MovieReview

Darke Reviews | The Martian (2015)

Posted by

8

This is not part of my October reviews, fortunately or unfortunately, my regular reviews do not get trumped by October. I had every intention of seeing this Thursday night but exhaustion kicked in and a desire for a record 6 hours of sleep ended up winning. Having seen it today and after some rest I can provide you the review you deserve.  I will say this, do not let Matt Damon or Jessica Chastain near the space program. Something goes wrong every time; how is it he is the one always stranded?

Anyway; does the movie hold up to the hype machine?

The film is based on a book by Andy Weir and adapted for the screen by Drew Goddard. I understand from some friends it is an excellent book and will be curious to hear the comparison between the two. Goddard on the other hand was the producer of the much loved (and very awesome) Netflix series Daredevil, The Cabin in the Woods, and Cloverfield. He also wrote one of my favorite episodes of Buffy the Vampire Slayer, “Conversations with Dead People.” So the source material is very strong, the writer has some solid understanding of characters and tension but do they have a director who can do something with that?

Well lets talk the story for a moment. This is a what you see is what you get. The movie literally is: Matt Damon gets left behind on Mars. NASA tries to figure out how to save him, while he tries to save himself.

Simple story. You need good actors and a good director to make it work. I give you Ridley Scott. I give you the man behind the camera and actors of Blade Runner, Alien, Black Hawk Down, and the list goes on. He doesn’t have a flawless list (Robin Hood, Hannibal, Exodus) but a solid one. He, despite his stumbles, is a brilliant film maker who can do more to create tension with a shot and space than a dozen of the modern horror directors combined. That is what this movie needed. Tension. You don’t know if they will bring him home, you don’t know if they will all survive doing so. Goddard, Weir, and Scott have masterfully crafted a story where you just aren’t sure.

Of course some of the work must go to the actors. Matt Damon by necessity carries the film and he has the chops to do it. I was watching the movie and thought is there another actor who could do this? Short answer I came up with is no. End to end of this movie, there’s not another bankable actor who could do this with such charm and such range.  Then you combine it with the following cast members

  • Jessica Chastain (Interstellar, Mama, Zero Dark Thirty)
  • Michael Peña (Shooter, Fury)
  • Jeff Daniels (Newsroom, Speed)
  • Kristen Wiig (Despicable Me 2, Brides Maids)
  • Sean Bean (duh)
  • Kate Mara (House of Cards)
  • Sebastian Stan (Winter Soldier, Once Upon a Time)
  • Chiwetel Ejiofor (Serenity, 12 Years a Slave)
  • Mackenzie Davis (Halt and Catch Fire)
  • Donald Glover  (Community)

This is the literal definition of a powerhouse cast. Each person despite how much or little screen time they are given manages to translate that into a memorable or otherwise engaging character. That’s art folks. This movie would die in the vacuum of space if you didn’t want to root for the characters. If you didn’t want to sit at the edge of your seat or bite your lip. Everyone is understandable in every decision made. Every action. Every consequence.  The movie lives and dies because of the performances these people gave in conjunction with solid directing, and source material.

In other words, this is everything Fantastic Four was not.

It is also not as pretentious as Interstellar, which I wanted to like, but really couldn’t.

As a technical point, the CG enhancement of the landscapes, the background, the skies made me really believe that they could have been on Mars. This is the George Miller lesson folks. Use CG to enhance not dominate. There’s only one slightly jarring, but appropriate effect in the movie. Everything else to me is beautiful. I was commenting the other day how claustrophobic modern movies tend to be. Tight locations, tight camera’s, fear of long range shots or appropriate long range shots. This movie is anything but. It uses distance as a tool as much as it uses sound and lack there of when needed. It really lives by show don’t tell on a lot of points and again is a better movie for it. If there are any other flaws, there’s some pacing issues (a Ridley Scott natural flaw) but otherwise that’s it.

TL;DR?

This is a good movie. This is a damn go0d movie. This isn’t a good sci fi movie. This isn’t a good dramatic movie. This IS a good movie. I watched the movie on the edge of my seat more than a few times.

I came out of the movie inspired.

I came out of the movie wanting to Science!

I came out of the movie satisfied with my experience in a way few movies this year have.

I highly recommend The Martian to anyone.

Darke Reviews | Final Girl (2015)

Posted by

2

I don’t know about you, but I hate when I see a trailer and the movie never quite makes it to the theatre. It never quite makes it to an easy to find DVD release. It’s especially painful when you want to see the movie. I talked about this with Trick R Treat last year.

This year the one that raises my ire is Final Girl. This would be the trailer in question:

I had been really looking forward to this one. If you are wondering about the title, it is based on the trope of most horror movies called the Final Girl. When you have a horror film think of who survives, who defeats the monster? It is almost always a girl who started out weak or unsure and develops into the hero that can defeat the beast.

So did the movie live up to my interest and expectations?

The movie has a total of four writing credits which doesn’t normally bode well. The three story credits go to Stephen Scarlata, Alejandro Seri, and Johnny Silver. A screenplay credit goes to Adam Prince. None of whom have done anything you’ve ever heard of or watched. The same can be said of director Tyler Shields.  Honestly, it shows. There are some interesting choices in how they light scenes with an overabundance of brightness. It is clearly intentional and works in some cases and is jarring in others. I can’t write reviews about how hollow and samey so many new movies are and then destroy one that is trying to do something different. The “floodlights” in the woods annoys me to no end, though the movie does it to create an almost stage like performance, I think I wish they would have fully committed to that then trying to give me a well lit forest for no reason.

The movie almost is going for a film noir style in both dialogue staging that wouldn’t work for many films. I can’t say it works here entirely either. Many scenes have an awkwardness to them that borders on uncomfortable while they try to address various tropes of the villain archetypes;  the momma’s boy, the frat boy, the daddy issues, and the harangued man.  Bearing in mind these are told with broad strokes and perhaps, hopefully, a bit of satire. Sadly these characters also have little chemistry either. Perhaps as sociopathic or psychotics they shouldn’t, but individually they function and together they do not.

I am not sure where the blame lies here. Our villains, as shown in the trailer, are played by Logan Huffman (V the Series), Cameron Bright (Thank You for Smoking, Twilight New Moon/Eclipse), Reece Thompson (Dreamcatcher, Perks of Being a Wallflower), Alexander Ludwig (Hunger Games, Vikings).  As a unit they come across little more than caricatures barely making it to 2 dimensional villains. For that reason alone I care little about them, but also want to see them suffer due to their natures.

On the flip side we have Wes Bentley (American Horror Story, Ghost Rider, Hunger Games) and Abigail Breslin (Zombieland, Maggie). Bentley is…well Bentley. I think he was trying to reach Agent 47 levels in his character and doesn’t quite make it; but he also is Wes Bentley and just has his own style of performance that I can see him being a future Nick Cage in the weird. Breslin, on the other hand, delivers a solid performance. I could see her as a scream queen or an action heroine in future projects as she is able to switch between stalker and stalked like a light switch.  I rather enjoyed her which makes her the bright spot in the performances of the movie, especially in the third act.

TL;DR?

Perhaps I expected more of it than it could deliver. Perhaps it never had the potential to deliver it at all. The movie just sort of lands flat and unsatisfying. With only one performance (Breslin) being interesting the movie fails on a lot of levels. They continued to shoot in a stage play meets noir vibe and never fully committed to it allowing me to appreciate that facet of it. There’s just some failures on storytelling that left me scratching my head what the point of some scenes were. That happened too often.

Sadly, unless you obsess over any of the actors Final Girl doesn’t make the cut.

 

 

 

Darke Reviews | Vamp (1986)

Posted by

2

So this is the first of the requests for reviews for this October Review-A-Day session. This also happens to be one I am ecstatic to review as I watched the VHS of this from my local video store back home so often the tape began to wear out. This underrated cult classic in the vampire genre bombed pretty hard in it’s opening summer release.  Granted it was against Aliens which made only 10 million in it’s first week that same time and was in the number 1 slot.. This is before the era of our modern summer blockbusters but to give an idea of other competition was Top Gun (10th week), Karate Kid II (5th week), Ferris Bueller (6th week).

But, Jess you obsess over vampire movies can you be fair about this one? Let’s see.

Written and Directed by Richard Wenk (The Equalizer) as his first film it perfectly captures the late 80’s cheese. It’s an interesting career since then with this as his oddest entry. Some movies can defy generation and time, others are locked in it so tightly they become near symbol of what that time was. This is the later.

The story is of two college frat pledges who offer to bring back a stripper as their initiation. In the wrong part of town the find more than they bargained for. Will any of them see the dawn?

It clearly has a mythos and a history to it’s world that it so intelligently doesn’t bother to explain like a more modern film would. It does fall into the horror comedy genre pretty solidly and while not truly campy, it does not take itself seriously either. It lives and breathes atmosphere through its tight sets, which do look like sets, and a near criminal abuse of neon lights. Neon is a character all to itself in this movie and it is an abundant living thing that permeates the film like the smell of bacon through a house.   It actually has some good dialogue beats in it that I’d appreciate more of in other vampire movies. It spent time to let a vampire and human have a conversation – when do you actually see that?

From an acting standpoint I am surprised anyone came out of this alive. The hero played by Chris Makepeace, who represents the typical 80s every man of the time, has a similar look and performance to that of Michael J Fox (duh), William Ragsdale (Fright Night) or Zach Galligan(Gremlins). Slightly nerdy, slightly all american white bread handsome.  He works in the film, but much like others kinda vanished into obscurity after. So few had the weight and raw charm of Fox. Robert Rusler, who plays the best friend AJ,  actually hits some good notes and gives a different performance than he did on Nightmare on Elm Street 2 (something I’ll have to be paid to review). He would go on to appear on Babylon 5 for two seasons but is otherwise also relatively obscure. The two stand outs and memorable are of course Grace Jones and Billy Drago. The film would be so much worse without their over the top performances (and wardrobe). They devoured scenery in all the right ways.

Effects wise, I’ve discussed the neon that functions as a set dressing and is otherwise impossibly over the top. I didn’t know pink and green neon were that abundant outside of a Joel Schumacher Batman movie.  From a make up and prosthetic standpoint they borrowed heavily from the influences of Fright Night and went full monstrous with their vampires with the overly enlarged mouths, claws, and extended appendages. Not your pretty vampires once they are ready to feed. Also it may include one of the few stakings by a shoe out there.

TL;DR?

If this movie came out today, I would rip it apart. All things being fair, I would tear into it with gleeful abandon as another bad vampire movie. This, however, has the benefit of some very blood stained nostalgia glasses. It’s not a good movie by any stretch of anyone’s imagination, but it has a lot of fun with itself and the audience.

I can see hints of the conception From Dusk til Dawn in the concept of this movie and it’s make up. While it isn’t good and was a bomb – it’s just too enjoyable. It is a hard find, I had to purchase it on one of my streaming accounts, but I have no regrets.

If you need some awesome 80’s cheese and vampires, this is a good film for you. I’m happy to have it in my collection finally, even if it is only digital.

 

Darke Reviews | Night of the Living Dead (1968)

Posted by

0

There are few examples in the last 50 years of a film that is so defining, so absolute, and so important to cinema that they have defined a generation and a genre. This could even be extrapolated to other genres as well, music, comics, television. It’s difficult to name a singular project in the thousands that have been released that so explore, spread, and influence our modern day world.

This is one of those films. The Zombie craze of today would not, could not, exist without this work. The rules, the style,  the look, even some of the types of shots and locations exist simply because George A. Romero gave us Night of the Living Dead.

So we know it is iconic. We know it is definitive, but does that mean it’s good?

The script was written by George Romero himself in conjunction with John Russo. Russo. This was their first writing credit on any film, and they would go to give us Zombie movies for the next 50 years together. 50 years. They haven’t been very prolific but consistent. There are not many folks who can claim 50 years of writing and directing as a claim to fame that are still working in Hollywood today. Of course Romero himself directed, another first for the legend.

That being said, the dialogue? Ain’t that great. It almost reads like a student film or stage play than a film at times. There are a lot of monologues and exposition to deliver information. The radio and television as a means to deliver information was actually well done. One of the better decisions is never fully committing to what may have caused the rising of the dead.

From an acting standpoint, the best performance comes from Duane Jones. He reads so natural and believable is is incredible, and perhaps a bit harmful to the rest of the cast. Not only is his acting so far above and beyond the rest of the cast, he is critical as the first African-American to have a starring and heroic role in a horror film. Judith O’dea also does remarkably well, even if she largely plays catatonic, as the infamous Barbara.

As a technical note, the camera angles and lighting choices, along with the choice of black and white vs. color also were brilliant decisions by Romero. So much of the film works because of the black and white, it allows the movie to hide some of it’s make up and flaws. There’s also a bit of genius in, what I believe, is the one of first uses of a child as the monster.

As a bit of trivia for those who enjoy these types of films, Tom Savini himself was to do the make up, but was unable to due to being sent to Vietnam.

TL;DR?

The movie holds up almost 50 years later. Though the word Zombie is never explicitly mentioned, in fact the word used is Ghoul, it defines every single film maker, writer, or producer when it comes to this genre.  It isn’t a perfect film by a long shot, if it were made today it would largely be laughed at; but because of when it was made and how it defies everything to become the legendary picture that it is.

I highly recommend this film not only for viewing, but to be in anyone’s collection.

Darke Reviews – The Intern (2015)

Posted by

0

Apparently this is the time for movies I wouldn’t normally see or review. Let’s face it the rom com isn’t typically me. Granted a lot of that is  I find them depressing at this point in my life. Though let me be clear this is not a Romantic Comedy. It’s a drama-dy? I really don’t know what this classifies as?

Let’s get to it shall we?

Written, Produced, and Directed by Nancy Meyers, the woman who gave us The Holiday, Baby Boom, and….Private Benjamin? She has some interesting history. The triple threat of being the money, the script, and the one telling people what to do can be dangerous indeed and many people don’t handle it well. Meyers appears to be an exception to the rule bringing a movie that is actually full of heart and charm to the screen. She had a script which attracted raw star power as well.

Any film starring both Anne Hathaway and Robert DeNiro should lean to the strong. but neither guarantees alone. This time is a home run for both actors. Hathaway does not go into Devil Wears Prada territory and I cannot get enough of this woman’s smile. She also gets to display her range of acting here that is just so damn genuine that you forget she is acting; kinda the point I suppose. De Niro is in good form as well, giving while not his greatest dramatic performance, perhaps one of his more nuanced of late. There’s a lot of subtlety in what he brings here and that’s part of what makes the movie work. A supporting cast including with the amazing Rene Russo doesn’t hurt your film either.

The movie as far as technical details go is very middle of the road. It doesn’t do a lot in any dramatic or narrative sense of filmmaking, but what it does do it does remarkably well. There are so many films these days in which I, and other critics, claim are hollow, emotionless, and otherwise forgettable. I want to remember this movie for all that it did right and avoided doing wrong – which is a talent in itself.

TL;DR?

Hard to believe, but it needs to be a short review on this one. I actually want people to see it. I think it’s a good date movie. I got to see it with my best friend, which also worked out along the themes of the film.

If you like the style of movie the trailer presents, see it. You won’t be dissappointed. The movie made me smile, made me cry, made me laugh. It let me enjoy and if something can make me enjoy for even 90 minutes…I’ll take it.

 

Darke Reviews – Black Mass (2015)

Posted by

1

This one was a request from a coworker and is  a few days later than I wanted, but I promised a review. The other reason it’s late is I had a bad experience at the movies and didn’t want to let my bias from the experience affect the review. This gave me time to really think on how I feel about the film and make recommendations with some time away from it.

So should you attend the Mass?

As we start this, you understand from my history this is not my preferred genre. I like good drama’s and the occasional “based on real events” films. I firmly believe there is a gap in time that should occur to let a film begin to fade from collective memory a bit and help us remember bits of our history we may not know as well. Films like Captain Phillips, The 33, and the upcoming film 13 Hours: The Secret Soldiers of Benghazi are too new, too recent for my tastes. This hits the right bridge of time away, but with individuals who are in recent(-ish) headlines.

The movie here focuses on that of James “Whitey” Bulger, leader of a small criminal empire, and his relationship with FBI agent John Connolly. Much of the film focuses on the relationships between Bulgers inner circle of the Winter Hill Gang and the interactions Connolly had with them and his own with the FBI itself.

It’s worth mentioning here that acting is amazing in this. Depp is back in form again and I want more of this man in movies. While Jack Sparrow probably allowed him to buy another island, it’s not why we learned to love him. The fact that he can become most anyone is. I lost Depp in this performance and saw the man he was playing and want more of this. Joel Edgerton has had a lot of high profile work and this probably for me is one of his strongest performances. Gatsby, Zero Dark Thirty, Exodus, show a growing penchant for him as a heavy, despite earlier performances in such movies as The Thing and King Arthur. He is a solid actor who actually showed an interesting range in the film. The other stars, such as Kevin Bacon, Peter Sarsgaard, Rory Cochran, Adam Scott, all do really well and craft whole people; which is good since they are portraying real people. That isn’t always the case in a performance, but thankfully was here. Benedict Cumberbatch does a passable job at a New England accent but not quite, but that could be argued as someone trying to fake a New England accent over a Southie accent, and in this case over his natural accent.

The screenplay for the movie comes from two men, Jez Butterworth and Mark Mallouk. Butterworth is one who was responsible for the beauty of Edge of Tomorrow and will be on the hook for Spectre later this year. This is Mallouks first writing gig. As the film is based on a book by Dick Lehr and Gerard O’Neill, I am not sure where to place some of the blame in dialogue. There are just some parts that are too ridiculous to believe anyone would buy, too tropish to be real and that took me out. Also, I am pretty sure the F-bomb is not actually punctuation, the movie disagrees with me to a level that would leave The Boondock Saints in awe.

Director Scott Cooper (Crazy Heart, Out of the Furnance) loves himself the close up. While not as bad as Maggie for having the camera in his actors face there are a lot of scenes where the actor uses well over 75% of the screen space with their noggin. It’s a technique that can work, but doesn’t always.  Also, the timing of cuts, beats, and overall pacing of the film drags a bit to the long side. I wasn’t expecting the Departed when it comes to action, but I wanted the pacing just a bit tighter. Also I would be left to believe things only happened every 10 years if the movie was my only guide.

TL;DR?

Black Mass is a solidly acted film that I can highly recommend to anyone who enjoys the era of the Modern Mafia. If you love stories in, about, or related to Boston this is a must see. The city doesn’t live and breathe here as it’s own character despite their attempts, but you know where you are. The movie can be compared to one of my more favorite films of this type of genre Citizen X.

If you aren’t a fan of this type of film, you won’t miss anything. Even the curious could give this a pass. Save it for the genre lovers.

 

 

Darke Reviews – Hotel Transylvania 2

Posted by

0

Hey folks, just putting this out there, I will not be seeing this movie. As much as it pains me to not see a Vampire movie of any kind on the silver screen; I am a woman of my word and am maintaining my boycott of all Adam Sandler films.

If he makes money from this, which he will, then he will continue to be allowed to make the other projects that are of far less quality. I cannot be a part of that in good conscience. I will review the original during the month of October, but this one falls under my perpetual boycott.

Sorry everyone.

Please see my review of Pixels for details on the boycott.

Darke Reviews – Maze Runner: The Scorch Trials

Posted by

3

I am curious and honestly thinking very hard here on how often the middle movie of a franchise with the concept of a trilogy being fully known is a solid film in it’s own right. I don’t think that Godfather was planned to be a trilogy, but if it was then you have Godfather II clearly. You of course have Empire Strikes back, which by the time it was made the trilogy was guaranteed. The Two Towers, naturally and I am sure there are a few others, but how many really? Granted I am talking there of some of the most iconic movies and books ever made, true greats. The Maze Runner doesn’t come to close to it, so I suppose it is not a fair comparison. Several of the last reviews of books to film adaptations have discussed the middle child before the final movie is split into two. By the way I have not heard an announcement of The Death Cure (the next book) being broken into two films.

So let’s get to the point – does The Scorch Trial survive itself?

The movie picks up literally right after the last one ends with the characters having escaped the Maze and being flown on helicopter to a base run by a man named Janson. Still on high alert Thomas and his friends leave the compound into the Scorch where even more risks and possibly salvation await them.

From a purely acting perspective, everyone gives it their all, when they are given the chance. Dylan O’Brien continues to shine and prove he is greater than Teen Wolf lets him be, though his fans know this already. He largely has to carry the film with way too many close ups, but covers a decent range of emotions and is at least interesting to watch. The rest of the survivors don’t get as much screen time as more characters must be introduced, though Ki Hong Lee as Minho continues to be the one we want to see more of. Giancarlo Esposito joins the cast as Jorge, who I just want more of as he lights up the screen. No one else really left me caring much, except a curious appearance by Alan Tudyk who I think was trying to impersonate Peter Stormare.

The weaknesses in the film can be pointed at a few sources, Wes Ball the director and T.S Nowlin the writer. Nowlin adapting the book to screen seemed to have  missed a mark in making you care about the characters. They introduce people, but you don’t care and point in fact you want to throat punch most of them. Granted some of the inherent stupidity of the characters may be in the source material, but to have half conversations and the pronoun game should be avoided as it really just tends to annoy – especially when you have a lot of down time to deal with it. It’s dumb and the script is dumb for doing it. Yes it annoys me.

Wes Ball, who also directed the last, seems to not know what to do with the actors, or the story, or the editing. The actors do ok. The shots and cinematography are great. The art is solid. Production design really good. Yet with all of the background elements working for him, the movie just kinda drones on. I mean I know it’s called the Maze Runner, but how many times can you run from a threat? There is an entire beautiful sequence that serves no real point other than to make the cast run again. The film could have dealt with about fifteen or twenty minutes of time being cut.

Now, I have been bashing the movie pretty solidly. It’s an ok sequel. Again the shots are beautiful. The tension ramps nicely and let’s you down relatively well. You don’t know who is going to die or if someone is going to die. They did better with this one than many zombie movies do.

TL;DR

The Scorch Trials are over. I am thankful. I wanted to check my watch at the end. It has at least 3 false endings, just when you think it’s about to roll credits it goes on.

If you are a fan of the Maze Runner books or the last movie I can tell you to see this; otherwise give it a pass.

 

 

SPOILER CORNER – ROLL OVER TO READ

Seriously, I think I just watched a live action version of The Last of Us. The movie has zombie like creatures that move fast, have no eyes, and eventually die and have the plant inside them grow into vine like substances. I know Last of Us came out after the book, but the parallels in shots from the game and this movie are kinda ridiculous.

 

END SPOILER CORNER

Darke Reviews | American Ultra (2015)

Posted by

2

Well this proved to be an interesting evening. Go to a movie, get all settled in with the nice recliners at Roadhouse Cinemas, get a drink and a pizza and start to enjoy. Then the movie pauses. We’re given some excuse of a technical difficulty. Then…5 minutes later – “So yeah there’s been a bomb threat. We need to evacuate everyone.” They handled it well. Everyone was orderly, they comped any food & drink already ordered and provided free tickets to another show. All in all – very well done. I feel sorry for the loss of revenue tonight because some kid was a jackhole (note: this is an assumption). This is the reason you are only getting one review tonight rather than two as the next available showing for this gem was at 9:45 at another theatre. So my friend and I hauled ourselves over and watched the first twenty minutes again…and that should tell you a little something already.

Now…for the rest of the story.

It is entirely likely you have never heard of American Ultra unless you saw a trailer on my facebook page the other week. It was not marketed well, or at all, yet the trailer was oddly compelling.  Need a refresher?

The film was written by the same man who gave us the better parts of Chronicle, Max Landis, and directed by Project X director Nima Nourizadeh. I can’t really go in depth to their body of work as usual as I have not watched Nima’s first film; not my genre. Landis on the other hand I can talk a little more about having seen Chronicle and looking forward to his next writing project Victor Frankenstein. He seems to have a good understanding of personal interactions, humor, and action. While his pacing stutters a few times the movie has an incredible amount of heart to it for what appeared to be from the trailer a screwball, surreal, action-comedy.

It is so much more, and less, than that. Landis script gives us a reasonably well constructed almost satirical look at the action spy genre.  It knows what it is and isn’t. It warmly embraces it’s absurdities. It is closer to Mr. and Mrs. Smith than it is Pineapple Express. It is a character driven movie with the two stars moving things forward in very real and very human ways. I give Landis credit here as the people in this movie are some of the most realistic and honest I have seen in a very long time.  The relationship between Jesse Eisenberg’s character Mike Howell and Kristen Stewarts Phoebe Larson felt like a real relationship. The dialogue and subtle interactions that the actors, Nima, and Landis spun together put more heart into this film than probably any film in the past two months.

This isn’t to say it isn’t filled with action, because it is. This isn’t to say it isn’t surreal at times, because it is. I found myself laughing at various intentional beats in the film due to their pure absurdity and the straight man reaction of the players. The best comedy, in my opinion, is that where the people who are delivering it act as if they aren’t in on the joke.  That said, there are few actual jokes and more moments that will make you laugh, make you smile, make you cry. There are more than enough scenes where you go “what the-“.

What helps here is the actors. Jesse Eisenberg (Social Network, Zombieland, Not Michael Cera…) is able to sell all the emotional roller coaster his character goes through. Partnering him with former Adventureland co-star Kristen Stewart (The Runaways, Twilight) was a good call. The two have genuine chemistry in this movie. The first twenty minutes have more ‘real talk’ and actual relationship type behaviors than any movie I have seen since If I Stay last year this time (almost to the date). That takes a lot of skill, subtlety, and more acting than people give Kristen Stewart, or Eisenberg, credit for. While Twilight has earned her much in the way of mocking, it also did not provide her a lot to work with and if this is the potential for the young actor, then I am happy to support her in future films – you should be too. As an aside I have an interest in seeing Adventureland now.

From a technical standpoint the movie is ok. Again there’s something just off about the pacing, but that might be intentional to allow some of the more awkward moments to sell. Some fights we get shaky cam, others we don’t. Obviously the ones without are superior. The make up work is solid for the injuries building throughout the film and looks as believable as the bloodsplatter looks ridiculously over the top. It isn’t Hammer films bad, but you know what you are seeing and aren’t seeing.

TL;DR?

I frequently say in this section that the most successful films are those that evoke emotion. This made me tear up once or twice. It made me laugh a lot more. More than that though? It made me smile. It’s been a few weeks since I truly had a movie that I just found myself relaxing and enjoying through and through. It was a comfortable, fun little ride that I would probably go on again if asked. It’s also nice in a summer of sequels, remakes, reimaginings, and reboots to see and be able to celebrate an original property.

If the trailer above intrigued you , I would ask that you go see this movie this weekend. Don’t wait. Studios rarely care little beyond the actuals of the first weekend. With next to no movies coming up for a full month that look to be worth anything – give this one your time.

If you weren’t intrigued by the trailer or were put off by it, I understand. This won’t be the movie for you; so don’t try to defy the odds.

I am glad I got a chance to see this one tonight, make a chance for yourself.

Darke Reviews – The Man from U.N.C.L.E. (2015)

Posted by

3

I have only a passing familiarity with the original TV series that ran from 1964 to 1968. I think I caught some reruns in syndication when I was a kid. I am pretty sure I remember the awesome Robert Vaughn as Napoleon Solo and David McCallum (Duckie from NCIS) as Illya Kuryakin. It was very much a product of it’s time in a similar Cold War era vein of James Bond, The Avengers (no not those Avengers), Mission: Impossible, Danger Man/Secret Agent, Get Smart, The Saint, I Spy, culminating in the end of the Cold War with Scarecrow and Mrs. King (I never missed an episode).

Something you may notice, I made all of those links to the original series. Something else you may notice almost all of them have been remade into modern movies – very very poorly with only two notable exceptions. As a reminder ( I am cruel) here you go to the notably bad ones.

I understand if you need to pause reading to take anti psychotics or antidepressants at being reminded of those films. I needed to set the stage for what is one of the last of the genre of old spy movies being redone.

Did it work better than the others? Does it break the curse?

If you are a regular reader you know the Three Writer Rule. 3 or more writers goes bad almost invariably. This movie has four unique story credits and with two of those repeating on the screenplay. This is excluding the Sam Rolfe credit for the TV series. Lets knock a few parties out right now. Jeff Kleeman is a producer with a pen. He generally is the money and some influence on a film, with no major film credits  prior as a writer it’s clear he wanted a say in the film enough to get himself a story credit. Then there is David C. Wilson, who has precisely two credits; the 1991 martial arts movie that made Escrima cool The Perfect Weapon and the oft forgotten 2000 film Supernova. I am almost wondering if David C. Wilson is an Alan Smithee in disguise? This brings us to Lionel Wigram and Guy Ritchie. Now things begin to get interesting as Wigram helped give us the RDJ  Sherlock Holmes in 2009 as a writer, then has largely served as an executive producer for such films as Harry Potter 5, 6, 7.1 and 7.2. He also gave us Cool as Ice. I am trying to decide if that wipes all the other good credit out. Then of course is Guy Ritchie, writer, director, producer. Gaining his fame from Lock, Stock, and Two Smoking Barrels and Snatch, later to give us the two new Sherlock Holmes films.

Did they tell a good story together? Well yes and no. The film is so predictable with its beats and overall plot that I probably could have looked like some sort of PreCog from the Future Crimes division if I had written this review first. Every single plot point is 100% unsurprising and even telegraphed. The movie then goes onto explain, as if we’re idiots, how some of the beats happened when a cut was used to show not tell. Not good. What is good is when the movie takes small moments to be quiet. They are a touch absurd and a bit off, yet bring the whole thing back together. The downside of course is they, like the movie run a bit long and rather than allowing you to catch your breath leave you checking your watch. Not that the movie needed time to let you catch your breath, the pacing, music, and overall feel of the film read more like Steven Soderbergh (Haywire, Oceans 11,  Traffic). The only touch of Ritchie I see is some of the cuts he chooses and a deliberate attempt to give it that 60’s film grain vibe.

From an acting perspective the mediocre retreaded script does little to help the actors. Thankfully someone reminded Henry Cavill he wasn’t working with Zack Snyder and that he could smile again and be charming again. It’s been a long time since I’ve seen that and that isn’t a good thing as beyond his magnificent physique the man actually has natural charm. Armie Hammer, who hasn’t had much work since the atrocity of the Lone Ranger plays our Russian. If you want a man to be charming and charismatic when he reads wooden – don’t let him play a cold war russian. It doesn’t mix. Thankfully Hammer and Cavill both transcend the script and what must be poor direction to at least make me crack a smile a few times. They made it work. They had the quiet moments and bromance that fan fic writers are already scribbling down ideas for. Supporting the stars we have a star in her own right, Alicia (I am really not an AI) Vikander, coming off of a stellar performance in Ex Machina. She at least has chemistry with the male leads which allows this film to work and Ritchie and the script realize she is not just a window dressing and use her appropriately.

No one else is really able to transcend the script, except Hugh Grant who as near as I can tell is playing Hugh Grant.

TL;DR?

Short version the movie is a meh.

You can get a few smiles and maybe some nostalgia from it if you enjoyed the original series. Hammer and Cavill pull off Illya and Solo rather well and I buy them and everything about them. If you were interested give it a matinee shot, otherwise this is a pass.

Slightly longer version? I think the Spy Genre is dead in film. Sad thing is I like Spy Movies. Always have. We’ve been Bourned to death. Mission Impossible and Bond work because they are larger than life. They are so huge from both the characters and the enemies. Even in the grittier and more reality (hah) centric film style we’ve gotten both Bond and MI are still bigger than us and that makes them truly timeless. The world that produced these earlier works is gone and even though the idea of vintage everything is still popular it doesn’t work as well when your genre needs a black and white enemy that is firmly of this world. Maybe in another few years this could be revisited but right now in the context of the world we live in the genre just does not work if you dance too close to reality. That thought, even watching the movie, took me out of it so hard that I started seeing the figurative paint and set dressing.

I think that explains why this was released in August. People might just be desperate enough to see it and it could make some money back.

So again – It’s a Meh. If you were planning on it anyway – Matinee. Otherwise, save your money a few more weeks until something that is must see comes out.