms. Salazar’s skillful body language and the technical prowess of the computer geniuses who brought Alita to life.

It’s interesting to see Christoph Waltz as a good guy. Usually he plays very rough, sometimes cold blooded or downright evil characters – such as being the most recent incarnation of James Bond’s antagonist Blofeld in Spectre, or the chilling psycho-Nazi Landa in Inglourious Basterds (sic), or the abusive plagiarizing husband in Big Eyes – the list goes on. But in Alita, Waltz is a nurturing protective creator/father-figure, his normally scary edge giving believability to his “side job”.

Jennifer Connelly, whose pedigree dates all the way back to David Bowie’s 1986 fantasy, Labyrinth, is Ido’s estranged wife and, therefore, Alita’s “mother”.

Mahershala Ali (Green Book – see my post on that brilliant movie) is the lead baddie’s main henchman.

Keean Johnson does a delightful job of charming Alita as the shady boyfriend, Hugo, in a mixed motivational character with shifting alliances that Clark Gable might have played way back when. And I MUST note that Mr. Johnson is a HOMESCHOOLED KID!!! Check out his bio here on us.imdb.com.

There are also some VERY fun cameos, which are designed for Mr. Cameron’s hoped for sequel. Jai Courtney (Terminator Genisys – and don’t laugh at me, I REALLY LIKED that movie – see my post on it here) plays Jashugan, a champion in Motorball, the gladiatorial game played in Alita. Edward Norton (he is to Hulk as Tobey Maguire was to Spiderman – close but no cigar, also in Collateral Beauty – see post here, Fight Club, and American History X), appears in a couple of  – don’t blink or you’ll miss it – moments as Nova the ULTIMATE controller of the sky city of Zalem, who becomes Alita’s nemesis and the target of her future goals to storm said city. Both have uncredited parts. Mr. Cameron explained that even if they never make the sequel, that those characters were must-haves in the story and essential to show. And, he said, if they did make a sequel that they wanted heavy hitters for those roles. Both men, Courtney and Norton, are friends and work colleagues of Cameron’s, so were more than willing to participate even in these tiny roles to help further the prospect of a sequel.

The soundtrack, written by Antonius B. Holkenborg, who goes by Junkie XL, is gorgeous and positively symphonic, creating a delightful variety of emotions from Alita’s sweetly, almost fairy-like awakening in Dr. Ido’s home to Terminator-feel violent reflections of her experiences in the Motorball battles against homicidal cyborgs during the Rollerball-level lethal game.

For anyone who is not old enough or geeky enough to remember the 1975 movie Rollerball, starring James Caan (whose credits date from the iconic tear-jerker sports game Brian’s Song, to the ill-fated Corleone son in The Godfather, to the voice of the tech-befuddled Dad in Cloudy with a Chance of Meatballs), it is worth taking note.  Motorball, as presented in Alita is a DUPLICATE of the murderous gladiatorial eponymous game played in the movieRollerball,   set in another dystopian ultra-violent society. It is obvious Mr. Kishiro is familiar with this story.

There has been some controversy over the use of oversized eyes in Alita. Some say they are disturbing and off-putting. I strongly disagree with the naysayers. Alita’s unusually large orbs perform a multiplicity of plot functions. For one, it highlights Alita AS a cyborg. There is no mistaking her for a natural born full human. For another, if windows are the eyes to the soul, then Alita wears hers not just on her sleeve right next to her heart but right there on her face for all the world to see. Between the fine acting and the quality CGI every subtlety of Alita’s growing and changing emotions and character are there for the audience to relate. Large,  disproportionate eyes are also a feature of small young creatures, including humans. It is one of the designations which mark an inchoate being, not just inspiring protective feelings of those around them but signaling their fundamental innocence. While Alita does do some horrific things it is from her training in her previous life and only done for the protection of others – Ido, her human friend Hugo, even a stray dog.

Alita has a couple of obstacles to hurdle to gain the attention and affection of a Western audience. The first and most obvious is, of course, the manga origin, which is a subset of an already limited demographic of comic book sales. The second is her identity as a warrior cyborg, which could have been an automatic bias against her given the Terminator series. I think her preternaturally large eyes help create an almost instant connection to this character, helping break down those barriers. I thought the device clever, without being (IF you will excuse the VERY deliberate pun) “in your face” and quite effective.

While animated AND based on a comic book character, Alita is NOT for children. There is EXTREME violence, which includes dismemberment, crushed heads, and death. It is likely the movie might have been saddled with an R rating had Cameron and Rodriguez not had the simple foresight to make cyborg “blood” obviously manufactured blue instead of gory red. There is at least one gratuitous “F” bomb uttered by Alita, herself. And they even violate one of MY personal taboos – they KILL A DOG! Though this happens, admittedly, out of sight, Alita smears the dog’s red blood under her eyes like war paint before beginning her quest to defeat the tyrannical forces which have been unleashed against her and her ersatz family.

As a result this is not a movie either for the young nor the faint of heart.  For a more mature audience, however, it is a spectacular and creatively told outing. It is interesting to almost “feel” the Japanese manga origins in the way the characters react in more restrained, almost “Vulcan” ways than an America audience might be used to.

In addition, the plot moves along quickly and efficiently. It does not dawdle on relatively trivial points on which many similar genre American movies might languish. For example, there is a bit of tension created from Ido not telling Alita initially that the name he chose for her was that of his murdered daughter. (In the original manga series it was Ido’s cat, but Cameron’s script, wisely, I thought, decided on a more emotionally compelling attachment). Honestly, in an America movie this omission might have been held on to for a prolonged period then left as a mid-first act or even mid-second act “reveal”. Instead, Alita establishes this “secret” only long enough for the audience to find out, then has Ido explain it to Alita fairly expeditiously.  To avoid spoilers I won’t give any more examples, but suffice to say this style is adapted throughout the movie. Such choices clear the way for a more intelligent plot.

I do recommend Alita but only for an older audience of late teens/young adults and up. It is refreshingly different and well written. It features excellent acting, especially considering the massive amounts of green screen in the landscape and motion capture equipment on the people with which the actors must contend. The music is worth listening to all by itself. But DO keep in mind the ending is VERY unsatisfying – albeit contrived purposefully so – as a build up for the next installment.

A SECOND LOOK AT THE NEW DR. WHO, A LOOK BACK AT AN OLD STAR TREK: NEXT GENERATION AND THE PRO-LIFE MESSAGE

SHORT TAKE:

The recent Dr. Who shows have been FAR better than the pilot and rely on puzzles, history, and most importantly, in The Tsuranga Conundrum, features — a pro-life message.

WHO SHOULD WATCH:

Anyone.

AND IF YOU LIKE THESE REVIEWS PLEASE SUBSCRIBE! THEN YOU'LL GET     EVERY NEW REVIEW SENT STRAIGHT TO YOUR E-MAIL!!

GO TO THE BOTTOM OF THE LEFT HAND SIDE AND TYPE YOUR E-MAIL IN – IT (SHOULD BE) THAT EASY. ANY PROBLEMS PLEASE SEND ME A COMMENT AND I'LL DO MY BEST TO RESOLVE YOUR ISSUE.

LONG TAKE:

I was not wrong. The first of the new Doctor Who's was terrible. Click HERE to see why. However, the stories immediately began improving and I had already intended to write a revised blog. But episode 5, The Tsuranga Conundrum, put me over the top and inspired me to get it done.

Let me first say a little bit about the other improved episodes. Rosa, much like TOS Star Trek's "City on the Edge of Forever", where one person's decision changes the course of history, revolves around whether or not Rosa Parks will refuse to stand for a white person on a bus in the 60s. Her act of civil disobedience, striking a blow for the dignity of every human, sparked the Civil Rights Movement. The antagonist for the show was a fellow time traveler who wished to interrupt this key event. The Doctor and company were there to protect the time line. Rosa was a lovely story and the theme harkened back to Doctor Who's original 1963 intent of being a time-traveling historian and scientist.

The other shows highlighted the female Doctor Who's natural strengths of intellect and puzzle-solving. As a woman, she does not have the upper body strength to physically handle altercations. The other doctors, aside from Christopher Eccleston, though of  "academic" builds, were still far stronger physically than this one could be. So her strength lies in her being, as David Tennant put it often, "clever". And this comes off very well again in this story.

While her companions are still not especially noteworthy, you kind of get used to them, and they have the virtues of neither being bossy nor abrasive as previous companions have been. Neither is there some long game arc with them as the linchpin to the mysteries of the universe, which is pretty refreshing. So the shows have definitely improved.

But the most recent Dr. Who episode was the icing on the cake and deserves special commendation. Doctor Who has always been pretty pro-life, much like Star Trek was pro-life. The value of sentient life was recognized,  regardless of how they looked. And there was respect for life and Creation in general, (even though there was only rarely a reference to a Creator). And Doctor Who is very much in the same vein. Enemies' lives are respected, valued and protected with as much alacrity as friends' lives. Character arcs are often about redemption, and rarely does the concept of revenge in any form rear its head.

Acknowledgement of life's importance in all forms is an understood thread that weaves itself though both shows. But only once before this most recent Dr Who show have I seen the pro-life position so clearly and plainly stated as it was in "The Child," from Star Trek the Next Generation.  In "The Child" Deanna Troi finds herself pregnant from an unknown entity. The consensus from the rest of the command crew was extreme caution and Worf, the Klingon security officer, even recommended abortion of the "fetus". But Deanna, not even knowing how she got pregnant, not knowing what was the intent of the entity who, frankly, raped her, flatly stated to her captain: "Do whatever you feel is necesssary to protect the ship and the crew, but know this, I'm going to have this baby". Not fetus, not product of conception, but "baby".  The only issue to Deanna was protection of the child that she carried and an acknowledgement that it was indeed a baby.

DR WHO SPOILERS

I am so very pleased to commend this new Doctor Who, and obviously the writer, Chris Chibnall, for making the same clear pro-life statement. In episode 5, "The Tsuranga Conundrum", the premise is that The Doctor and her companions are trapped on a hospital ship without her TARDIS. Their literal deus ex machina is temporarily out of reach on a planet several days travel away. The main storyline revolves around an attack on the hospital ship by a new mysterious alien, the Pting. But that is not really relevant to the point of this blog, so I will let you enjoy that part on your own. 

Their subplot, partially intended for comedy, is really the most important part of the story. Yoss is a young unmarried man, in the last stages of pregnancy. Now bear with me. Though the young man looks human, he is a different species and this IS a science fiction show. When asked how he knows the child will be a boy, he responds matter-of-factly: "Boys give birth to boys and girls give birth to girls. That's how it is." So – yeah – alien. Somehow this struck me as especially funny, as I am sure the writer intended. When two of The Doctor's companions, understandably confused, ask him how this could have happened, meaning – how could he, a man, become pregnant?!!! the scared new dad misunderstands and explains that it was the result of an ill-thought out one night stand.

Here is where the pro-life begins. There was never any mention of Yoss considering abortion even though he makes clear that pregnancy was the LAST thng he wanted at this time in his life and that he feels woefully underprepared to be a parent. In addition, the writer, through Yoss, goes out of his way to show the companions what his unborn baby looks like in a series of 3D ultrasound images. There was no plot purpose to this slide show, but it made a brilliant point and, I thought was the highlight of the episode. His species' gestation takes only 5 days, therefore the pictures he shows are a succession of developmental shots only a few hours after conception, then after the first day, the second day, third, and fourth, all of which show dramatic gestation of a species that looks just like a normal human child. The last picture of his unborn baby, taken three hours earlier, shows a full-term, perfectly beautiful,  baby boy to the awe and delight of the attending companions.

I thought this masterfully done. Whether the writer intended to or not, he makes it clear, even to the most uninitiated, that it takes no time at all to get from "conception" to "baby".  And giving this species a five day gestation brings that thought home in a very condensed way.

There are some predictable but still funny moments of two squeamish human men in a delivery room assisting with the C-section birth of a baby. But all the concepts are treated tactfully, so not to worry. The rest of the subplot is cute as well and involves his decision whether or not to keep his baby or give him up for adoption.

And there's a bit of lagniappe. Usually Doctor Who, and even my own beloved Star Trek, avoid religion at best and take sly jabs at it at worst. But in this Doctor Who, during the funeral for one of the guest characters, prayers are requested from saints! While, unfortunately, no mention of God was there, reference to saints, a distinctly Catholic spiritual concept, was a delightful and blessed breath of fresh air.

As I have not been shy of doing in the past, I have re-evaluated the show. I hereby backtrack on my previous overall negative impression of the new female Doctor Who. While I continue to maintain that the first was poorly done, it did not put her best foot forward. The steep incline of improvement has been quite a pleasant surprise.

So, I recommend for all of you Doctor Who fans who have not tuned in yet, to give Miss Whitaker's Doctor Who a try. Based upon shows 2 through 5 she deserves another chance.

And bravo to our new MISS Doctor Who for her profoundly pro-life message. I will be tuning in again.

ANT-MAN AND THE WASP: A MIXED BAG – BUT ANOTHER PUZZLE PIECE IN THE MARVEL UNIVERSE OVERALL PICTURE

AUDIO PODCAST OPTION OF ANT-MAN AND THE WASP REVIEW

SHORT TAKE:

Flawed selfish characters in a plot full of holes, but even faulty Marvel hero films are fun. If you do go – STAY FOR TWO IMPORTANT END CREDIT SCENES!

WHO SHOULD GO:

I’d advise parental discretion here. There is a lot to commend it as a fun action-adventure. But while Ant-Man is altruistic and focused on his family, the Pyms are selfish and unconcerned about the damage they do to others. And there is a sprinkling of mild “cuss” words as well as one very inappropriate strong profanity, especially for a child’s film, uttered by Hank in a moment of stress.

AND IF YOU LIKE THESE REVIEWS PLEASE SUBSCRIBE! THEN YOU’LL GET     EVERY NEW REVIEW SENT STRAIGHT TO YOUR E-MAIL!!

GO TO THE BOTTOM OF THE LEFT HAND SIDE AND TYPE YOUR E-MAIL IN – IT (SHOULD BE) THAT EASY. ANY PROBLEMS PLEASE SEND ME A COMMENT AND I’LL DO MY BEST TO RESOLVE YOUR ISSUE.

LONG TAKE:

Before I start my review, let me just say that I LIKED Ant-Man and The Wasp. The story and characters are very flawed, but like the oddly cut, and hard to place piece in a jigsaw puzzle, it fits into its own little niche.

TRIED NOT TO SPOIL BUT SOME REFERENCES INEVITABLY IMPLY THINGS SO HEREBY BE FOREWARNED

The Pyms are the singularly most flawed enhanced individuals in the Marvel Universe. I don’t call them “heroes” because during the course of the entire movie they don’t do one heroic thing. Lang and his ex-cons are another story, as they risk their lives, livelihood and freedom to help the Pyms. But outside of Loki and pretrained Dr. Strange, the Pyms are the most selfish “good guys” we’ve met. Strange reforms and Loki is at least witty and has spectacular style.

Even Thanos THINKS what he’s trying to do is for the good of the Universe and is willing to make personal sacrifices for others – no matter how colossally and tragically misguided Thanos’ intentions are.

And DEADPOOL! While, admittedly, Deadpool has an agenda of vengeance, his goal is to take out bad guys, which is to the benefit of innocents everywhere, AND he is willing to sacrifice his otherwise potentially immortal life for a kid he hardly knows. When Deadpool is a better moral example than the Pyms, you know the Pyms have issues.

Here’s another way to look at it.

Whether Ant-Man AKA Scott Lang (Paul Rudd), the Wasp AKA Hope Pym (Evangeline Lilly), and Hank Pym (Michael Douglas) are good guys or bad guys kind of depends upon whether or not their universe is full of NPC’s. For those of us not video gamers, an NPC is a non-player character, a critter or human which is really just part of the landscape serving as a decoration, target, or information access. Their deaths are irrelevant to the game’s outcome.

The premise of Ant-Man and The Wasp concerns the Pyms who are trying to retrieve Janet Pym, (Michelle Pfeiffer), the wife of Hank and mother of Hope, from the quantum realm in which she was lost three decades before during a mission to disarm a nuclear weapon.

To accomplish this they kidnap Scott from his house arrest 3 days before he will have served his full term, which sentence resulted from his participation in the events of Captain America: Civil War. This kidnapping puts Scott at risk of getting him thrown in jail for the next 20 years and missing his daughter’s entire youth. During the course of the movie the Pyms shrink and enlarge everything from cars to buildings to Pez dispensers and humans. In the real world many of these activities, especially when accomplished during car chases on busy highways and in populous areas, would have resulted, inevitably, in the collateral deaths of many bystanders.

All this in order to rescue one adult human, who, though lost performing a heroic act, volunteered knowing exactly what would happen to her. While their goal is admirable, the lengths to which they go are not. I understand WHY they do what they do but it does not justify their actions.

There is a Biblical truism which warns that no goal, no matter how good, can be justified with even a single evil act. While granting that rule must be temporized with common sense, someone committing a small sin to further the noblest goal would still have to take responsibility for their actions. And there is no doubt that wrecking havoc on an entire city and putting hundreds, if not thousands, of other people’s lives in danger for the benefit of a single person, is neither a small sin nor an admirable plan.

In addition, Hope Pym is another in a growing list of tiresome, condescending, feminist, “I can do anything better than you can,” chip-on-their-shoulder, self-absorbed, female characters which have most notably reared their ugly heads in the Star Wars franchise, as well as movies like Oceans 8. (Click on the names to access those reviews.)

All that being said Ant-Man and The Wasp is, kind of obviously even from the title, a fantasy science fiction. If we can keep that in mind, for the sake of this review, and the fantasy in which such stories live, let us presume that at least no innocent person, by some miracle, was harmed during the course of the movie and that all property damage was duly compensated by the Pyms using some kind of techno gizmo.

If you think that’s absurd, then consider that we are discussing a movie wherein the characters can shrink themselves down to quantum level size and enlarge themselves to the height of tall buildings in a moment and with no permanent ill-effects.

I can live with that.

Moving forward from there, I can safely say that Ant-Man and The Wasp is a very fun movie. It is a family-friendly action adventure with a couple of provisos. Scott Lang and his crew of lovably goofy but well intentioned fellow ex-cons, Luis (Michael Pena), Kurt (David Dastmelchian), and Dave (Clifford Joseph Harris, Jr. aka T.I. shortened and altered into initials from the nickname “Tip” which his grandfather gave him), appropriately enough, run a security company. Who better would know how to stop a thief than another thief? They risk their new business to help the Pyms.

The dialogue is often tongue and cheek, such as when cliche comments are taken literally and responded to in kind. An example is a prolonged and funny discussion between Luis and the villain Sonny (Walton Goggins) as to whether or not the torture drug they are about to administer to Luis should be properly referred to as truth serum and then the Shrek style Pinocchio recitation Sonny gets from Luis of irrelevancies in response to asking where Scott is.

Little is taken really seriously so I suppose the car chases and suddenly and constantly expanding and shrinking buildings and people shouldn’t be either.

The plot is interesting, especially as there are multiple sets of conflicting interests. The Pyms wish to save Janet. Scott wants to help the Pyms but stay out of jail. Sonny wants the Pym’s tech to sell. Ava (Hannah John-Kamen) needs the Pym tech to solve her chronic state of quantum flux inflicted on her as a child when her father’s experiment goes awry, an accident she blames on Hank Pym. Foster has his own agenda. The Fed, Jimmy Woo (Randall Park), wants to catch SOMEbody — ANYbody!. And the ex-con friends are just simply agog to be involved with super hero “stuff”. Frankly, given all the contrasting interests involved, the ONLY thing that maintains Hank’s priority of use of the tech is the fact that he invented and owns the technology.

Everyone believes their cause justifiable but only Sonny is seen as the real bad guy . Hwever, since Scott, the Pyms and their friends are the ones through whose eyes we see the proceedings, they are the ones for whom we are supposed to root.So we are to ignore when bystanders are put at risk……………??

OK.  I’m fine with that. This is, after all, a science fiction fantasy. I mean, come on, the guy’s riding an ant.

Violence is cartoonish and the language is pretty clean until Hank lets loose with at least one over the top profanity I could have done without in a child’s movie. For parental guidance I am quick to seek information from www.screenit.com. Membership is cheap and well worth it.

The rest is what we’ve come to expect from a Marvel Superhero Movie, with lots of exciting special effects which worked really well with 3D by the way. I’m not normally a big 3D fan but the flying-fighting scenes were ratchted up at least a half a notch by the glasses. The flashbacks featuring a younger Michelle Pfeiffer were the best I’ve ever seen, though Douglas suffered from the typical overly smoothed face and peculiar facial expressions common to this cinematographic magic trick. I think it is something about the mouth that just doesn’t look right most of the time. I’m not singling out Douglas. I am aware of his medical issues and that is not the problem because this is universal to any time older actors are “youthened” by CGI.

Also, Pfieffer’s character is the point of one of the biggest plot holes – how did she survive 30 years in a hostile environment with zero resources? Food? Water? Bathroom? She aged and referenced being aware of the passage of 30 years time. She didn’t even have a pack of cards so even if she didn’t have to eat or drink, how did she manage not to go insane? This is completely glossed over without mention and I’ve found no precedent for answers even from comic book geeks on the net.

Another one that bugged (sorry about the pun) me was the physics which operated conveniently to the plot. On the one hand, being shrunk seems to afford some survivability not usually possible – like falls and impacts which would destroy a normal unshrunk human. This would imply a certain enhanced density. Granted, the suit they wear must help a lot but does not account for every instance – such as when their helmets are off. If the humans had been tiny but undense they could have been swatted like fairies or butterflies. Instead they carry an enormous amount of momentum and punch in fights. This implies the matter is all there but concentrated. On the other hand, Hank can pick up an entire shrunken building and people carry it around as though it was made of styrofoam. Even a scale model of that building would have been heavier than presented had it been made of the same unconcentrated steel girder and concrete materials, much less how many thousands of tons it should weight even in its shrunken but dense state. So which is it guys?

On the positive side, the jokes are funny, Scott doing his best as a father was refreshing, and I enjoyed the lighter tone of the movie, especially since the previous one I saw was Infinity Wars. However, on that note, and without giving any spoilers — hold onto your seat. Let’s just say it is important to sit through all of the credits and that the FIVE screenwriters (talk about a story written by committee!): Chris McKenna, Erik Sommers, Paul Rudd (the Ant-Man, himself), Andrew Barrer and Gabriel Ferrari, as well as director, Peyton Reed, were definitely aware of the aforementioned movie.

In short, without a score card, it is difficult to tell whether the Pyms or Sonny is the “bad guy” team. The Pyms’ goals are exclusively personally, relatively trivial in the grand scheme considering what they are willing to do to others, ignore the desperate needs of others, like Ava, casually put the safety and security of Lang’s family and friends at risk by yanking Scott out of his house arrest a mere three days before he will be free, dismissively ignore Hank’s possible culpability in Ava’s condition, and put thousands of innocent bystanders in mortal danger.

It is not their best Marvel movie, nor does it try to be but it does hold its own and finds its place in the Marvel universe. I especially enjoyed the addition of Michelle Pfeiffer as new blood into the mix and the return of Scott’s motley crue of comic convicts led by Michael Pena (Collaterol Beauty), who is always a pleasure, especially when he is telling one if his overly convoluted stories.

So, you older geeks (like me) – go see Ant-Man and the Wasp, if for no other reason than to put another puzzle piece into the overall picture that is the Marvel Universe, but I’d see it before deciding whether or not to bring impressionable kids.

HOTEL ARTEMIS: A RIOT, SOME ROBBERS, A SECRET HOSPITAL TO WHICH THEY GO, AND THE NURSE WHO RUNS IT

SHORT TAKE:

Violent but subtly humorous, action filled but occasionally thoughtful, and creative look at a near future ultra secret hotel-hospital for wealthy criminals run by an aging, no-nonsense, rough but surprisingly compassionate and maternal Nurse and her massive orderly, during a perfect storm of chaos.

WHO SHOULD GO:

This is an adult only movie to be sure. Though there is almost no sexuality of any kind, there is a LOT of violence and a large dose of bad language. NOT for kids.

LONG TAKE:

There may be no honor among thieves but at the Hotel Artemis there is at least some loyalty. The Hotel Artemis is a 22 year old run-down member-only hospital for criminals. On the 12th floor of a building in the wrong part of Los Angeles, it is exclusive, hidden and generally thought to be a myth. Hotel Artemis is an indie movie, written and directed by Drew Pierce whose credits as writer include Iron Man 3, Mission Impossible: Rogue Nation and 2020's future new Downey, Jr. Sherlock Holmes. This is his first outing directing a feature length film.  

Set in the near future of 2028 Los Angeles, Artemis features microwave scalpels, 3D printers which can manufacture new livers, and the highly skilled Nurse, played by Jodie Foster, who is more worn down than the Artemis' elevators. Agoraphobic, alcoholic, pill popping and jaded, Nurse shuffles about the hotel and her charges, administering treatments with a confident medical hand and a tough love bedside manner.  (As an odd piece of trivia it is the second time Foster has played an agoraphobic, the first time as Alexandra Rover, the neurotic writer in the filmed version of the comedy children's story Nim's Island.)

Her only staff – part orderly part bouncer – is Dave Bautista's character, Everest, whose name is a mystery only to people who have never seen a picture of this man mountain. His strong arm but restrained hand is somehow both scary and adorable. Early on, for example, he is jumped from behind by a customer who has been turned away. Shrugging him off as a bear might an overzealous cub he cautions him with the zen calm of an experienced camp counselor not to do it again or he just might have to really [mess] him up. 

Everyone goes by a nickname gleaned from either their job description or the hotel room name and Foster's lead character, The Nurse, is no exception. The movie is about the night of the Nurse's Perfect Storm. A city wide riot, like a slow-moving wildfire, is heading their way at the same time the Artemis' owner and founder, a mob kingpin named The Wolf King/Niagra, in yet another flamboyant bad guy role played by Jeff Goldblum, enters late in the evening for ministrations, accompanied by his overeager to please son, (Star Trek's Zachery Quinto), and his gang of thugs. Caught in the crossfire are a pair of brothers freshly injured from a bank robbery Waikiki and Honolulu, (Sterling Brown and Brian Henry), a munitions dealer, Acapulco (Charlie Day)  who came off the worse for wear in an altercation with a mistress, and a mysterious hit woman, Nice, played by Sophia Boutella, whose true allegiances and hidden agenda slowly unfold as the evening wears on. I have not cared much for the one note characters Boutella played in Kingsmen and Atomic Blonde, but her Nice in Hotel Artemis has her growing on me.  The ensuing tornado of violence will expose formerly unknown histories and secrets central to the souls of these eminently interesting characters.

There are many rules for the Hotel Artemis. Among them are: no weapons allowed, no one but members through the gates, do not insult or threaten the staff, and …….. do not kill the other patients. For one reason or another all the rules will be broken this night …. for better or for worse.

The violence is considerable and the language is fairly raw but there is no sexuality. Who has time with the amount of fighting and blood shed that will go on?

Foster is the genuine article. An actor, like Dustin Hoffman, who does not shy away from looking truly ugly. But from Foster's Nurse, underneath her worn exterior, shines a beauty of genuine but rough and no-nonsense affection for her patients. She exercises an unsentimental, tough-love maternal protective fiduciary duty towards them all and it makes her character both endearing and relatable in ways that more glamorous but despicable women in movies like Ocean's 8, can not even begin to evoke. If honesty and genuine concern were coinage she would be the richest woman in this movie about a medical retreat for the super wealthy criminal. I haven't seen this kind of unique perspective on the maternal instinct since Ripley's square off with the mother creature in Aliens.

This is an unusual and creative movie. I believe it has been vastly underrated by the traditional reviewing community, more particularly Rex Reed who labeled it as a shoddy freak show. This is grossly unfair and I suspect he did not understand its themes of filial duty and responsible altruism, which the writer is asserting is a potential which lies at the core of every human soul, even the apparently mosty fallen ones among us. The characters are three dimensional and behave in often unexpected but very credible ways. They are somewhat larger than life (especially Bautista) but there are genuine and unique personalities which come out clearly in small ways and clever dialogue. No exceptions or excuses are made for their criminal behavior but there is a humanity to them which make them very accessible. And, Hallelujah, Hotel Artemis does not always take itself completely seriously. Goldblum's character is aware that he is a very bad guy and likely to come to a very bad end. Baustista's character knows he is massive and almost unstoppable but has a gentle and fiercely protective spot for this tiny fragile elderly and essentially kind maternal Nurse. Right after Waikiki warns an especially obnoxious fellow patient, Acapulco, that Nice could kill him with a coffee cup she immediately demonstrates, then warns Acapulco that it is a good thing the Hotel Artemis has its rules. Nice advises someone on how to die well: "They paid for your death, don't give them your dignity for free." And if you're the kind of movie attendee who likes to stay for the credits, the last line is: "The staff of the Hotel Artemis hopes you enjoyed your stay and that you will come again." One has to smile.

Certainly not a family friendly film, but for those of appropriate age and disposition, Hotel Artemis is more than worth your time.

 

SOLO – GAP FILLER AND WELCOME “THROW BACK” TO THE ORIGINAL STAR WARS STYLE OF A NEW HOPE

SHORT TAKE:

FINALLY, a return to the classic style and pacing of the original family friendly clean agenda free (mostly) Star Wars, in the origin story of the one and only Han Solo.

WHO SHOULD GO:

Pretty much anyone. Not as violent as Rogue One and less cleavage than Carrie Fisher's gold metal bikini in Return of the Jedi.

LONG TAKE:

WARNING: CONTAINS A FEW CRUCIAL SPOILERS TO OTHER STAR WARS MOVIES.

When I was a kid I used to do jigsaw puzzles with my Dad. 300 piece, 500. I think the biggest one we ever did together was a 1,500 piece puzzle of the French Quarter at Night. Similar to this one.

No one piece stands out, except as you are fitting it into the bigger picture. Originally made from wood in 1760 and cut into pieces by a jig-saw, most jigsaw puzzles are now made of cardboard, but the fascination remains. Each piece has its own unique "personality" and has only one place where it will go to complete a bigger overall picture. While you are searching for just that right spot, that one piece becomes very important and you know, briefly, every detail of its shape – every tab and blank, edge and curve fitting specifically into one part of the tesselation that is a completed jigsaw puzzle. But then, when you figure out where it goes, its success is defined as how well it blends in with and disappears into the rest of the picture.

Solo reminds me of that – appropriate for such a movie to be named for a single, unpaired, individual – Solo is as unique in shape but as uniform in texture and picture as all the other Star Wars movies, so like a unique puzzle piece stands alone yet fits in beautifully to the overall picture. This is not a bad thing.

The point I’m making is that Solo fills an empty spot in the larger overall painting that is the Star Wars Universe. In the original films, Star Wars – A New Hope, Empire Strikes Back and Return of the Jedi  – there was a LOT of missing back story to Han that worked as a mystery then, but over time became niggling points for which people would enjoy answers. What was this card game from which Solo won the Falcon "fair and square" from Lando? How did Solo and Chewy meet? Where did Han come from? How did he acquire the skills he so effortlessly displayed as a smuggler? There was no mention of a gang or family business. No mentor or sponsor. Were there any women in his life before Leia? Why does Chewy stay with and take orders from this annoying, snarky, only marginally successful representative of a significantly physically weaker race? Were there any defining watershed moments in his past which would help shape this surprisingly complex character, who was part scoundrel with a soft heart and part hero with a large Machiavellian streak? Why are Lando and I the only creatures in the Universe that think Solo’s first name should be pronounced with a short vowel – Han – like hand or fan? And where did he learn to speak —- Wookie? Well – MOST of these questions are artfully answered, at least in part by the new Star Wars installment – Solo: A Star Wars Story.

Personally, I find the timeline for the release of the Star Wars movies very convoluted. We start with Star Wars, originally released as a stand alone movie in 1977 but then renamed Star Wars – A New Hope IV in 1981 when they started making the sequels. The SECOND Star Wars movie made, Empire Strikes Back was numbered V and Return of the Jedi – really the third born, was numbered VI. THEN they made Phantom Menace and the sequels to IT 16 years after the Return of the Jedi but were subsequently numbered I, II and III. THEN THEN Force Awakens and Last Jedi were made in 2015 and 2017 but they REALLY belong after Return of the Jedi which was released in 1983. But THEN THEN THEN Rogue One’s story belongs squeezed between number III – Revenge of the Sith (2005) and IV – A New Hope which was released in 1977, which REALLY should force a renumbering AGAIN if it weren’t for the possibility that the Star Wars fans might storm Lucasfilms and…..wait……that changed too. Disney bought them out.

Well.  *sigh*

Where does that leave Solo’s timeline you might ask? Crammed between Revenge of the Sith (III) and Rogue One, leaving LOTS of time BETWEEN the timelines of Solo and Rogue One to fill in more of Han’s life adventures before he basically…catches up to himself.

Alden Ehrenreich (pronounced ALL-DEN ERIN-RIKE – I know I got THAT correct as I listened for it on an interview with the actor!) is wonderful as the young Han Solo. A terrific actor in general he made quite an impression in the Cohen Brothers homage to 1950's movie genres, Hail Caeser, as an endearing, stalwart, naive Audie Murphy-type character. Ehrenreich has JUST the right twinkle in his eye, spring in his steps, mischief in his manner, unrelieved optimism in his own abilities, confidence in his mannerisms and slightly arrogant attitude that make him SO familiar to the Han Solo we grew up with. Yet this Solo is neither an imitation nor a caricature. Ehrenreich makes Solo his own but is so convincing that, like a reigning dowager at a family reunion you would have known who this young man belonged to just by watching him for 30 seconds.

Donald Glover (the scientist who figures out how to get The Martian home) plays a young brash Lando with the expected pinache and verve.

Peter Mayhew – all 7 foot 3 of him – now retired living in Texas, was the original Chewbacca. This mantle, or should I say "walking carpet," is now worn by Joonas Suotomo, a 6 foot 11 Finnish basketball player.

Emilia Clarke (Game of Throne’s Dragon Lady and the newest incarnation of Sarah Conner from the Terminator series installment Genisys) introduces a new ingredient into Solo’s early life – Qi’ra, a fellow street rat from his home world of Corellia.

Woody Harrelson (Zombieland, Glass Castle (see my blog) and 2012) brings his own unique but familiar style to the character of ringleader Beckett. Charismatic as always, Harrelson’s Beckett runs a troupe of highly specialized thieves who takes Han on in the middle of a job.

Thandie Newton (2012, Crash, HBO's Westworld series, Mission Impossible II) plays Val, a member of Beckett’s gang. As a side note I thought it was only me who kept confusing her with Star Trek’s new Uhura and Guardians of the Galaxy’s Gamora –

Zoe Saldana. For half the movie I was thinking: WOW Zoe is in EVERYTHING sci fi! I felt stupid when I discovered my mistake in the credits until I found these pictures and anecdotes about how other fellow actors confused them as well.

I mean, to be fair, they could stunt double for each other.

L3-37 – voice by Phoebe Waller-Bridge – is really the only sour note in the production. Intended, I suspect, to be their female version of C3PO, she is such an over-the-top feminist robot that she would have been better suited to an animated Shrek caricature or a replacement for Joan Rivers’ Dot Matrix in a Spaceballs sequel. So grinding was she that whenever she was on screen I couldn’t wait for her to be off. At least she makes Jar Jar Binks seem more appealing.

Finally, Paul Bettany plays Dryden Vos, a guy as bad as his Avenger’s Vision is Thor-hammer good. Bettany is fun to watch as he chews the scenary with calculated menace and the evil abandon required of any good Bond super-villain or Star Wars Hutt-style baddie.

Overall, I really enjoyed Solo. It’s completely family friendly. There is a bit of violence but no more than in the original Star Wars and less "cleavage" than in Fisher’s gold bikini in Return of the Jedi. The plot fills in a lots of gaps – like spackling over the holes in a well worn, well loved bedroom wall … or like one of the missing pieces of a puzzle, making it a very satisfying experience. Unlike the Last Jedi, which kind of trashed the continuity character of Luke, or the lame way they dispatched Han in Force Awakens, this story feels as Star Wars-ian as the original. It’s exciting, has lots of space races, neat aliens, is often funny and is basically a "throw back" in the BEST possible way, to the very first Star Wars – the foundational New Hope, which, personally gives ME hope that the Star Wars franchise might FINALLY be back on the right track..