The X-Men film series and all it's offshoots have been a
mixed bag, to say the least, but I've enjoyed more of them than I've disliked.
But if we had to suffer through convoluted messes like the third X film and
that hideous Origins Wolverine disaster to get to LOGAN (2017) then it may have been worth it.
Set in an apocalyptic future America
in which the rest of mutant-kind has been hunted to extinction, Logan hides his identity
trying to earn enough money get a sick Charles Xavier out of the country. Xavier's
illness makes him unintentionally dangerous and the plan is to get him far away
from people. Enter a woman on the run with a child that just might be another
mutant with a connection to Logan .
Soon, a business financed paramilitary force is after them and Logan has to decide if he has any of his past
heroic nature within.
The strengths of this film are many and often surprising. I
expected great performances from this cast but the depth of emotion in the
story was stunning. I expected well done action sequences but I didn't expect
each action scene to cause so many intensely distressing feelings for me. This
is a finely written, beautifully crafted and - dare I say it - brilliant film
with much to say about life, humanity, friendship, duty and love. This is a
great movie and if it is ignored at award time then the Academy can burn in
Hell.
I'm a fan of Vin Diesel and have followed his screen career
since seeing his self-made short film Multi-Facial in 1995. He's a big beefy
guy with an remarkably resonant voice who can actually emote and has taken control
of his career in a way that is impressive. As insane and over-the-top as the
Fast & Furious films have become they are still great fun action movies and
play by their own loopy rules (and physics). It was in the hope of just such
silly fun I went to see XXX: THE RETURN OF XANDER CAGE (2017).
I saw the first XXX film and did not like it. If I had
remembered this fact a bit more clearly I would have skipped this matinee
screening and done something more productive with my time. But ten minutes into
this third entry in the series the memory came flooding back and I said out
loud 'Oh, yeah. This is going to suck.' What I had forgotten was that these
movie have no sense of reality but not in the fun, wink-wink slick manner of
the Fast & Furious franchise. Here all is supposed to be super serious with
Cage being the smartest man in the room at all times. The problem is that the
script is never up to a level higher than a cartoon so for Cage to be that smart
guy everyone around him has to be as dumb as a stack of peat moss. There is
almost no attempt made to present the other characters as credible threats,
thinking human beings or even anything other than game play obstacles to be
overcome.
That is the biggest problem of this film and this sad series
in total. Nothing matters because nothing is creditable and therefore there are
no stakes in the story. Without a viable sense of danger we have no reason to
care about the thinly drawn characters or their fate so it's all just a silly
and eventually tiring bunch of kinetic crap. A movie about a group of extremely
talented, adrenaline junkie spies should not bore it's audience into yawns. It's
easy to see Diesel is trying to build another franchise around a core group
that will expand into a 'family' but I suspect it will fail. Or, it should.
KONG: SKULL
ISLAND (2017) has been
lauded and castigated in almost equal measure among monster fans. The 'thumbs
up' crowd claim it's a fun, exciting monster epic that builds a new Kong story
from elements of Apocalypse Now, the original 1933 Kong and the 1976 remake.
This is true, to a certain point. The 'thumbs down' side argue that the film is
bereft of decent characters, the action overwhelms the story and pace is too
quick. This view is also true to a degree. Where do I stand?
I ended up enjoying KONG but with reservations. Most of the
objections I've heard from the Nay side seem a little silly but I do think
there are some valid criticisms to be made. First, there is precious little
time spent letting us get to know the characters. The only actors that really
get a shot at crafting meaningful characterizations are Sam Jackson and John
Goodman but even they are given less time than is necessary. John C. Reilly's
WWII pilot is somewhat amusing and talks a lot but we don't really get to feel
much for him. Everyone else is merely a cipher moving through the tale doing
what is required to advance to the next plot point.
That would be my main criticism of the film - there is not
enough time spent letting us soak up the beauty and grandeur of the Skull Island
they have created. It's as if they learned only one lesson from the Peter
Jackson mess from 2005 - don't let things drag out to David Lean lengths. And don't
get me wrong - that's a damned good lesson to take from that film! But when
you're creating a whole new fantasy world location you need to let us look
around for a while before tossing us into the conflict. Let us wallow in the
visuals and then gradually introduce the monsters and tension. Or introduce the
monsters in a shockingly quick manner and then let us look at the world you've
built in the second act so we grow to understand the environment and it's
people a bit. We needed much more time with the human natives without Reilly's
babblings to show us their village and how they live in this mad place. This is
where the film could have let us get to know the characters well but it
doesn't.
I suspect that there were several scenes left on the cutting
room floor that would give the movie the extra characterization I feel it is
lacking. Perhaps we'll get those in some future extended edition on Blu-Ray.
But it would have been nice to have seen them on the big screen making the
exciting action sequences more emotionally involving. I like what is there, but
I hope for more.
GET OUT (2017) is one of the best horror films of recent
years and takes some great older ideas into fascinating modern areas. Jordan
Peele's debut as writer/director shows that he is a student of the genre as
well as a clear-eyed observer of humanity and society. It is his vision of
American culture that I found most refreshing. He lets his audience gradually
see, one incident at a time, how a black man interacts with and carefully
negotiates a world where he is always suspect. We see how his natural fear of
white people and their inherent position of power informs his thoughts and
actions and how he has to remind himself that the family of his girlfriend feels no malice toward him. But while his normal defenses are sometimes too sensitive
to small things is he right to sense a dangerous undercurrent of racial superiority
in his weekend hosts' attitude? Is the predatory vibe he gets from certain
comments a misread of a culture he knows only as an outsider or a warning sign
he should heed?
I won't reveal anything more than to say that this is a
brilliant film and heralds what I hope is a long career in the horror genre for
Peele.
X-RAY (1981) - 3 (terrible slasher)
SPECTRAL (2016)- 5 (derivitive SF tale)
THE WITCH'S MOUNTAIN (1972) - 5 (odd Spanish horror effort)
THE HOUSE THAT SCREAMED (1969) - 8 (rewatch)
XXX: THE RETURN OF XANDER CAGE (2017)- 3 (miserable)
DEATH WISH 3 (1985) - 5 (cheesy, ridiculous BUT entertaining
trash)
PULSE (1988) - 4 (electricity is evil!)
KONG: SKULL
ISLAND (2017) - 7
HORROR RISES FROM THE TOMB (1973) - 8 (rewatch)
THE NIGHT OF THE WEREWOLF (1981) - 7 (rewatch)
LOOKING FOR MR. GOODBAR (19677) - 7
GET OUT (2017) - 9
HATE FOR HATE (1967) - 5 (spaghetti western)
No comments:
Post a Comment