Author's Note: As you might have guessed from the title, it's yet another round of movie reviews, courtesy of the free movie channels we keep getting time and again. With this many of 'em, who needs subscriptions? 😁
I had yet another set of free movie channels the weekend before last (Showtime and The Movie Channel and more), so that means even more movies, which means even more content to review- always a good thing. About the only negative is that it inherently postpones other stuff, but hey, we'll live. So, without further ado, here's another batch of recent movie reviews. 😉
X-Men: Dark Phoenix
I was hesitant to see this one, not because I have anything against the cast- in fact, I'm a pretty big fan of a lot of them- but because: (A) They've already told this story before, albeit poorly; (B) The reviews were pretty abysmal; and (C) It tanked big-time at the box office, becoming the biggest bomb of 2019- none of which inspired much confidence. That said, it was on one afternoon while I had free movie channels, so I figured what the hell- the only thing I have to lose is two hours of my time.
Well, there's good news and bad news. On the one hand, it is at least an improvement on the previous attempt, The Last Stand. On the other, it's not by much. Basically, it's movies like this that were giving superhero flicks a bad name in the first place. Though not as deadening as some of the worst of the DC movies, it's definitely a bit of a slog, and a largely humorless affair.
Hugh Jackman's Wolverine is very much missed, and though his own last movie, Logan, was the darkest in the X-Men saga yet, it was also one of the best, thanks to strong writing and acting across the board. Such is not the case here, with the writing especially weak and the acting a bit lackluster all around, even from actors I normally like. Everyone seems to be sleepwalking and going through the motions, even the newer recruits.
Star Sophie Turner, who was so good on Game of Thrones, especially in later seasons, is very nearly a complete blank slate here as the iconic Jean Grey- she just doesn't have the gravitas it takes to pull off such heavy material. Meanwhile, it's no wonder Jennifer Lawrence took some time off shortly after this film- she looks exhausted and almost like even she doesn't know what the hell's going on at any time. Thankfully, for her sake, her screen time is limited, for reasons I won't get into, though the trailer had no trouble spoiling it for everyone.
Even the usually rock-solid James McAvoy and Michael Fassbinder seem at a loss to inject much emotion into the proceedings, though the latter fares slightly better, thanks to certain plot developments. Likewise, although Jessica Chastain is perfectly fine in her role, even as the newcomer to the festivities, she seems to be bored to tears as the main baddie. It should have been an opportunity for her to cut loose and unleash her inner warrior princess. But it's as if she can't even be bothered to give even a campy performance- she's just cashing a check, really.
The younger cast fare only slightly better. Nicholas Hoult, as Hank McCoy, aka The Beast, does manage to give an emotional, somewhat wrenching performance, as one of the ones most affected by Jean Grey's actions. Likewise, Tye Sheridan, as Scott Summers, aka Cyclops, has some heavy emotional lifting to do as Grey's love interest, and he mostly rises to the occasion, building on the good will he created amongst geek fans with his lead role in Spielberg's Ready Player One.
Although he's vastly underutilized, Evan Peters is the lone source of amusement here, as he reprises his role as the wily Quicksilver, who basically just shows up to crack wise and do stuff really quick to move things forward. And under normal circumstances, I love both Alexandra Shipp (Tragedy Girls, Shaft), who plays Storm, and Halston Sage (The Orville, Prodigal Son), making her debut as Dazzler, but neither of them are around long enough to make much of an impression here.
Of course, if you know the backstory of this thing, it's no wonder it's a bigger train wreck than the one in the film. It originally was conceived as a two-part film, then downsized as the producers had second thoughts after the last X-Men installment, Apocalypse, underperformed at the box office. Major changes abounded, needless to say. The original approach might have helped give the film more wiggle room to flesh out some of the performances, particularly Turner's, but I'm also glad they didn't go there, if the end result is any indication.
The entire third act had to be extensively rewritten and reshot- almost never a good sign- and at least some of the haphazard performances may be a direct result of all the changes. Chastain, in particular, admitted her character changed drastically throughout the process, which may go a long way towards explaining why it's so erratic, as well as why Chastain herself seems a bit lost.
Fans seemed to sense it was bad news, leading to a mere $65 million gross in the States, on a whopping $200 million budget- it only fared slightly better overseas, limping to an overall gross of slightly over $252 million. In the end, it was calculated to have lost a good $133 million for the studio, 20th Century Fox, and effectively killed off a planned two more films in the saga. With the Disney merger, it seems likely that a new approach will be taken, perhaps combining the X-Men with other characters, which might be just the shot in the arm the ailing franchise needs. We'll see.
For now, we have this movie, which, I hate to say, is really only for the die-hards. Even though it is marginally better than The Last Stand, I'm afraid the Dark Phoenix saga deserved better than it got all around. Oh well. Nothing ventured, nothing gained, I suppose. Those determined to see it anyway probably already have by now, but for the rest of you, you might want to skip it, unless it's under similar circumstances to my own- i.e. if you can see it for free or rent it from the library or so forth. All others, you have been warned.
Alita: Battle Angel
Somewhat ironically, this film was the reason why Dark Phoenix was moved from earlier in the year to later in the year, so that the two would-be blockbuster flicks wouldn't have to compete with one another. Smart move, as this film fared far better than Phoenix, but I'm not sure anywhere they could have moved that one would have made a difference. Alita, on the other hand, didn't just make bigger bank that that film- it's just plain better in general.
It helps that the cast is much more game here, with most of them seeming to be having a good time, with star Christoph Waltz camping it up as a sort of robotic mad scientist, Dr. Ido, and Ed Skrein and Jackie Earle Haley wonderfully sailing over the top with the roles as the baddies Zapan and Grewishka, respectively. As the beguiling Alita, Rosa Salazar (The Maze Runner series, Insurgent)- who's 34 IRL- is effortlessly youthful, charming and appealing- she alone makes the film worth seeing, TBH- a real achievement for a role that's basically entirely CGI-driven.
The impressive cast also includes Oscar winner Mahershala Ali (Green Book) as the villainous Vector, who may not be who he seems to be; Jennifer Connelly (Labyrinth, Requiem for a Dream) as his cohort, Dr. Chiren, who is also Dr. Ido's ex-wife; Jeff Fahey (Machete, Planet Terror) as a "Hunter-Warrior," who wields a pack of cyber-dogs; Eiza González (TV's From Dusk Till Dawn, Baby Driver) as Nyssiana, a part-cyborg assassin; Lana Condor (X-Men: Apocalypse, Deadly Class) as Koyomi; and Keean Johnson (Nashville, Euphoria) as Hugo, Alita's love interest.
The film was co-written (and produced) by none other than James Cameron, with an assist from Laeta Kalogridis (Shutter Island, Pathfinder); and directed by cult favorite Robert Rodriguez, of Sin City and From Dusk Till Dawn fame. You may notice several alums from his work in the cast list above. In addition, there's cameos from RR regular Michelle Rodriguez (no relation), Jai Courtney (Terminator Genisys, Suicide Squad) and Edward Norton (Fight Club, Birdman). It's also Rodriguez' highest-grossing film ever, which is nice to see, as a longtime fan.
A decent enough hit, it grossed $405 million at the box office worldwide, on a $170 million budget- not too shabby- though marketing and distribution costs drove up that latter number considerably, meaning that the profit wasn't as big as it might seem going by those numbers. Fortunately, it was also a huge hit on Blu-Ray and DVD ($50 million in sales and counting), so that helped make up for it, and it's now proving quite popular on movie channels to boot, so that's cool.
However, planned sequels may be in limbo, since, as with X-Men, it was a 20th Century Fox product, so Disney may not want to pursue it, in light of its violent content and being generally off-brand, as it were. Too bad, as it's one of Rodriguez' better efforts and a lot of fun, with great visual effects, a winning cast and an intriguing story-line that would have lent itself nicely to future endeavors, especially as it's based on a popular manga, with plenty of possibilities, plot-wise.
Whatever the case for its future, Alita is well-worth seeing, and I must say, I really enjoyed it overall. I might even buy it myself, if only to check out the various bonuses, and, of course, RR's ongoing "film school," as well as a 3D version on a bonus disc. This was my first time seeing it, so I missed out on the 3D version- in this case, it might actually be worth seeing, given the eye-popping visuals. I say check it out, especially if you're into cyberpunk-style sci-fi stuff. It's a lot of fun. 👾
The House with a Clock in its Walls
Speaking of fun- I had pretty low expectations going in to this also-ran horror/fantasy film aimed at younger audiences, but you know what? It wasn't half-bad. I think my main reservation was that it looked like a Goosebumps knock-off, down to the inclusion of that film's star, Jack Black. Hell, it even has killer jack-o-lanterns, a la the second Goosebumps flick, Haunted Halloween. But if you can get past those similarities, it's a neat little film.
In actuality, it's closer to the Harry Potter series- although, interestingly, I looked up the book it was based on, and it turns out that it's from way back in 1973, and was the first in a series of 12 books written by John Bellairs and Brad Strickland, some of which have illustrations by Edward Gorey, of whom I am a big fan. The book was previously adapted, at least in part, as one of three segments in the Vincent Price horror anthology, Once Upon a Midnight Scary, which I was also not familiar with, but I'm a big fan of Price, so I'd like to see that as well.
The film was directed by, of all people, Eli Roth, of Cabin Fever and Hostel notoriety, with a script by Eric Kripke, of the TV series Supernatural fame, both of whom I am a big fan of. Had I known this, I might have watched this one sooner, but fair warning: it's not their typical fare. Like I said, this one is aimed squarely at the kiddies, so die-hard horror fans should lower their expectations accordingly- though, by kids' films standards, it's fairly intense, albeit no more so than the Harry Potter series overall.
It revolves around an orphaned ten-year-old boy, Lewis (Owen Vaccaro, of the Daddy's Home series), who loses his parents in a car crash and is sent to live with his eccentric uncle, Jonathan (Black). In no time, he realizes that there's some weird stuff going on in the house, and that his relative is a warlock. In addition, their next-door neighbor, Florence (Cate Blanchett, slumming it nicely), is a witch, with whom Jonathan has a bit of a love/hate relationship.
Chief among the odd goings-on is the sound of ticking clock within the walls of the house- hence the title. It turns out the house was formerly owned by an evil wizard named Isaac Izard (Kyle MacLachlan, of Twin Peaks) and his wife, Selena (Renée Elise Goldsberry, Altered Carbon), who hid the clock before they died, and that Jonathan is obsessed with finding it. In spite of this, he forbids Lewis from helping, which turns out to be a mistake, as Lewis only becomes more determined to do so by learning magic himself, which proves to be a hit-and-miss affair that often causes more trouble than it helps matters.
While predictable, at least to a certain degree- there was one twist involving the neighbor I didn't see coming- the film is nevertheless fairly enjoyable, with a warped sense of humor to it that I really dug. While fans of Roth may come away a bit disappointed, if you like Supernatural, you might be more inclined to enjoy this one. It's not particularly scary, by any means, but it has a similar sense of humor to it. But then, neither is Supernatural, really- it's more entertaining than scary.
The cast is pretty rock solid, and though Black basically just does a variation of his role in the Goosebumps flicks, he and Blanchett have a nice, unexpected chemistry together, even though they spend most of the film playfully sniping at one another. As a longtime Twin Peaks fan, MacLachlan is always welcome as well. I wasn't really familiar with Vaccaro, though he had a small role in Disney's Noelle, which I enjoyed- he was a young version of Bill Hader's character- but I thought he was pretty good as the quirky Lewis.
I would definitely watch a sequel, though I gather this was only a modest hit, grossing $131 million on a $42 million budget, so a sequel may or may not end up happening- though it did end up being Roth's best opening ever, so good on him for that. Roth has indicated he would be up for a sequel, so we'll see. Considering I had zero expectations going in, it was a pleasant surprise, and I enjoyed it. I say check it out, if you know what you're getting into and you like this sort of thing.
Stuber
Another one I had low expectations for and ended up being pleasantly surprised by, the main draw for me with Stuber was the oddball pairing of wrestler-turned-actor Dave Bautista (the Guardians of the Galaxy movies) and stand-up comedian-turned-actor Kumail Nanjiani (Silicon Valley, The Big Sick). It seemed like something that could work, if only because it was such an out-there pairing- and it absolutely does, so nice going, whoever thought of it in the first place.
It's kind of inherently cool to see such a nice, average guy like Nanjiani get the lead in an action movie, of all things. His consistently amusing sense of humor and his bristling-but-engaging chemistry with Bautista absolutely makes this film work, even if the plot is nothing special. Basically, Bautista is a rogue cop, Vic, obsessed with bringing down a crook responsible for the death of his partner (Karen Gillan, his GOTG co-star, in a brief-but-enjoyable cameo).
The only problem is that he just got Lasik eye surgery and his vision is still iffy, and therefore, he can't drive, so he's forced to get an Uber driver, Stu (Nanjiani), to do it for him. Needless to say, Stu isn't thrilled to be drug into Vic's drama, not in the least as he's amping up to seal the deal with gal pal, Becca (Betty Gilpin, of GLOW, literally phoning it in- as in most of her performance is by iPhone), who he has an unrequited crush on.
Meanwhile, Stu himself is supposed to be attending his daughter Nicole's art opening, and has a decidedly fractured relationship with her, which Stu attempts to advise him on, much to Vic's chagrin. Nicole is played by the always-likable Natalie Morales, of Parks and Recreation and Dead to Me- she's no relation to the anchorwoman of the same name, BTW. Also cropping up is Mira Sorvino, who plays Vic's much-beleaguered police Captain. Nice to see her getting a lot more work since the whole Weinstein thing blew up.
While the plot is decidedly by-the-numbers, as is the character development, this film is the very definition of a passable time-waster that's absolutely made for cable TV. It's 100% the kind of thing you find yourself watching when there's nothing else on and you're not sure what you're in the mood for, so you just end up watching whatever's on. Kind of like The Beastmaster back in the day. It's not the sort of thing that will make any critic's best-of list, but it is just enjoyable enough to keep them from panning it altogether.
That may sound like faint praise, but those types of films have their place, and like I said, it's totally on cable, or nowadays, streaming, I suppose. I wouldn't advise buying it, but it's absolutely worth a watch if you have access to movie channels or rentals via your local library. It's worth seeing alone on the strength of the two leads' chemistry, that's for sure. I say check it out, but only if you're in the mood for some light action, with a heavy dose of humor.
The Operative
Last but not least, we have The Operative, which is basically what a feature film version of the recently-departed series Homeland might be like, if we were watching the beginning of Carrie's career, instead of joining it already in progress. Though the main character, Rachel, isn't bipolar, per se, she does seem to have some emotional issues, at the very least- or perhaps a lack of emotions thereof, which, of course, makes her perfect for being an undercover spy.
Rachel is played by the excellent Diane Kruger, who actually did play a character in the neighborhood of Carrie (aka Claire Danes' character, for those unfamiliar with Homeland) on the short-lived-but-really-underrated FX show, The Bridge. Kruger seems to be channeling her character in that show here, though she does show emotion in some key scenes, particularly a cringe-worthy sexual assault that comes out of nowhere and will leave you needing to take a shower afterwards, so fair warning there.
She plays the aforementioned Rachel, an English teacher that works as a spy for the Mossad, basically Israel's version of the CIA. Her handler is Thomas (Martin Freeman, The Hobbit trilogy), who is called in when Rachel mysteriously disappears while on the job after her father's funeral. As her last call was to Thomas, the Mossad brings him in to help track her down, fearing she's gone rogue, having gotten too close to her detail, Farhad (Cas Anvar, The Strain), who is key to their current operation.
As Thomas details her recruitment and work with Mossad to all those concerned, we see via flashbacks how she was brought into the agency and how she was deployed, first with smaller operations, and then with a much-bigger assignment. Given her inclination to do things her own way, the Mossad fears the worst, but if need be, they aren't above hunting her down and either capturing her or even killing her, if she's truly switched sides.
This will be familiar territory to those who watch this sort of thing on the regular, but if you're still suffering from Homeland withdrawal, it's just the ticket. Kruger, as always, is intense and driven, as the wily Rachel, who is determined to prove herself at all costs, even as she wonders whether she's cut out for this sort of thing or not. As the film progresses, though, we see the lengths she goes to, in order to prove herself, which often involve crossing her own lines, much less the Mossad's.
It's a riveting piece of work, based on the Hebrew novel, The English Teacher, which was, in fact, written by a former intelligence officer, which is probably why it rings so true. Though not a box office hit, and not particularly critically-acclaimed, I really enjoyed the film. It's a slow burn, to be sure, and not the sort of thing I'd recommend to those who like more mainstream action fare. It's much more cerebral and intense, less an action movie than a character study- literally, as the Mossad is studying Rachel in order to figure out who she is and why she went rogue.
I say check it out, but only if you like your spy stuff on the more low-key side: think the recent miniseries The Night Manager or The Little Drummer Girl. If you liked either of those, then this will absolutely do it for you, but if you're more inclined towards, say, the James Bond or Mission: Impossible series, then you might find it boring. But I really dug it, overall.
Well, that about does it for now. As I mentioned, I probably have enough movies I watched on cable stockpiled to do another one of these collections, but I'm going to try and sneak in an old-school review sooner than later, so keep an eye out for that. TTYL, my dear readers! 😉
Author's Note: This week got a bit away from me, but cut me some slack- it's my birthday today! 🙌
Anyway, the good news is that you get a super-sized article for your trouble, featuring no less than five- count 'em! - reviews of movies I've seen recently. Hope you enjoy it, and we'll get back to the columns next week. I have a small handful of reviews I still want to do, then I'll get to the other stuff I mentioned- the franchise review, the Cronenberg Chronicles, and my various Best Of lists.
This article is a compilation of reviews of some of the movies I watched via the free movie channels I had over the course of the last few months. I guess they're going crazy with all of that since people are stuck at home, but I say keep it coming. It's just a way to see content I might not be able to otherwise, or might not watch if I had to pay for it.
I've got enough for at least one more compilation of these, barring having access to free movie channels this coming weekend, in which case, there will likely be more. There are also about three or four other older movies I saw via free movie channels that aren't on this list, but that's because they're all getting their own articles. I try to limit these articles (the Movie Round-Ups) to covering movies released over the last few years. Look for those other articles about older movies to be released in the weeks to come.
In the meantime, let's get this show on the road...
Bad Education
The newest film I watched, this HBO original revolves around the true story about the largest case of embezzlement in public school history. The impressive cast includes Hugh Jackman (aka Wolverine), Allison Janney (Oscar winner for I, Tonya), Ray Romano (experiencing a bit of a career resurgence between this and Scorsese's much-celebrated The Irishman), Annaleigh Ashford (a burgeoning fave of mine, thanks to her work on Masters of Sex, Younger and The Good Fight), Alex Wolff (the last two Jumanji films, Hereditary) and a solid, borderline star-making turn by Geraldine Viswanathan (Blockers, TV's Miracle Workers).
The set-up is this: it's 2002, superintendent Dr. Frank Tassone (Jackman) has overseen Roslyn High School in Long Island, New York, for the last few years, taking it to the 4th ranked public school in the nation, with help from his assistant superintendent, Pam Gluckin (Janney). Unbeknownst to almost anyone, save maybe Gluckin, is the fact that Tassone, who claims to have lost his wife years ago, is a closeted gay man currently having an affair with a former student, in spite of being the object of affection of nearly every single woman in town, and being beloved by students and parents alike.
Somewhat ironically, Tassone encourages aspiring reporter Rachel (Viswanathan) to not settle for "puff pieces" and to "make her own stories." To that end, she begins investigating the upcoming Skywalk project at the school, which leads her to discover that something is off about the school's finances. That soon comes further to light when Gluckin's son makes some ill-advised charges to the Roslyn district account, which are noticed by a local relative of the head of the school board, who brings it to his attention.
Pam is soon confronted for her actions, and ultimately let go when it is discovered that she has spent far more than that, at the urging of Tassone, who convinces the board that it would be better to let her go than have it become a full-on scandal if they went to the police. Little do they know that Tassone is doing the same thing and that, together, the two have been embezzling literally millions from the public-school system- but thanks to Rachel's dogged reporting, they soon will.
The film was written by Mike Makowsky, who was an actual student at the school when Tassone was arrested, and it was based on an article in New York magazine. It was directed by Cory Finley, who also directed one of my favorite films of 2017, Thoroughbreds, which made my end-of-the-year list for that year. This one was extremely well-received, and understandably so, as it is impeccably cast and that cast is nothing short of fantastic, especially Jackman and Janney.
The film is sort of like Election by way of the recent college admissions scandal, in that it shows how money can corrupt everything, and cause people who mean well to do terrible, unscrupulous things. And, for that matter, for people to do almost equally awful things to cover it up- as they say, it's often the cover-up, not the crime that gets you. Had Tassone not encouraged Rachel to follow the story, it might not have happened, though Pam wasn't exactly keeping things under the radar, what with her letting relatives go buck wild with the school's charge card and all, so perhaps it was inevitable.
It's a well-paced, often darkly funny movie, that nonetheless keeps turning the screws as it progresses, ratcheting up the suspense until the viewer knows that none of this is going to end well- and it doesn't. One can't help but feel bad for the school itself, and the innocent students caught in the crossfire that did nothing wrong and suddenly found themselves graduating from a discredited, scandal-plagued school, which can't be great for one's resume, to say the least.
If this sounds even remotely interesting to you, it probably will be. It's well-worth a watch, to be sure. Check it out! 😉
The Murder of Nicole Brown Simpson
Another one ostensibly based on true events, as you might have guessed from the title, this one is based on the notorious OJ Simpson case, albeit told from a much different perspective from that of, say, the multi-award winning American Crime Story: The People v. OJ Simpson. Here, we get things told primarily from the perspective of the titular Nicole Brown Simpson, as played by Mena Suvari, of American Beauty and the American Pie series fame.
In addition, we get an alternate theory of what might have "really" happened, complete with an alternate suspect, though OJ Simpson (stuntman Gene Freeman, who played "Pooka" in the Into the Dark flicks) is still peripherally involved. Much to my shock, the theory is not without some merit, as I discovered upon doing a deep dive on the facts. Not saying I believe it, and a lot of it is decidedly far-fetched, but it is interesting, that's for sure, and worth at least reading about, even if this movie is a bit on the iffy and exploitative side- but hey, that's Hollywood for you. Still, Once Upon a Time...In Hollywood, this is not.
The theory here is that Nicole ran afoul of serial killer Glen Edward Rogers (played by Nick Stahl, of Terminator 3 and HBO's Carnivàle), aka "The Casanova Killer" or "The Cross Country Killer," who was reportedly in the LA area at the time of the murders and worked on her home as a painter. OJ got wind of it and allegedly hired Rogers himself to rob her of a few specific items- sound familiar? - and told Rogers he "might have to kill her" to pull it off.
According to this movie, he did just that, basically at OJ's behest, who was jealous of Nicole's involvement with other men, specifically Ron Goldman (Drew Roy, Secretariat), who was there at the time of the attack, and thus, also killed because he was at the wrong place at the wrong time. We also see Rogers kill Sandra Gallagher (stuntwoman Dena Sodano), which actually did happen for real, more or less just as it's seen here. He was convicted and sentenced to death for the crime in California, though his death sentence is still pending appeal.
The film also implies that Nicole and Rogers had a brief affair that turned violent, and that Nicole reported him to the police, but wasn't taken seriously, on account of all the domestic disturbance calls she made after increasingly violent encounters with her ex-husband, OJ, some of which were caught on tape and are used here, albeit possibly recreated. It's hard to tell what's real and what's made up here, TBH. I suspect a lot of it is indeed bullshit, though Rogers himself told his brother that he did kill Ron and Nicole, as chronicled in the documentary, My Brother The Killer.
Whatever the real case, the movie is certainly watchable, and Suvari gives her best performance in ages in the film and manages to create a very real portrayal of what must have been a pretty horrific state of existence for Nicole in her final days, regardless of what really happened. Stahl is also effectively charming and creepy, depending on the situation- sometimes both at once.
Also cropping up, in case you were wondering, are troubled socialite Faye Resnick (Taryn Manning, of Orange is the New Black, who cleans up nice), who is also implied to have had an affair with Nicole; and yes, the Kardashians, including Kris (a near-unrecognizable Agnes Bruckner, a regular to this sort of thing, having played Anna Nicole Smith in a TV-movie, as well as being in The Craigslist Killer and lots of horror movies) and the then-kids, Khloe, Kourtney and Kim.
The film was directed by horror regular Daniel Farrands, who wrote the somewhat underrated Halloween: The Curse of Michael Myers and directed the entertaining Friday the 13th-themed docs, His Name is Jason and Crystal Lake Memories and the Nightmare on Elm Street-themed Never Sleep Again: The Elm Street Legacy, before making the leap to feature films with the similarly real-life based The Amityville Murders and the much-ballyhooed The Haunting of Sharon Tate, which was also no Once Upon a Time...In Hollywood, from what I hear. I admittedly haven't seen those last two, but maybe he should stick to documentaries, lol.
Worth a look if you're still fascinated by the OJ/Nicole drama, but don't count on it shedding too much light on what really went down as there is a whole lot of speculation and outright fiction happening here. Still, if you're a fan of Suvari or Stahl, it's worth seeing once. Maybe it will lead to better roles for both, given that their careers have cooled as of late. We'll see. Until then, taken as a movie, it's okay, but kind of laughable at time, which is not what you want in a true crime type movie. Put it this way: I've seen better Lifetime movies based on real cases.
What Keeps You Alive
From a true-crime-based-thriller to a crime that rings all too true, What Keeps You Alive was a film I happened upon when looking for something new to watch on the free movie channels I had access to. I'd never heard of it, or anyone in it, but it looked interesting and it fished me in, and maybe twenty minutes in, if that, I was hooked. The thing is, this was not at all what I was expecting from a movie described in the synopsis as being about "a married couple engulfed by venomous betrayals while attempting to celebrate their one-year anniversary." That's putting it mildly.
Honestly, the best way to go into this film is to go into it cold, like I did, having no idea where this was headed or what was going to happen. But suffice it to say, where it heads is no place good, especially for the two leading ladies- and I'm not talking about their performances. I'll see if I can talk around it a bit, so as to not spoil anything, but trust me, the less you know, the better.
Jackie (Hannah Emily Anderson, of The Purge TV show and Jigsaw) takes her wife, Jules (Brittany Allen, also of Jigsaw, as well as The Prodigy and Amazon's The Boys) to her family's cabin in the woods to celebrate their one-year anniversary. Everything is basically going fine until someone shows up at their door to make sure no one is breaking in said cabin, as it has been unoccupied for some time.
The woman in question is Sarah (Martha MacIsaac, of Superbad and The Last House on the Left remake), and she recognizes Jackie- but by a different name- from childhood. Uh-oh. Things do not go well from there, as Jackie is forced to answer some very awkward questions, to say the least. The answers do not help matters, and even less so when Jules pays a visit to Sarah's house and finds out that Jackie was continuing to lie about things and leaving some pretty heavy shit out altogether.
After that, Jules confronts Jackie in earnest, and boy, do things take a turn. It's better not to say much more, but suffice it to say, this is probably not how Jules hoped to spend her one-year anniversary. I suppose I can at least allow that the film is basically a dramatic thriller, but that the synopsis doesn't do it justice at all. I wouldn't advise watching the trailer, which, as per usual, spoils a lot of the twists at hand. I've told you everything you need to know, believe you me.
The film was written and directed by Colin Minihan, who previously worked with Allen on both the zombie flick It Stains the Sands Red and Extraterrestrial, neither of which I've seen- though I own the latter, so that one will be rectified sooner than later. Minihan was also behind the found footage horror of the Grave Encounters flicks- he co-wrote both and co-directed the first as one-half of the so-called "Vicious Brothers" duo. He's currently in the process of rebooting the entertaining Urban Legend franchise.
It helps that Minihan has a pre-existing relationship with Allen and that Allen has one with Anderson: the three all work well together, which is crucial in a film like this, especially when a lesbian relationship is at the heart- or lack thereof- of the film. While I'm the first to admit that the film falls prey to horror movie clichés in the final half, a lot of which are nonsensical and run counter to what one might do in such a situation, that realistic relationship goes a long way towards justifying a lot of it, and the motives of all concerned are well-put-together if you're really paying attention.
Put another way, there's a method to the madness that, while it can't completely explain away some dumb moves, especially on Jules' end, they do reward those paying close attention (i.e. the bird callback). As a longtime horror fan, you get used to such stupid moves, and though this isn't an outright horror film per se, if you're a longtime fan of the genre, too, you'll know what I mean. There's no excuse for some of it, but if the story is compelling enough- and this one is- you tend to let such things slide.
Still, some may cry foul more than others, depending on your tolerance for such things. But I liked all the twists and the ending was really solid, even if it lacks credibility to an extent. (Basically, one character has to do something specific, which, if she hadn't, it wouldn't really make sense to us, the viewers, and to a certain extent, it doesn't, anyway.) Be sure to pay close attention to the very end, where we get an additional audio clue as to what happens next for one character as well.
It's a flawed movie, execution-wise, I'll admit, but for free, I really enjoyed it, and I sure didn't see some of those twists coming, even if they get progressively dopier. I say check it out, especially if you like the idea of a modern twist on a story that's been told before in a more straightforward way- emphasis on "straight." It's a fun ride, if a bit unbelievable at times. But there's just enough talent on display here to make it worth your while, IMHO. 😨
Yesterday
How's this for high concept? After an inexplicable worldwide blackout, when the lights come back on, certain things have changed for the vast majority of people, including the existence of The Beatles (and, by extension, Oasis), Harry Potter, Coca-Cola, cigarettes and Saturday Night Live (though it does still essentially exist, only now as "Thursday Night Live").
One of the only people that remembers these things is our protagonist, aspiring musician Jack (Himesh Patel, Avenue 5), who was hit by a bus during the blackout, and thus wonders if he might not be dreaming- as do we, which would be one explanation for the events at hand. When he plays The Beatles classic "Yesterday" for his friends, they mistake it for one of his songs, and he thinks they're putting him on, until he checks online and can't find The Beatles anywhere.
Realizing that he could potentially hit the jackpot by playing The Beatles' music as his own, he starts doing just that, and records a demo with a local producer. Musician Ed Sheeran (playing himself, in an amusingly tongue-in-cheek turn) sees Jack performing online and invites him to open for him at an upcoming gig in Moscow. In no time, his "talent" is recognized and a big-time producer, Debra Hammer (Kate McKinnon, of SNL fame- or should I say "TNL" here, lol), who immediately sets him to recording in a professional studio, where his career quickly takes off, albeit on the backs of far more talented people than he.
But he might not be the only one out there that remembers The Beatles, and that could be a problem. Further, is he really a success if he's simply adopting other people's music as his own? Or is he just a glorified cover band artist? Jack wrestles with that, as well as the pitfalls of fame, including a self-imposed blow to his burgeoning relationship with longtime friend and supporter, Ellie (the always-adorable Lily James, of Baby Driver and Cinderella fame). Will it end well? Or was it all just a weird dream in the first place?
Well- mild spoiler alert, but one which I think is worth knowing going in- we never really find out. Whether or not it's all a fever dream or not is left up to the viewer, but there is nothing in the ending to lead one to believe it to be pure fiction, either. As such, this aspect of the film may be frustrating to the viewer, which is why I say it's probably better that you know that going in, as no concrete answer is ever given to why the blackout happens in the first place, much less why it wipes out certain things from existence.
But if you opt to go with it, it's a fun little film, with lots of in-jokes for eagle-eyed (and ear-ed) viewers, particularly in regards to The Beatles, but also Harry Potter fans and those who love a good detailed alternate universe joke. And, needless to say, the music is fantastic, as director Danny Boyle (Trainspotting, Slumdog Millionaire) managed to secure the rights to a small army of Beatles songs for the cool sum of $10 million- at least a third, maybe more of the budget! Granted, all of said songs are covers, performed by star Patel himself, but he's a talented enough singer and likable as all get out, so you won't mind that much.
The end result is a flawed-but-enjoyable endeavor that drags a bit here and there at nearly two hours long, but is overall is a pretty nifty little film, with lots of winning performances and funny moments, including cameos from James Corden (as himself) and Trainspotting vet Robert Carlyle as a decidedly familiar face everyone should know- especially Beatles fans. Needless to say, the music is great, and I did appreciate the attention to detail, even if we never get a proper explanation as to the why of it all. I say check it out, especially if you're a Beatles fan, but don't expect anything profound- it's just a neat little popcorn movie with a cool concept. 😎
Blinded by the Light
Growing up, I became fascinated by other cultures and started watching foreign films at a pretty early age, beginning with Asian action and Kung Fu-type films and Italian horror films and working my way through films from many other subgenres as I got older, including French New Wave and Italian Neorealism and so forth. By the time I got to film school, I had already seen a lot of movies that many of my fellow film students were seeing for the first time in film history class.
I especially like learning about cultures I know little about, such as the one that's at the center of this film: the life of Pakistani immigrants. I had no idea that there was an influx of them in Britain in the 80's and that it resulted in a wave of racism that is not at all dissimilar from what we're seeing now directed at immigrants in general in the US, specifically Mexicans and, more recently, albeit for very different reasons, towards Asians.
The film is based on a true story, that of journalist Sarfraz Manzoor, who also co-wrote the script, which is based on his book Greetings from Bury Park: Race, Religion and Rock N’ Roll. Here, his "character" is renamed Javed (Viveik Kalra, the upcoming Voyagers), a teenage high school student that is becoming distant from his former best friend, Matt (Dean-Charles Chapman, 1917), who is heavily into synth-pop and fronts his own band. Matt tasks Javed to write lyrics for said band, but Javed, who can't seem to write anything that isn't politically motivated, is floundering, as the music that is popular isn't doing it for him.
Enter new friend, Roops (Aaron Phagura), who introduces Javed to the singer that will single-handedly change the course of his life: Bruce Springsteen. Javed falls head over heels in love with Springsteen's music just when he is starting to despair with the trajectory of his own life, and it has a profound effect on him. Realizing how Springsteen's own lyrics and experiences reflect his own, he throws himself into his writing and begins to churn out lyrics, as well as essays inspired by Springsteen's work.
There's only one big problem: the film is set in the late 80's, aka past Springsteen's prime. Sure, he was still around and popular with a certain contingent- but, for the most part that contingent was an older crowd, such as Matt's dad, who is a huge fan, and, in one memorable scene, helps Javed belt out a Springsteen song to Javed's would-be-lady-love, Eliza (Nell Williams, The Good Liar).
As such, this causes a rift between Matt and Javed, to say nothing of his strict father, Malik (Kulvinder Ghir, Bend It Like Beckham, another foreign film I loved from the same director as this one and one of the first movies I was ever paid to review, BTW), who has no sympathy for "Jewish-American rock music." (Malik thinks Springsteen is Jewish, because of his name, lol.)
As with Yesterday, a lot of this film revolves around the music of one artist, in this case, Springsteen, of course, whose music is used throughout, though we also get a sampling of what was popular at the time, i.e. Pet Shop Boys, Level 42, Cutting Crew, Tiffany, etc. I was never a big Springsteen fan- as with the main character here, by the time I got to high school, he was sort of old news, though my generation was more about the Alternative Rock scene. I had already gone through my classic rock phase by then, courtesy of my parents, neither of which listened to Springsteen, so there you go.
However, I was a big Prince fan as a kid- still am, actually- and that definitely got me some weird looks, both from my friends and my older peers. I distinctly remember my babysitter asking my mother: "You let him listen to Prince? He's so nasty!" Said my mom, without missing a beat: "Too late now- he's got all of his records." My mom was single by then, so she had no fucks left to give after the disaster that was my father- as such, she probably did let me get away with murder, between all the horror movies and R-rated movies I watched and the insane music I listened to, of which Prince was only the tip of the iceberg, lol.
The point being, I know what it's like to be out of the step with the times, as was the case with Javid. I liked that he connected with something so distinctly American as Springsteen, and likewise marveled at how well his lyrics reflected the sorts of things Javed was going through at the time. The film cleverly highlights those lyrics by actually showing them swirling around the screen when Javed listens to Springsteen's music, which is a nice touch.
Another thing I liked was, while Javed at first dismisses the music he doesn't like- synth-pop- and actively rebels against his family for standing in the way of what he wants out of life, he eventually learns to accept those things and learn to work with them instead of against them. In other words, he realizes that, while he might not like it, synth-pop means as much to the people who love it as Springsteen does to him.
In addition, he also picks up on the importance of family via Springsteen's lyrics, and eventually mends fences with his father, while at the same time, his father realizes that the two aren't so different from one another- he, too, rebelled against his own dad by moving to the UK as an older teenager who also thought he knew it all.
Yes, the film traffics in heartwarming sentiment and general cheesiness at times, but Javed's overwhelming love of Springsteen is infectious, so much so that it actually made me reassess my feelings about Springsteen my own damn self. For instance, I knew he wrote Patti Smith/10,000 Maniacs' "Because the Night" but I had never heard his version. I'd also never heard his version of the titular tune, which has been confounding listeners since the 70's- nice to finally figure out what the hell Manfred Mann was going on about all these years- hint: it wasn't "douches," lol. 😜
I don't know that I'll be seeking out his stuff necessarily, but it might be time to at least purchase a decent "Greatest Hits" collection at the very least. Either way, I loved this film, and was happy to see that Javed- or, at least, his real-life counterpart- was finally able to see his musical hero- over 150 times, no less! (I don't know that I would want to see anyone live over 150 times, even if I could go back in time and see some of the greats.) And he has the pictures to prove that not only did he meet Springsteen IRL (as seen above), but so did his parents. And obviously Springsteen had to sign off on this movie using his songs, so good on him for that, too.
All in all, an enjoyable movie, and one that, like me, you might learn something from, given my overall lack of knowledge about Pakistanis and their treatment in England, which was just awful. The more things change, the more they stay the same, unfortunately. But it's always good to see things from the other side, and maybe someone will see this and rethink their own stance on someone they hate for no good reason. One can only hope.
Anyway, regardless, even if you're not a Springsteen fan, you should check this one out. It's a neat little sleeper that deserves to find a wider audience, with a relatable story and loveable characters you'll care for if you aren't totally heartless.
Until next time, thanks for reading! 😀
