Reviews

Darke Reviews – Best and Worst of 2016

Posted by

0

I haven’t tried one of these before, I see some people do top 10, top 5, top 7, or top 11. I see some only do Best, some do best and worst. Let’s face it the movie review game is flooded with people who have their own takes and spins – so might as well take my own right?

Now this list is strictly based on movies I have watched as part of a First Run experience in theatres. So things like Goonies don’t count, nor do direct to DVD purchases.

Best of 2016

This was a hard category, because quite honestly out of the 40+ movies I watched this year most were just good or “ok”, others were completely Meh. Only 10 made it into potential ranking for best movies of the year and that has been paired down to the following 6.

  1. Arrival
    When considering overall production value, mental engagement, visuals, the film making, script, and just concept. Arrival for me has to be the best movie of the year. It may not win in the rewatch category, but it just nails it and is one of the best sci-fi movies this decade (which we’re now 70% through). If this doesn’t get at least a nod for the Oscars I am going to be even further disappointed in the Academy.
  2. Kubo and the Two Strings
    This almost nailed the number one slot. It so beautiful and heartfelt. To date this is Laika’s best film and is absolutely magical. Watching their behind the scenes production videos should make you even more in awe of what was finally released on screen. I have had the opportunity to share it with people who missed it in theatres that “don’t watch animation” and they loved it. Don’t pass this one up.
  3. Moana
    It’s better than Frozen. Full stop, no argument. It is nearly flawless. Frozen shows signs of its 11th hour edits, Moana does not. Granted Let it Go is still a superior, and intensely personal song, to anything in Moana; but I have to give credit to the Princess ‘I want song’ “How Far I’ll go”. While not as personal to me, it still resonated, as does the rest of the movie. The animation is some of the best Disney has ever done and shows how far they are going and how much more that they can do. It is an incredible tight production with a small cast and very focused and directed story. I am hoping Disney takes notes on this one and continues to give us more like Moana.https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cPAbx5kgCJo
  4. The Witch
    This one stuck with me. It stuck with me hard. I want to say there are not a lot of good witch movies, which is true, but thats doing a disservice to this to limit it so much. There are not a lot of good period horror movies. I suppose it makes some sense as you can’t shoot as cheaply when doing a period piece, but I would love to see other productions follow the footsteps of this one. It isn’t for everyone, but this is a list of what I loved this year and I truly loved the Witch for all it gave me. It made me feel. It made me think. It made me smile at the end. It’s a good film deserving a good watch.
  5. Deadpool
    Not for kids. Awesome movie that I spent laughing from credit to post credit. I am looking forward to the sequel to see if it they caught lightning in a
    bottle or is there a recipe they figured out to make a successful R Rated movie.
  6. Suicide Squad
    I know this is making a lot of peoples worst of the year lists. I’ve watched it in theatres twice, watched the extended edition for a third time. I have to acknowledge it does have flaws, but the DCEU really needs to pay more attention to David Ayer and less to Zack Snyder. He nailed these characters and there’s a lot of effort behind the scenes to really bring them to life. The actors themselves gave it their all and it shows too. With the recent announcement of Gotham City Sirens as a Harley Quinn spin off film with Ayer at the helm I am excited again for a DC movie. I just hope he lets her have more control over the costume this time.

Worst  of 2016

As I said before the ability to pair this list down to the worst of the worst was difficult with so many potential contenders this year. Some were badly made, others bad concepts, some just outright offensive, and two were so below mediocre I couldn’t even bring myself to write about them.

  1. Divergent: Allegiant / London Has Fallen
    It’s a tie!. You’ll notice there is no link to the reviews. These two movies left me with such amazing apathy at how bad they were by comparison to their predecessors I couldn’t even come up with the energy to write about it. To be fair Gods of Egypt almost made the 6th spot. I maintained my boycott and didn’t pay money to see it, but it was on HBO when I was on a work trip and I did watch. Not only did it deserve the boycott, but it was beyond horrific. I have seen better SyFy movie of the weeks.
  2. Mechanic: Resurrection
    This was just such mediocre garbage that tried to pass itself off as an action movie. I have seen student films that look better.
  3. Independence Day Resuregence
    Sometimes sequels are better. Sometimes they are worse. Sometimes they are not needed. Sometimes we just don’t care. No one wanted it. No one asked for it. Ok well not recently. A lot of us wanted to see more back in 1996. Bigger isn’t better. Scaling up isn’t always the way to go. I guarantee you no one wanted to see more of Brent Spiners butt.  If you watch this you will want your time back and ask yourself why it was made.
  4. Batman v Superman: Dawn of Justice
    *sigh*
  5. 10 Cloverfield Lane
    I am once again the contrarian. I am seeing this make some folks top 10 lists, and in one case the number one slot. I am asking myself if we watched the same movie.  It moved up the list over movies that were just badly made because it left me irritated. I have to assume that is not the feeling the filmmakers wanted to evoke.
  6. Inferno
    Yeah. So you are probably wondering how this and the number two slot beat out BvS? Because there are moments of brilliance in BvS. There are moments of good action. There are moments of good characters. Bat-fleck is good. Wonder Woman is flipping amazing. This movie though has no brilliance. It is a paycheck for some people and I have to say they did not earn it.  It is the worst made movie of the year because of the budget, the starpower, and former skill level of those involved in the production. They had all the components and clearly threw them in the trash before cooking with them.

Wait where’s Passengers?

It gets it’s own category!

Most Hated Movie of 2016

Passengers
My hate for this film only grows. It’s not just bad it’s patently offensive to anyone with decency – which is clearly not the director or writer. My biggest disappointment with it? It didn’t bomb harder.

 

That’s it everyone. That’s the year.

Agree/Disagree? Tell me your thoughts here or on Facebook!

Darke Reviews | Assassins Creed (2016)

Posted by

1

Nothing is True.
Everything is Permitted.

Forewarning. I have played through the Ezio Trilogy of the video game twice. Played through AC3 once which was a slog and lost interest during AC4 as I didn’t find the actual plot engaging. That’s right folks, this is a video game turned movie. We all know there are only a handful of exceptions to the rule that these will be horrible.

  • Silent Hill
  • Mortal Kombat
  • Warcraft (it wasn’t horrible!…just not great)
  • Resident Evil (again not horrible. even good)

You can argue Mortal Kombat, but I’ll fight you. It’s fun. It’s actually pretty good for the 90’s. The litany of crimes against video games largely began with Super Mario Bros., but really took off with Uwe Boll rampage through the German tax code and movie industry with beauties like Alone in the Dark, House of the Dead, Bloodrayne, and more.

So does Assassin’s Creed break the curse or should it have stayed in the shadows?

Looking behind the curtain as usual, we have the invocation of the three writer rule. Michael Lesslie (Macbeth 2015), Adam Cooper (Exodus Gods and Kings, Allegiant), Bill Collage (Exodus Gods and Kings, Allegiant). Now Allegiant was so bad and droll I didn’t even have the energy to write a review for it. But did they do a bad job here? Actually…mostly no. They went with as an original story as they could tell. You see when adapting a story based game like Assassins Creed, or say Mass Effect, you have to be original. You won’t tell the story that got to the heart of a player that made it their game. You need to make it YOUR story, but in their universe. They succeeded here. It has all the right story elements to tell me this is AC, but their own story for it – mostly.

Where they fail though is continuing to use the Apple of Eden McGuffin. They could have made up their own artifact that Abstergo and the Templars wanted and the Assassins have to protect. Slight spoiler, but if you didn’t figure it out from the trailer – the Assassins are the good guys. The logic fails sadly extend to the characters who shift motivations inexplicably and without sufficient justification. The other, perhaps biggest failure is the contrast between past and present. People play the game to spend 80% of their time in the historical period, the other 20% is dealing with the framework and setup for how it all happens – the Templars & Assassins in the modern age still clawing for supremacy over each other and the lives of the planet. The movie reverses this with more time in the modern period than the past.

Sure in the past they give us beautiful fan service that the players of the games will like (or wince depending on what you thought of the section). You have your carriage chases, leaps of faith, rooftop runs, blades, darts, ropes, all of it. It made me happy to see so much of the game realized in a live action environment, but this excitement was dampened by poor filming and bringing me back to the “real world” in the middle of scenes.

Which leads into the next failure, the directing. Justin Kurzel. Director of the Snowtown Murders and Macbeth (2015 version) shows what I can only judge as having been done in an altered state. He apes styles of three or four other directors, that shouldn’t be combined together. This is where production behind the scenes things lie to us. Knowing that the Leap of Faith was done practically was amazing. The final execution could have been CGI and we may not have noticed due to the intense colour correction, computer enhancements, and outright computer built worlds and lighting. Oh the lighting was so horrific through this. There were a handful of inspired shots that meant little because they were ruined by either a bad cut or bad effect. I mean when 2004’s Nightwatch (really good by the way) has a better pan down on a mass combat than this does twelve years of technology later – we have a problem. The colour correction made me want to join the Brotherhood and off someone.

The acting is…flat. No one is in it. It’s not as bad as M. Night Shaylaman directing flat, but not too far off. That’s a horrible thing to do to Michael Fassbender and Marion Cotillard. Jeremy Iron’s doesn’t care anymore and quite frankly neither do we. He’s just fun to watch when he’s allowed to go full Ham on Rye. Sadly he does not here. What impresses me though is how diverse the cast is; while sadly the mains are Caucasian, the rest has some really good diversity and characters that are at least interesting if not under utilized. I really wanted more of Ariane Labed’s character Maria (the awesome female assassin from the trailer) as she was engaging and believable.

Another point in the movies favor is that in all the past life sequences they speak Spanish and Latin. They didn’t shortcut this and I have to give them props here. The costumes were good. The idea on how to visualize the Animus was kinda cool. The city running scenes were what I expected and looked appropriate.

 

TL;DR?

Assassins work in the shadows to protect the light. The movie wasn’t quite ready for the light. It’s not horrific and I was entertained for the better part of the viewing – but it also wasn’t that good either. The directing and camera work were largely poor and the CGI environments were under rendered. It’s surprising to find out this movie cost $125 million to make because I cannot tell you where the money went. Character motivations were all over the place without a good plot reason to support them. The nods to the video game are good and there’s some nice little easter eggs.

It isn’t a crime against the AC Games -it’s actually very true to them –  or movies in general, but it also isn’t worth a theatrical viewing either.

It’s not great, its barely good – but at least it wasn’t BAD.

Should you see it?

Netflix, streaming, rental…yeah if you like the games.

Going to buy it?

Probably…depends how I feel the day it comes out. May wait for discount bin.

So…double feature?

I watched this BEFORE Passengers, so I wouldn’t let my feelings for that garbage interfere with this. It did however make me want to play the game again this weekend.

Anything else?

It’s cute they think they will get a sequel.

Darke Reviews | Passengers (2016)

Posted by

6

I like good sci-fi. I think my review of Arrival and The Martian show that. Hell I even like some bad Sci Fi (5th Wave) and Mediocre Sci Fi (Morgan , Transcendence) so long as I am entertained.  Though as 10 Cloverfield Lane found out – if you keep beating me over the head with a specific trope I will be unforgiving. I want to expect more. You as a viewing audience should expect more.

What’s the point I am getting to?

First a warning. I have to violate the No Spoiler Rule here. You can click here to skip to the TL;DR

Spoiler-Warning
spoilers

Still reading?

Ok.

I wish this movie had a face so I could punch it.

The entire contrivance of the movie after the system error that wakes *him* up is that he is the one that wakes her up. Why? Because she’s beautiful. Because he has cyber-stalked her sleeping beauty. Because he thinks she’s perfect and he loves the idea of her. So he wakes her up knowing this will be a death sentence for her as much as the one he is already subjected to. There’s no consent. No permission. No anything, but his man guilt. Him wrestling with the decision for 5 minutes of screen time is enough apparently.

Of course she finds out about the 2/3 mark of the movie, long after they’ve become a thing through their isolation and his charm. He doesn’t even tell her himself, but she finds out by accident. Oh sure he kept saying he was going to tell her, but he never did.

They do allow her to be rightfully angry. Justifiably so, as he has all but murdered her by waking her up nearly 90 years prior to the time she should have been. She goes to lengths to avoid him, but he uses the ship wide communicator to try to make an apology for it so she can’t even actually escape him. Then at least two other sources in the film tell her “…you just have to deal with it and him”; which she finally does and forgives him in a scene that had me clenching my jaw where she after being angry at him was willing to let everyone on the ship die so he could live.

I really hate this movie. I really hate that the producers allowed it.

ITS CREEPY. I don’t care anything else that happens, the premise from the time he woke her up is WRONG.

This is rape culture the movie. “It’s ok because he was alone. We have to think of HIS life. His sanity. Her life and her agency doesn’t matter next to his.”

The movie was written by Jon Spaihts, who also has an executive producer credit which explains why the producers allowed it. He has writing credits on the abysmal bomb The Darkest Hour, Prometheus, and Doctor Strange. He is the writer on the upcoming Mummy movie with Tom Cruise. Oscar nominated director Morten Tyldum (The Imitation Game) was at the helm on this.  Gee, two guys write a space Sleeping Beauty movie where the Prince is a handsome ‘every man’ that of course she’d fall in love with despite you know stalking her and committing one of the universes slowest murders. They use consistent and constant plot contrivances and writing to make it so she does forgive him and they die happily ever after.

When your biggest plot point is similar to parts of Fatal Attraction, Captivity but you are going for actual romance – you failed. I suppose if you want to see Stockholm syndrome the movie this would suffice.

Ok, beyond my rage at that. There are other components to the movie that are a colossal mediocre. I mean if you want to see what life is like trapped in an ever refilling shopping mall you’ve got something to watch here. If you want to watch your typical just in the nick of time save the ship from disaster with no actual tension or risk because you know they won’t kill your lead actor as they spent the previous 80% of the movie man-splaining him for you. Also – the heroic save – doesn’t redeem the bad act. Sorry it doesn’t.

What really kills me is the opening was good. His waking up and handling it was good. How he tried to deal with things was good. Then the bridge between Act I and Act II comes along and poof. Rage. I mean would you REALLY root for Tom Hanks in Castaway if he had intentionally pulled someone from a peaceful happy life and potential just so he wouldn’t be alone? If you said yes – I am a little worried.

*sigh* I really could keep going. I really *SHOULD* keep going, but if you don’t have the idea by now I am not sure what else I could say.

Actors? Pratt and Lawrence are fine. This should surprise no one. She has three Oscar nominations and a win. She can act circles around people. Chris Pratt is charming as ever and we know he can bring intensity when he wants to thanks to Magnificent Seven, Jurassic World,  and Guardians of the Galaxy. They are FINE. She handles the bits of rage and avoidance as well as anyone can, probably better.

Effects? Solid. Nothing to write home about. Nothing particularly new. Definitely very clean and top of the line don’t get me wrong but there was nothing we haven’t seen before.

 

Spoiler-Warning

spoilers

Technically the spoilers are above this, but I am hiding them above the fold with the image…

TL;DR

Do not see this movie. I spent money on it so I could confirm the stories I had heard. They aren’t too far off the mark.

I spent money so I can ask you not to.

If you want to watch a better movie about people waking up from hibernation? Pandorum. It’s good sci-fi horror. That’s what this should have been. If you want a decent stalking movie – there’s always Fatal Attraction. I heard The Resident was pretty good too.

Seriously readers – don’t give this money. Don’t let Hollywood think this is alright. Let it bomb for the controversy it rightfully deserves.

I understand some folks will see this because they just love Pratt. I get it. He’s cute. He’s charming. Just spend the $20 (Ticket+Concessions) to buy Jurassic World or Magnificent Seven. If you like Jennifer Lawrence and want to see her vamping it up, there’s American Hustle.

Just don’t see this.

Please.

Thank you.

~The Management of Amused in the Dark

Darke Reviews | Rogue One: A Star Wars Story (2016)

Posted by

2

If you remember my Force Awakens review I made it clear how good that one was. What I did not do was share my fan-girl credentials, which in this day and age may get me doxxed or called a fake geek girl. Suffice to say there was no one in my high school back in the early 90’s who could keep up with me on the Star Wars lore. I admit I am nowhere near the obsessive with it I was then, but Star Wars The Old Republic is kindling that flame again. I have felt the hype for this one since the first trailer when I heard Felicity Jones go “This is a Rebellion isn’t it? I rebel.”

So lets cut to it…does the movie live up to the hype?

Directed by Gareth Edwards, who I have raved on before with Monsters and Godzilla, does well with the small character moments and specific scenes. The reshoots, despite what others may say, however are painfully obvious. I can see where the studio and Tony Gilroy came in. I can see the asks, and honestly so can you. Just watch the trailers after seeing the movie. Edwards clearly had a vision for the movie and the studio disagreed, now he has said in a recent interview the “real” reason for the reshoots and what they solved for – but I am not entirely sold on that. While I am certain some pick up shots and additional reshoots may have been necessary; what we have as a final product shows the signs of having come undone at the seams and being restitched to use Riz Ahmeds analogy. The stitches are evident in many places and what I sadly cannot judge is  – were they fully needed.

The reason I say that is there are so many tonal changes in the film, the characters, and plot, – even the look sometimes that you can tell there is something wrong. Maybe it is me having seen so many movies, maybe it is just having my expectations too high. But the joint directing and production of this has created a series of irreconcilable flaws and issues with the film. There are times that they show rather than tell – which adds run time and an unnecessary scene that SHOULD be cut. Ironic as I have been vetching about bad editing all year.

Ok so directing and editing have flaws, but what of the script? The movie wraps with 4 total writers between story and screenplay. Tony Gilroy (Bourne 1, 2, 3, and 4) was brought into direct during reshoots and also has a screenplay credit which means he also got scripting edits in too. Knowing he is also behind the lackluster Bourne Legacy makes me wonder why he was selected to be brought in to help. Chris Weitz (Cinderella, Golden Compass) also has a screenplay credit and I sort of eviscerated him on Cinderella’s review too. This adds to my confusion and maybe if I had looked for this before going in I may have tempered my expectations. The story credit (so this is the original writers) goes to John Knoll who was a visual effects supervisor on A New Hope and Return of the Jedi amongst many other really good movies; yet this is the first writing gig. With him is Gary Whitta, who was  writer on the terrifically bad After Earth, but also 2 episodes of Star Wars Rebels.

At this point with these pedigrees – I am surprised the movie is as good as it is. I wish I could see the original script. I wish I could see the original cut. There’s so much good here and unexplored potential. So much that I can see the hints of something better than the final product. I mean the story has a foregone conclusion to it so nothing should come as a surprise, except the fate of our characters. Which we have to be introduced to and care about in the space of 2 hours and 45 minutes.

Thankfully – we do.

This is where the movie shines. The actors. Damn if they don’t have charisma and chemistry. Ok sure their performances are bordering on manic at times, but that isn’t their fault. That’s direction and story. Felicity Jones (Inferno, Theory of Everything) is more than capable of carrying the film. She’s remarkable, strong, vulnerable and everything I wanted. Diego Luna (Vampires Los Muertos, Milk, Elysium) does rather well with the complexity of his own character and pairs well with Jones like a fine meal. Alan Tudyk is a gift and a treasure. That is all you need know. Donnie Yen and Wen Jiang are fantastic and add to the story even if you will have trouble remembering their characters names. Ben Mendelsohn, has an unenviable task of trying to be the films bad guy. He has the shoes of Vader, Palpatine, and Ren to fill. He does his best, but lacks the weight of even Ren. I almost wish him and Mads Mikkelsen had switched their roles as Mads has that kind of weight. This isn’t to say he doesn’t give his best effort because he does. It just lacked something – but perhaps that is also the reshoots?

Technicals – ok 94% of the movie is flawless visually. There are literally hundreds of scenes of practical meets digital effects that are only improved. Musically it’s very good. They did a truly remarkable job making me feel like this was before Episode IV. What about the other 6%? Two words Uncanny Valley. You did something. You did it very very well – but it’s not perfect. That lack of perfection is jarring to my eyes and those of the person watching it with me. Two more years of technology advancement and I wouldn’t even notice. I would know but not notice and that is saying something.

TL;DR?

The movie is good. The review above puts it through the meat grinder – because it could have been so much better. So. Much. Better. This is my expectations along with some very critical and painful editing choices. Not just the reshoots – which I have to admit may have improved the movie and I don’t know. That said; they may have also damaged it. I really can’t tell unless I could compare.

I know I am going to be in a minority on this one, but the movie is just a solid Good. It is deeply flawed and I don’t have to squint to see the flaws. This saddens and even angers me a bit. It should take more effort to tear this apart and it takes almost none. There’s good to defend, but it’s hard to overlook and defend the flaws.

The actors salvage this. Many of the visual effects shots are so gorgeous they fall easily into the category of best I’ve seen. That is why there’s anger. Because I can see where you did so bloody well. I just wish you had stuck the landing Disney.

Should you see it?

I still say yes – but temper your expectations.

What about 3-D?

Maybe. I can see where shots like the modified AT-AT’s walking out of the mist would be amazing in 3-D.

Will you buy it?

Yes.

Are you seeing it again?

Yes and I am hoping I am more forgiving to enjoy all of it a bit more.

Last words?

Sorry folks. I wish I could tell you this was as amazing as I thought Force Awakens was. It’s good, but it should and could have been better. It deserved to be better.

 

Darke Reviews | Moana (2016)

Posted by

1

So what does Queen Elsa, the Vampire Princess, the nocturnal frozen being that she is think of Moana? It really shouldn’t come as a surprise that I do like Disney animation. I grew up at the tail end of the ‘dark ages’ of Disney animation when the Golden Age was touted as what we had and the Silver Age was…special. I still think The Black Cauldron is underrated, but then again what kid doesn’t like a Gaelic myth of bringing back an undead army? Ok so maybe just me.  That’s fair. You might be asking but Queen Elsa, how will you judge this fairly against your own film, Frozen? Well if you check the link there even as hyped as I am on my own song (Let it Go,…duh) I found the movie to be a mixed bag. Even before knowing how many 11th hour changes there were it was clear there were some choices made that didn’t make a seamless film.

What does that spell out for Moana? Does it have the same issues?

You’d think so as it not only violates my rule of three, it goes beyond double. Yep, 7 writers on the credits. Story by…and  I am going to bullet this since there are so many

  • Jordan Kandell –  No other credits, twin brother to Aaron
  • Aaron Kandell  – No other credits, twin (duh) both raised in Hawaii
  • Pamela Ribon – writer on Mind of Mencia
  • Don Hall – Emperors New Groove, Tarzan
  • Chris Williams – Mulan, Bolt
  • John Musker – Treasure Planet (highly underrated), The Little Mermaid, Hercules, Aladdin, Princess and the Frog, and oh hey the Black Cauldron
  • Ron Clements – same credits as Mr. Musker.

The final screenplay credit goes to Jared Bush, who has a “Creative Leadership Walt Disney Animation Studios” – which I am not sure what that means. Clements, Musker, Hall, and Williams have dual director and co-director credits for the movie. So 7 writers, 4 directors chairs – with a lot of overlap. This should be a mess.

It isn’t.

Now as near as I can tell, this is an original story inspired by native Hawaiian and Pacific Island mythology. Yes, not based on any particular myth, previously told story, but instead apparently original. This is awesome. What it also gives us is a cohesive narrative that doesn’t feel like something has to be shoe horned together to make it palatable to both adults and children. It gives us a story of bravery, heart, and finding yourself that we’ve seen many a time since the Disney Renaissance in 1989 (started by Musker & Clements); but it does it better somehow. There are more than a few times the movie tugged on heartstrings in either well written emotional ways or the big hero moments that bring the whole thing together.  This movie should be all over the place tonally, but it isn’t. It should be a wreck that looks like it’s been edited to the ends of the earth then back again but it isn’t. Somehow, this was the right combination of leadership, intent, and will made this movie work against it’s own odds.

Is it perfect in the writing and directing department? Maybe. I mean that. Maybe. No beats felt out of place, except maybe one.

All of the performances were on their A-Game; especially Auli’i Cravalho who voices and sings Moana. She has a set of lungs that rival people twice her age (she’s 16 today – no lie November 22, 2000). She poured her heart into this and as her first role I hope to see she has many more to come.  Dwayne ‘The Rock’ Johnson was also in top form as Maui, with all his natural charisma brought to bear with the power of his voice and good animation. He holds the serious and somber moments down like the professional he is, but also charms you with the comedic beats he is given. The other performances are solid, but suitably minor, such as Nicole Sherzinger, Jermaine Clement, Temuera Morrison, and Rachel House.

It’s worth noting that with the exception of Alan Tudyk every performer I can find a bio on is either of Maori, Samoan, Hawaiian, or other Oceanic/Polynesian descent. With as much time as I spend not seeing movies for inappropriate diversity or casting, I need to make note of this. This is special. This is right. This is good. We need more of this. Thank you Disney for getting it right this time. Please Hollywood follow in their footsteps and learn something here. Please.

Ok, so how is the animation? The best they’ve done. Period. Full stop. Look I have only been to Hawaii once and it was last April, but if they didn’t capture how alive it was, how beautiful it was; then I don’t know what I watched. The colours were so vibrant and magnificent. Then lets talk water. Perfection. Yes, it’s clearly meant to be animated, but I think if they wanted to, they could have made it real. The day was lovely, but the night shots were absolutely magnificent. There is so much awesome in the animation here I could go on, but instead…

Music!

I just bought the soundtrack. Need more? Ok. I can do that. The same attention to detail that was given to the story, the acting, the animation was given to the songs. All of them felt right. All of them were good, even the one that was a touch out of place with the others still felt thematically ok with the movie. Unlike Frozen, they remembered the entirety of the movie that it was a musical and let the songs carry along the bridges of scenes and acts and it served them well. The music maintains the themes, language, and style of the incredible people who the movie is about. Yes. Language. There are a few songs that they don’t sing in English and it doesn’t matter. That’s how effective the music is.

Full disclosure, Moana’s theme song also speaks to me – it’s not spoiler to share the lyrics (Song by Lin-Manuel Miranda)

But I come back to the water, no matter how hard I try

Every turn I take, every trail I track
Every path I make, every road leads back
To the place I know, where I can not go
Though I long to be

See the line where the sky meets the sea? It calls me
And no one knows, how far it goes
If the wind in my sail on the sea stays behind me
One day I’ll know, if I go there’s just no telling how far I’ll go

One thing my friends know about me is you can’t get me away from the water if I am near it. There’s a reason I spend hours at Torrey Pines park just watching the waves. Does it beat out Let it Go? No, but it’s definitely in the top 3 of my “I want”/”Who I am” Disney songs.

TL;DR

Just see it already. I don’t need to say more. It’s fantastic. Absolutely fantastic. Music, Animation, Acting, its fantastic. This is one of Disneys best and it gives representation in a time where there is so little. Support this movie. It’s a great movie for adults, kids of all ages.

Yeah that’s it.

Go. Go now. It’s ok to see movies on Wednesday night. It’s ok to hide from the hordes on Black Friday and see this instead.

So should I see it?

*shakes you* did you not read? YES! Seriously. Go see it

Will you buy it on BluRay?

Without question. I mean I just bought the soundtrack

How about 3D?

I saw the film with two people who are unable to watch 3-D, but having watched it. Yes, I think the 3-D will enhance the experience. If you can’t afford 3-D, then standard will be fine.

Anything else?

Yes. The toddler Moana is the most adorable thing I have ever witnessed on screen with my own two eyes.

Darke Reviews | Fantastic Beasts and Where to Find Them (2016)

Posted by

0

As you, my regular readers, know I never read the books for the movies I watch. Well almost never, sometimes after I may but that is extraordinarily rare. The same rule applies to even things like Narnia, Lord of the Rings, The Hobbit, and yes Harry Potter. While the other 6th graders in middle school were reading The Lion The Witch and the Wardrobe, I was reading Stephen King’s Skeleton Crew. When they were reading The Hobbit, I was on The Stand and Clive Barkers Cabal. This says a lot of my preferences and possibly how my brain works. I earned my nickname in school (thank you Darrin ) for many a reason, reading material was a part of it. The point of this is that my only attachment to the Potter-verse is the films and some well written fan fic.

In the interests of full disclosure when this trailer dropped, I was unimpressed. Nothing about it made me want to see it. It was unfamiliar, but didn’t seem to provide me the sense of wonder and awe that many of the Potter movies did.

So…did it impress me?

Well, let’s tackle the writing shall we? J.K. Rowling herself has the sole credit. No one can say this is beyond the authors intent here.  She brings us what would amount to her own fan fic or head canon, expanding on a bit character mentioned in passing. It’s absolutely correct for her to do so. Any writer will tell you that some characters stick with you, they are a line in passing when you write them but they won’t let you go. I believe she said as much of Newt Scamander. She believed his story needed to be told. Now I can’t be certain if that story wasn’t asked of her by the studio and her publisher as well, but she wanted it too and here we are.

I think though, that she needed an editor on this script. Another one anyway. It’s kinda a mess. The tonal shifts are mind boggling, the story is both convoluted and so painfully simplistic and obvious simultaneously without being particularly good at either. Nothing came as a surprise and to me there, but for a few moments was missing the wonder and joy that Potter brought. A movie about fantastic creatures should truly make them fantastic. I should want my Falcor or Artax, but I am left wanting here. Wanting something not quite delivered on save a brief few seconds and barest moments of reveal. The rest is shot in such a way that you don’t get to really take it in and appreciate it, or are distracted by it rather than being allowed to focus.

That of course goes to the fault of director David Yates, this years mediocre to failing Tarzan and the last few Harry Potter films. After this film and Tarzan I think I was generous with him on that review. While he managed to direct the hell out of beats that were successful, he also – now  – is clearly responsible for the ones that weren’t. He is responsible for the washed out palette I vetched about in my last review as well. The moments of colour are too few and far between. That’s his call and I think it was a wrong one. Muted colours and muted emotions; yet he did manage to pull some things in the film off successfully. That may have to go to the actors though.

Eddie Redmayne remains a mystery to me. I can’t tell if I like him or not. I still need to see The Danish Girl, he was ok as Marius in Les Miserables, but then there is his performance in Jupiter Ascending. I just don’t know what to make of him. Knowing the other tones he can and has done, I would say he does rather well here however showing someone who cares more about his Beasts than anything else around him to a certain point. He is just likeable enough and when you see him interact with the creatures it shines; which is impressive since none of it was there. Katherine Waterston (Boardwalk Empire, Inherent Vice) acts her part well enough but has zero chemistry with Redmayne romantic or otherwise. Our future Flash, Ezra Miller, channels his inner Kylo Ren for this. He’s ok.

Two people however stand out. Alison Sudol (Between Us, Dig, Transparent) as Queenie Goldstein is just the perfect blend of manic pixie dream girl, charming, and sweet to make her a positively endearing and memorable character. This is especially evident as she plays against Dan Fogler (Fan Boys) as Jake Kowalski. While I was annoyed at his intro, I blame the entire movie for that as the set up to the plot was clumsy as a newborn deer, he turned out to be my favourite character in the film. Eddie’s performance as Newt may be the face, but Fogler is the heart. He was everything I needed and once I warmed up to him I was invested in HIS outcome. The movie itself? Not so much because I knew the beats before they happened. Just not his. So he was the only real investment I had in the movie and if I have to have some  – I am ok with it being him.

From a technical standpoint. It’s just as messy as the plot and story architecture.  The acts themselves are mediocre, but the bridges between them tend to shine. The same can be said of the effects which are somehow, yet again, less than a movie from five years ago. There was too much CG, too much colour wash, too much warping. Just too much and too fake to care. There were some good shots, but not enough. There were some beautiful pan and zooms, but not enough against the whole. It was both dull and overly produced at the same time.

TL;DR

The last sentence there really encapsulates the movie. Both dull and over produced. The movie is a mess but it has a heart. The dichotomy of this production is so fascinating I don’t know what else to say. It is deeply flawed and feels as rushed as a Formula 1 driver on the track, but there’s something to it. That said, if you were to compared this to another series, film and book, this is The Hobbit to the Potter films Lord of the Rings. It is both a prequel and has some particularly odd beats that might appeal to children…or something.

It is clear it’s the same universe, but the tone is so dramatically different. The movie itself can’t keep it’s own tonal consistency to the point I really did stop caring and just wanted to see how they’d tie the bow at the end.

Should you see it?

I have been weighing this answer the entirety of the 30 minute drive home.

The entirety of writing this review.

I am not sure if it is me or what, but the movie is clunky but still has heart. I would NOT pay full price, Matinee at best.

But I think people *should* probably see it…I guess?

Will you see it again?

cheap seats or if someone else buys my ticket – maybe. I’d rather save the money for Moana.

Will you buy it?

eh….the magic 8 ball says Not Certain. Ask again later.

About Moana….

I am on media blackout for it until next week. I will be seeing it. I will fight anyone who tries to stop me or spoil it. I want to see this. I want it to be good. Yes I may like it more than Frozen, but not more than Elsa and Let it Go.

Darke Reviews | Arrival (2016)

Posted by

5

If you’ve been paying attention to me over the past few years I have been running this site, you will know I love Sci Fi and Science in general. I was raised on Sci Fi movies, with some of my favourites from childhood being things like Star Wars, Star Trek, Alien, Aliens, The Blackhole, 2010, The Last Starfighter, Enemy Mine, Dune, The Abyss, Tron…ok so the list goes on. Alright the list does go on *deep breath* Flash Gordon, Altered States, Flight of the Navigator, My Science Project, Explorers, Lifeforce, Night of the Comet…ok ok I will stop now. That’s still but a fraction of what I grew up with and love. Some holds up better than others, others such as 2001 and Blade Runner I didn’t appreciate as a kid but do now.

When it comes to sciences, Chemistry, Archaeology, Linguistics, Physics, History, Astronomy, and Psychology are but a tip of an iceberg of things that fascinate me to no end. Put an article in front of me around some of these fields I will read it and do my best to understand it. Give me someone in these fields to talk to and I will probably pick their brain and ask questions, even if I only understand about a third of what they are saying. There was a time in my living room two linguists started speaking about various complexities of language and the breakdown of components of language and language groups. I comprehended a fraction, but still found it fascinating and had I chosen could have studied more to understand the rest. With this combination of fascination it should be no surprise that on Stargate and SG-1 my favourite character is Daniel Jackson. That I spent time making a character for a game who had a journal and was deciphering Goa’uld. That I love studying how Dothraki and High Valyrian work; which by the by enabled the creation wonderful relationship with someone, simply by speaking just a little Dothraki and sharing the geekness.

So whats the point and how does this apply to the movie?

Well let’s talk about that then. The film deals with the arrival (roll credits, ding), of an alien race and our protagonist is brought in to help decipher their language. So we have the marriage of Sci Fi and Linguistics. Ok so that’s technically repeating myself as it is SCIENCE Fiction, but for so long we have been moving away from the science part of science fiction relegating it’s existence to that of technobabble and gimmicks, without asking the important questions. Like The Martian, this movie goes back and puts the Science back with gleeful abandon and still manages to make it accessible to most any film goer who chooses to watch this.

This is not entirely an original work as it is based on the book Story of Your Life by Ted Chiang. It was adapted for the screen by Eric Heisserer who also penned The Thing (2011), A Nightmare on Elm Street (2010), and this years Lights Out.  As I’ve started recently, this tells me he either has been offered projects that have ties to classic 80s or he has a passion for it. Success rate of the film notwithstanding. He also seems to understand and appreciate dramatic tension, or strives to do so. With this, while still unfamiliar with the original material, I feel he succeeded as the dialogue choices and plot points either hit or tropes avoided brought me great joy. He also managed to make it accessible to people who don’t have a passion for science. While not as open as the Martian was, there’s a lot here that they do explain and it works. The rest of the time you can follow along and it works with little explanation.

That means a credit must go to director Denis Villeneuve (Prisoners, Sicario). You see a script can tell you one thing, but your decision to show not tell makes all the difference. What makes this movie work is a combination of showing and telling, ironically a plot point of the film. In combination with the script he is able to weave a cohesive story that tells you what you need to know, asks questions to keep you engaged, and delivers an ending that was surprisingly well handled. The direction of his actors was good as was his blocking and choice of camera angles. There are a few scenes where very intentional tricks of the camera are used if you are watching. That is the best term to apply to the direction here. Intentional. This is well thought out and I believe there is very little deviation from the plan as the scenes unfold in practice vs on paper.

Of course you need your stars to deliver as well. Amy Adams (Enchanted, American Hustle) delivers a fantastic performance as our Linguist – turned Xenolinguist  – who must carry the film. She brings the appropriate levels of shock, scientific methods, and inquiry that I wanted to see in this. Jeremy Renner (Avengers, American Hustle) is a ‘hard scientist’, physicist I believe, who works for the government and is brought in with Adams to help uncover the purpose of the aliens. What I absolutely love is the chemistry and partnership between both actor and character as the film progresses with good delivery and solid execution on his own sciences while they unravel the mystery of the aliens.

But….

There are flaws, I really wish directors would stop adjusting the contrast and colour balance of their work. While it’s clear it’s an intentional choice, I don’t know that it was a necessary one. Retaining your normal palette here would have been sufficient and forced other techniques to come into play to show other components of the story. That’s it. That’s my big flaw. OK there are a few minor tropes they hit which were…able to be dealt with and quickly which made them bearable in an otherwise near perfect product of science fiction.

TL:DR?

As Passengers has not come out yet, Morgan was disappointing, I am the lone dissenting voice on 10 Cloverfield Lane; this is hands down the best Science Fiction movie of the year. I will easily put this up there with films such as Contact, The Martian, Ex Machina, and others of their ilk. It proves we haven’t lost how to do good Sci-Fi just that people may be afraid to. Without trying to sound too elitist, this is Sci Fi, the rest is space action or space fantasy. Let’s face it Star Wars is a space fantasy, we can all accept this and love it as much as we all do anyway.

The performances are good. The camera work is good. The script and direction are good. The movie had a very tight (by Hollywood standards) budget of $47 million and you can see the amount of control they had in making this and we all benefit for it. This is the kind of movie, like The Martian, that lets you and your friends have good intelligent conversation coming out of the movie about what you just watched.

My recommendation? Help them make their money back and then some.

Should you see it?

See immediate sentence above.

Will you buy it on BluRay?

Yes. No doubt.

Any warnings?

It’s appropriately slow, but methodical. This has the pace of a good drama. It is NOT an action set piece.

Folks that’s it for this one. We have a really good movie here that was really enjoyable.

If you are a reader of my reviews and have a passion for Linguistics, see it and come back and tell me what you think of the science.

Darke Reviews | Doctor Strange (2016)

Posted by

1

First off let me apologize, as this is not actually a review.

One of the principles of my day job is Integrity without Compromise. So I am left with a quandary –

See a movie that I actually want to see but I know has a problem in it that I have boycotted movies in the past for.

– or –

Not see one of the most anticipated movies of the year and be unable to tell my readers about it.

I am sorry everyone, but I have to stick to my guns on this one. Due to the White-washing of a historically Asian character known as the Ancient One I cannot see Dr. Strange. Yes, Tilda Swinton is an amazing actor. There has been nothing she has done that I haven’t enjoyed her performance. The fault only lays on her for taking the role.

The real problem comes down to Marvel Studios and the writers rationale for doing so. Money. There’s absolutely no morality to the decision, point in fact it’s the opposite of it. I get big business I really do, but that doesn’t mean I have to let them slide on it.

This is where geopolitics comes into play. For those that don’t know China considers Tibet part of China. Tibet does not consider themselves part of China. If they cast a Tibetan actor, they cannot screen the movie in China, the second largest audience for movies in the world.  They can’t make money in China if they cast someone who is actually Tibetan, but if you cast a Chinese actor for the Tibetan role it sends a different (and even worse) message.

So you are left with this decision that is like one of those button push “You get this, but this….”

  1. Cast a Tibetan as the role of the Ancient but now you can’t show your movie in China.
  2. Cast another ‘Asian’ as the role of the Acient but now you’ve invalidated an entire country it’s independence in a tacit manor which to the rest of the world looks as if you are endorsing China.
  3. Cast another ethnicity as the Ancient but be lambasted for not being true to the character.
  4. Cast a white actor in the role and be accused of white washing, but hey you get to release in China.

Marvel chose option 4.

I will not deny the complexity of this decision, it shouldn’t be denied and needs to be appreciated. They are a business and it wouldn’t be just this movie that could be at risk, as China could not allow other movies simply out of spite.

Are there other facets to how they did this to try to mitigate the white washing? Sure. They wrote the character as a title that could come from any culture; but at the same time they keep the original white-savior narrative of Dr. Strange. You know the story, the white guy learns from the wise old insert ethnic group and becomes the savior? The did try to mitigate it, but they didn’t go far enough or brave enough.

If you want to write that it’s not white washed try these tricks

1. He doesn’t go to Asia at all. Shamballah did not have to be terrestrial.
2. The Ancient isn’t white.

Why does it matter so much about a white actor in a role that could have gone to a person of colour?

Please please read this:

Jar Full of Major Characters

or this

Casting Minorities as White Characters is not a double standard. Here’s why

The short version is this:

“When there are so few raisins to start, any change made is really easy to spot, and makes a really significant difference.

This is why it is bad, even despicable, to take a character who was originally a character of color and make them white. But why it can be positive to take a character who was originally white and make them a character of color.

The white characters bowl is already so full that any change in number is almost meaningless (and is bound to be undone in mere minutes anyway, with the amount of new story creation going on), while the characters of color bowl changes hugely with each addition or subtraction, and any subtraction is a major loss. “

But, Jess, you’re white. Why does it matter to you?

Because I have a voice, social awareness and consciousness, and need to speak when I see something wrong.

Because it matters to him: George Takei

So let me get this straight. You cast a white actress so you wouldn’t hurt sales … in Asia? This backpedaling is nearly as cringeworthy as the casting. Marvel must think we’re all idiots,” writes Takei. “Marvel already addressed the Tibetan question by setting the action and the Ancient One in Kathmandu, Nepal, in the film. It wouldn’t have mattered to the Chinese government by that point whether the character was white or Asian, as it was already in another country. So this is a red herring, and it’s insulting that they expect us to buy their explanation. They cast Tilda because they believe white audiences want to see white faces. Audiences, too, should be aware of how dumb and out of touch the studios think we are.”

I do not under any circumstances get to tell him he is wrong or even attempt to invalidate his opinion.

TL;DR?

I am absolutely certain Dr. Strange is a good movie, maybe even great. I won’t know, I cannot give the movie money – nor can I allow someone to pay for a ticket for me.

If you wish to see it, I really hope you enjoy it. Even with movies I hate, if someone loves it I am happy for them. Legitimately so. My opinion and recommendation is just that, mine. I write to share it.

I wrote to share this. I would ask you not to see Dr. Strange, but if you do – enjoy it.

Boycotting a bad movie like Exodus or Gods of Egypt is easy.

Boycotting a good movie is hard.

 

PS.

Suicide Squad made over $700 Million dollars Domestic+World Wide without release in China, and that movie is problematic and divisive as hell amongst fans. I think you could have survived Marvel.

Darke Reviews | Inferno (2016)

Posted by

2

So, I’ve watched all of the Dan Brown movies before watching this. I rather like The Da Vinci Code. I felt the acting was on point, enjoyed the mystery, even if there were a few contrived points. It probably comes from an absolute love and fascination with history. In addition a passion to ask the question, “What if?” These types of stories that are just a touch off the history, just a touch off the real thing that they create a fully enriched and believable mythology are fascinating to me. The mystery presented there was small(ish), and self-contained which allowed it to work as well as it did. The consequences were interesting, but at a specific scale that was relatable to the audience. History and Religion intertwined.

Then came Angels & Demons. Physics and Religion.  The mystery was curious, and while my love for physics and the sciences there is not nearly as strong as my love of history, it was engaging. Then the third act came along and left me feeling generally annoyed. A lot of goodwill for the movie was lost in short order and while again it was well made, it was annoying and too convoluted. While my memory can recall most of DVC pretty accurately, I can maybe recall 50% of Angels & Demons. It was an “ok” after a solid opening.

Now we have Inferno.

The question remains did I get stuck in the Inferno, Purgatorio, or Paradiso watching this?

First, let me say I have a early 1900’s print of The Divine Comedy in my library, so again I say History geek. Not that it comes into play much in this screenplay. In short, its a mess.  I cannot speak for Dan Brown’s novel, but David Koepp (Mission: Impossible, Jurassic Park, War of the Worlds) either was faithful and the novel is a mess, attempted to salvage it and failed, or took something good and gave it anxiety. Now, looking at his filmography he tends to work with pretty decent directors and the films themselves generally are well received. But there have been flaws since 2002. Secret Window, then in 2005 War of the Worlds, 2008 Indiana Jones and the Kingdom of the Crystal Skull, he did work on Angels & Demons as well. I am not sure what is going on here, but…this movie is a bloody mess.

The narrative is hard to follow and the parts that should be interesting are glossed over with such a wide brush I could paint the deck of the USS Enterprise with a single stroke. It takes a normal man who at least in the first movie was relatable. Now he is immediately thrust into the story of a super spy better fitting a Mission Impossible or Bourne movie without the physicality of either.  Every line is said, but they are just small quick beats that serve little point beyond getting to the next in something that is too large and ultimately meaningless.

I’ve been seeing a lot about risk show up in Superhero reviews. There are no risks. The dangers are too big to comprehend, thus you do not care. Ultron is going to destroy the world in some vague plan. Loki destroy the world, but to no particular real end.  The villain of Suicide Squad, destroy the world for reasons in some vague way. The stakes are TOO high. Too much. Constantly too much. This time, the trailers tell us we are at threat from something that will somehow wipe out only half of every living human. I admit my biochemistry and virology game are a bit weak, not really studied in over 20 years aside from a few journals reviewed from time to time and keeping an eye on the newest advances in medical science. That said, the science begs the incredulous here. A pathogen that will only take half the population because reasons? A race against the clock to stop it or the world dies in some vague way. It’s too big to care about or buy into. Unless…..

Unless you have the directorial fortitude to make the 12 Monkeys, Planet of the Apes, or 28 Days Later call; which would surprise everyone. The mystery and the race have no weight because we all know this isn’t going to happen. The first movie it’s about uncovering the Grail, something big but stays personal and the ramifications to the world are mostly philosophical in nature. Angels & Demons….would affect a single religion and how it affects the world, but in this day and age we see that even the faithful will turn against the faith if a message is sent they don’t agree with. It’s still a personal, theological, and philosophical outcome; but also was the first to have a McGuffin level body count on failure. This, from the trailer alone is a 4 billion people body count on failure. A failure you know won’t happen. So why care?

That is not the directors only failing here. The opening credits tried to mimic things like 12 Monkeys or I Am Legend, and other staccato style openings with dialogue that has no context to us at this opening. After that we begin in media res; in the hopes that we will dive right in and be brought along on the confusing journey of Dr. Robert Langdon. The trick to bring us along? Just tell the story. Let Hanks act. You do not need to cut every 2 to 4 seconds. You don’t need to blur the camera or lens flare it or wobble it to make us realize he’s confused. The man can act, at least based on 5 Oscar nominations and 2  wins of the golden statue. We don’t need camera tricks.

I really need to go to the story about Marathon Man, with Dustin Hoffman and Sir Laurence Olivier

During the filming of “Marathon Man,” Dustin Hoffman was supposed to play a man who had been up all night. And method actor that he is, he spent the night before shooting the scene awake. When he arrived on the set, his co-star Laurence Olivier asked why he looked so tired. Hoffman explained his approach. Olivier paused and then said, “Try acting, dear boy . . . It’s much easier.”

Director Ron Howard just out and out fails this movie. Let your bloody actors act. If you want to keep a mystery don’t focus on things that most audiences these days will pick up on. Don’t go to generic footage with bad CGI to show a plague scene. Interspersing so called Hallucinations of a battle just breaks the moment rather than enhances it. I really want to keep railing on the bad directing here, but the list would go on too long and I would need to have spoilers.

The final word on the directing is cutting the shot after no longer than 4 seconds the entire movie is a horrible way to make a film. It was noticeable, in such an excruciating way the guy next to me started counting along with me, even though I was just using my fingers. Just stop. Long takes are Ok.

*grumble* I didn’t expect this review to be this long.

Acting? Hanks sleep walks through the role, trying his best to play someone who has brain trauma. He’s uninvested the entire movie and has absolutely no chemistry with anyone at all, even himself. He doesn’t even manage chemistry with his suit. There are three bright spots however, Omar Sy (Bishop in X-Men Days of Future Past)  as a WHO operative on the trail of the plague. He is in the top three most memorable characters and enjoyable to watch, even if you see it all coming a mile a way since the movie opening (and trailer) spoils him. I finally have a line on Felicity Jones, having only seen her in Amazing Spider Man 2 as Felicia – which as I recall her being a bright spot in the movie. I am now looking very forward to her in a more action oriented role in Rogue One this December.  She does everything she can to elevate the poor material she was given and directed on. I can’t say she always succeeds, but I lay that on Howard not her performance.  Side note, I think she would make a great companion on Dr. Who. The brightest star goes to Irrfan Khan (Jurassic World, Life of Pi). He made me smile and laugh a few times (intentionally!!). It was needed. The man exuded charisma on screen and was so just casual and easy going that I wanted to watch a movie about him. Yet another failing on the material and director that a third string character (not actor) is so much more interesting than your main.

TL;DR?

This marks one of my larger reviews coming in at almost 1500 words at this point.

I didn’t expect to go off on such a rant above, but dear powers that be this movie fails on so many basic levels that I needed to use this gif.

While not an abomination like Die Hard 5 or other movies, this one is just such a remarkable disappointment. It is a dismal failure in my opinion on the career of Ron Howard and Tom Hanks. It isn’t deserving of hate, but instead pity. Sadly that pity means I think it needs the Old Yeller treatment and to be never spoken of again. I come here to not praise this movie, but to bury it.

Should you see it?

I wish I hadn’t. So no.

Will you buy it?

Honestly I am hoping it bombs enough that the studio decides against putting it on BluRay. We should never speak of this again remember?

Is it really THAT bad?

Probably not, but unlike some movies which I can ignore the flaws for a greater narrative, performance, or filming technique there’s not enough good here to allow me to ignore the flaws.

Ok, so let’s talk Dr. Strange!

Let’s…not today. I would not be kind. Look for something on next weeks release soon though.

Darke Reviews | Jack Reacher: Never Go Back (2016)

Posted by

1

There are times I know I am glad I almost never read the books for the movies I watch. Take for instance Jack Reacher, the 2012 movie I consider a near perfect film in its craft. The mystery is solid, well paced, the action while limited is view able and visceral. The acting is top notch and it has one of the best openings to a film probably in the last decade. It probably deserves a review of it’s own and I may have to get to that; actually a little sad I didn’t have one already. But that’s the movie. People RAGED over the casting of Tom Cruise as someone who is by the book supposed to be a mountain of a man. I suppose if I was a fan of the character in that way I might be upset, actually I know I was when Vampire Diaries came out and some of the characters I liked were changed. So I get it, but without that baggage I went in to an unknown property that I didn’t know was based on a book at the time and really enjoyed it.

The question is does the Hollywood mandated sequel meet the bar?

The movie of course is based on the book Never Go Back by Lee Childs, to which I have no idea the accuracy of said material (beyond his size). It was then adapted under my three writer rule by Richard Wenk, Edward Zwick, and Marshall Herskovitz. Wenk has shown up in my reviews before as the writer of The Magnificent Seven and the Equalizer. He also was the writer on one of my favourite guilty pleasure vampire movies, Vamp. Herskovitz was a producer on the amazingly underrated The Last Samurai (also with Tom Cruise) and additionally working on the screenplay there. Leaving us with Edward Zwick, who was a writer on The Last Samurai, but also directed this movie. His directorial credits also include little films no one ever heard of such as the Civil War movie “Glory”, a little movie with Brad Pitt called Legends of the Fall, oh yeah and director of Blood Diamond and Last Samurai.

You may wonder why I go into this much detail on their prior works. I find it important as you can begin to see patterns in behaviors, styles of shots, dialogue, lighting, blocking everything. These guys have a pretty good pedigree. Which leaves me wondering what happened here? It has moments where the brilliance wants to shine. Don’t get me wrong, the movie is Ok. Good even, but its like diet low salt popcorn. Ultimately unsatisfying when it could have been so much more. The camera work, including some interestingly used Dutch angles, is ok. The mystery is ok. The…everything is ok. Why? Why is it just this? These guys have the skills to elevate it. Cruise is a producer, Christopher McQuarrie director of the superior first movie is a producer. There’s no excuse.

The story picks up with Jack Reacher (Cruise), former Military Police Major, doing his best A-Team impression drifting in and out of towns and uncovering things that offend his sense of justice and morals. He begins phone flirting with Major Turner (Cobie Smulders) and is intent on meeting her. When he arrives he finds she’s been arrested on espionage charges. He also finds, that someone has filed a paternity suit against him while he’s been doing the drifting thing, and that he may have a 15 year old daughter (Danika Yarosh). She of course is drawn into the plot of murder, betrayal, and corruption as a potential pawn to use against Reacher.

This is just lazy. I mean I went to see an action crime thriller and ended up with what, the most awkward family outing? I mean it was a joy to see Reachers misogyny. I can’t tell you how thrilling it was to see him be “a mans man” a few times and just try to blunt force trauma his way through social situations. Every beat is neatly telegraphed or otherwise rehashed from the first movie. There’s flat out lazy filmmaking choices to ‘show us’ that Reacher has a good memory. Directorial choices make it so painfully obvious how he’s observing everything around him. It was absolutely aggravating because it should have been better.

The actors are fine, though it appears unlike the first movie someone added leg day back into Tom’s contract. I counted three scenes of him running, maybe 4. I stopped caring. This isn’t to say Cruise did a bad job. Quite the contrary, and despite my earlier protests, he’s fantastic. It is GOOD to see your hero has flaws. It is good to see your hero can be wounded. Even little things like his fingers twitching after the in media res diner scene. That’s what happens as you come down from a fight. It’s again what makes me think there’s a better movie that wanted to come out. Cobie Smulders (Avengers, How I Met Your Mother) is excellent. She matches Tom Cruise quite well and is absolutely believable in her role. I think there’s a long term action star here if she wants it. She did all she could do with the script she was given and more, which puts her a leg up on a lot of other actors as she was able to elevate a few scenes beyond how basic they were. She has good chemistry with Cruise as an actor even if the characters are in conflict. Danika Yarosh (Heroes Reborn) is also good. She’s honestly believable as kid who has been in and out of the system a few times and treads carefully the line of the stupid teenager by both script and directing. I repeat myself, the fact that her performance and character is as good as it is is in direct opposition to the overall emotion I felt at the end.

The fight sequences up to the climactic one are a hair too dependent on cuts and camera motion; a detractor. Just a few seconds longer, just a bit more stability and Just Ok fight sequence would have been good ones. The climactic one was pleasing even if the beat leading up to it was…*sigh* The action was GOOD, if you could see it. The fights were visceral and brutal and seeing the hero hurt was good, but they lacked something – at least until the climax. That one felt Excellent. Again…annoyance at what should and was trying to be better.

TL;DR

I had my hopes up for this one. That may have been a mistake. It was a simple paint by numbers action mover, with a lackluster mystery. Everything was just a few shades, a few beats, or few cuts from being really incredible but just ended up on the right side of mediocre.

I don’t hate the movie, I am just disappointed in it. I am disappointed in the director and writers who I’ve seen enough body of work to know what they are capable of and could have given something richer. I am annoyed by some very lazy choices in film making that are undeserving of what this should have been.

So what would you rate it?

Somewhere between an Ok and a Good. It’s serviceable and has enough moments of entertainment that it is absolutely watchable. I just found that there’s enough detractors that I couldn’t ignore despite wanting to. Audiences will find it ok and a lot of dudes will be going Reacher is a bad ass.

Should you see it?

If you’ve got a spare ten bucks and aren’t seeing the superior film The Accountant? Sure. Just matinee…or with Beer or something. But really go see The Accountant.

Will you buy it?

Eh probably? I just won’t be rushing out to get it or pre order it.

So you didn’t do the review a day after all?

No. Heart wasn’t in it. It’s also tiring. If you watch web reviewers, they generally limit themselves to once a week. It’s harder than it looks to do these and do them well. Giving every review for 31 days the right attention and credit is draining. I might do another run in the future. Maybe random ones. I do owe someone a review of either Dungeons and Dragons or the Core.

Next week, Inferno. Because I hate myself, but mostly so I can get a sense of Felicity Jones before Rogue One.