Review – Page 10 – L&D Report

Once Upon a Time… in Hollywood (D)

brad-pitt-flaunts-abs-ftr

Once Upon a Time… in Hollywood is not quite the Tarantino movie I was expecting, possibly because I didn’t know what to expect. I will start by saying that I was relieved to see L posted his review because, frankly, I wasn’t quite sure where to start with this one. It’s not that the movie doesn’t give you a lot to think about, it does, it’s just that there are so many things going on and so many things that don’t quite fit together that I found it difficult to conceptualize a coherent review. In that spirit, I will just add some additional thoughts to what L has put out there already.

First off, I liked the movie a lot more than he did, though I admit that I shared his doubts that there was an end it sight. There are indeed a lot of close ups of people’s legs as they walk from here to there (and from there back to here again). I really liked the portrayal of late-60s Hollywood and the surrounding environs, and am somewhat surprised that L wasn’t more sympathetic to just taking it all in. Maybe because we didn’t get out of the theater until almost 2 a.m.?

Continue reading “Once Upon a Time… in Hollywood (D)”

Once Upon a Time In Hollywood (L)

I could really get into it and write a review for next two hours and forty five minutes but I have already scarificed enough of my time for this movie. If I did the review in the style of this movie, it would go something like this: ……………………………………….I got up early ……………………………………….I decided to get a muffin and a chai latte ……………………………………….I was early so I had to sit at the coffee drive thru, waiting for them to open ……………………………………….I sat with the car on and a cool song blasting ……………………………………….The coffee guy shows up. I turn off my car. The song cuts out abruptly. I say, “I got up early.” Coffee guy says, “I did too.”

And that’s basically it. D nailed it on the drive afterwards, where at lot of our shared post-movie analysis takes place. And this is how he described it, “self-indulgent”. Now, yes, I could spend the rest of my life trying to perfect directing a scene where someone with a flamethrower gruesomely chars another person to death in a swimming pool, but luckily I have been spared that fate.

At one point I was thinking to myself. “This movie will never end.” And then it ended about two minutes later.

Another D note, it’s really two films in one. Neither is really compelling and nothing interesting to speak of happens unless you think a shirtless Brad Pitt on a rooftop is interesting. Which, I’m sure that will be true for a lot of people but it’s not a circus side show, it’s Quentin Tarantino’s 9th feature or at least that’s what the poster claims.

I tried having low expectations, I really did. But I just couldn’t and now the disappointment has arrived. Al Pacino is in this film. He is totally wasted. There is a part of the story where the DiCaprio character, a fading 50s star now doing bit parts in 60s episodic TV, goes to Rome to star in Spaghetti Westerns. But you never see any of that. Another missed opportunity. There is plenty of meandering, driving on empty freeways and smoking by holding the pack up to your mouth and plucking a cig out. Plenty of that. DiCaprio cries a lot. So what, I was crying too, on the inside.

Another great D note. (This entire review is basically me, transcribing his thoughts)…Tarantino knows how to create tension. And he really does. The scene where Pitt goes to Manson’s cult compound is truly ominous and well done. The scene where Pitt’s character, a stuntman, fights Mike Moh’s Bruce Lee works. The scene where the DiCaprio character is schooled by a child actress is effective. But are these scenes enough to save this Gone with the Wind run time movie? If you saw Us and are looking for an interesting period piece about people who break into homes in order to kill them, don’t watch this movie, just watch Us again. Us is really a brilliant film that has a lot to say. Once Upon a Time In Hollywood is a well-crafted whole lot of nothing to see here unless you like watching people look at themselves in the mirror.

If the young Tarantino found this new Tarantino he would slap him…or shoot him, cut off his finger, stuff a red ball in his mouth…you understand what I mean.

Ramen Shop

ramen shop.jpg

Ramen Shop is a heartwarming story about two cultures and one family with a troubled history and a need to heal. I love the opening wide shot of a field where you see children walking along in the distance, birds flying and a quintessential Japanese train cutting through the frame. Beautiful, introspective and playful compositions like this tell this family drama. It’s easy to get wrapped up in this film as it revolves around the extended and multidimensional meanings of food — really delicious food. And although it’s told in a straightforward visual style, story structure-wise it intertwines in a way that keeps the narrative interesting. It’s a Singaporean film but like the food, it’s really all about the meshing of one culture, like a helix, with another.

In a time of increasing nationalist sentiment around the world, it’s important to have stories like these. Not simplistic tales about how everyone should happily embrace a former enemy but a real look at history, the roots of mistrust and how we can gain confidence and learn from one another again. I really don’t want to say more since I do hope you watch it and I’d rather not drop any spoilers here. There is not a lot of over the top emotion in Ramen Shop but when climactic drama does happen it is powerful with a denouement that will leave you reaching for a box of tissues or Pocky’s.

So if you love food, especially asian food in general and Japanese and Singaporean cuisine in particular. Or if you are a fan of films like Citizen Kane or Tokyo Story with a lot of fixed camera shots, deep focus and well crafted mise-en-scene. Or if you are in the mood for a sentimental story that is still grounded in history and has a lot of heart, I highly recommend Ramen Shop to you. My neighbors actually brought me the copy I watched and asked me to return it to the library when I was done.

Make sure you have a restaurant reservation right after or eat before you watch this movie —or at least have some popcorn beside you because you won’t make it.

The Lion King

the_lion_king_remake_simba_paw_via_disney_youtube_2019

I took a group to see the new “live action” Disney’s The Lion King, joining a packed house for one of the Thursday opening presentations. I didn’t quite know what to expect, as I have somehow managed not to have seen the animated Disney’s The Lion King or Broadway’s The Lion King, or any other incarnations, sequels, or prequels of the clearly beloved story.

From what I gather, the big innovation here is that instead of animation we are treated to computer-generated “real” versions of the talking animals. To my novice eye this was all quite technically spectacular and those of you into technical spectacularity will undoubtedly enjoy this. But I’m not sure that if your goal is to anthropomorphize a setting and story that adding hyper-realism to the mix is the route to go.

But I will bypass that line of inquiry and say that I didn’t find this particularly compelling or inspirational, and instead found large swaths of the movie to have brooding overtones and the climax to be borderline apocalyptic. The little kid who followed me out of the theater told his mother that he didn’t like it and that it was “too scary.” She started to reassure him and I interjected, saying “Look, when you see a lion falling off a cliff to its certain death and vicious paw-to-paw combat, a little kid is naturally going to be scared…. And did you see that little lion almost get trampled by a herd of wildebeests and then get chased by a pack of hyper-realistic hyenas who were trying to kill him? How do you think that makes your little guy here feel?”

Well, perhaps I didn’t say that, but it wouldn’t have been out of order. The movie does an excellent job portraying the vulnerability and near helplessness of our young vis-à-vis the evils that men do. And I will say that the movie does a much better job motivating how the pride got into its various messes than it does convincing us how they could conceivably get out of them. Yada yada yada, indeed.

So if you are a CGI junkie or just can’t get enough Lion King or you are looking for a cool place to scare the bejeezus out of your small children, head on over and check it out. Unfortunately, a big would-be blockbuster premiere like this generally preempts release of other movies, so the movie selection otherwise isn’t terribly great.

L&D will return with Tarantino at Thursday evening’s opening. See you all there.

Crawl

805593_022

You know it’s the soft-spot of the summer when the king of squirm himself texts to suggest that we head off to see a scary movie. Such was the case this past bargain Tuesday, with L&D finding ourselves in the upper-deck of a packed house for the late showing of Crawl, this summer’s addition to the creepy action fare genre.

And it’s not too bad!

The movie takes us to Florida, two hours from Gainsville by car, we’re told, where a hurricane is depositing enough water to flood the place out. Without giving too much away, let’s just say there are some biggun gators on the loose. Who knew? How they terrorize a college student and her hapless father (among others) is the subject of the movie.

The filmmakers definitely did a lot with a little here. I liked the student (Kaya Scodelario) a lot better than I liked the dad (Barry Pepper), though clearly both have some acting chops. The script was pretty tight and self-contained, somewhat logical as far as it goes, not as annoying as it might have been, and plenty creepy. It definitely taxed the limits of the L&D Jump-o-Meter that we bring along for such occasions, though it didn’t seem to phase the younger generation seated amongst us.

I think the kids enjoyed it though. If I recall correctly, we even shared some laughs. I particularly liked the ever-so-brief billboard advertising a giant alligator zoo, barely noticeable if you aren’t looking for it, as the main character drove through the storm. Solid all around.

If you are up for some creepy crawlies, check out Crawl. But I think I will pass on the invitation to join you. Once is enough for me, thank you very much.

Stuber

40595281323_2a15019a5c_b — *Is that you, Iko?*

Regular L&D readers are probably aware that we do not coordinate who, if anyone, is going to write and post the next review. Typically, we write about things that we are moved to write about, either because there was something we liked, something that made us think, or something particularly irritating about what we just saw. More often than not, it’s all three. One of us usually feels compelled to write something down, and sometimes we both do. On the other hand, for a number of movies neither of us has the time or the inclination to get something together, so it just hangs out there without comment.

That preamble perhaps provides a glimpse into the delayed response in producing a review for our next feature, Stuber, which we saw on opening night almost a full week ago. As we headed past the Taco Bell, we were vaguely aware that the reviews were tepid. But we both think Kamail Nanjiani is pretty funny and we both thought he was pretty much the funniest part of the decidedly disappointing MiB offering, so we held out hope that this wouldn’t be a complete disaster.

And I think our low expectations were rewarded. Without laboring over the plot details (see above), we laughed out loud a few times and found a lot of things to like — for instance, the tremendous scene involving a rogue propane tank tops my list of comic violence. So I think the movie sort of worked for me and I think at this point it’s fair to say that Nanjiani can carry his weight in a comedy. As an action movie or a drama, well, let’s just say it works pretty well as a comedy.

Continue reading “Stuber”

Spiderman: Far From Home

Spider-Man-Far-From-Home-TV-spot

We ventured out for a special holiday week Tuesday opening of Spiderman: Far From Home, playing to a pretty crowded house for the late show. This is the first major Marvel Comics Universe (MCU) release since Avengers: Endgame, and this fits squarely into the universe with constant reminders to what has come before. I’m not saying that’s a good thing.

The movie retains a healthy reliance on Peter Parker’s high school experience, and the writers continue to seem to know their way around the teenager mentality. After the obligatory opening action scene, we move into a pretty expansive exploration of the class trip to Europe with Peter, MJ, and Flash, along with major roles for Brad and Betty this time around. Tom Holland and Zendaya and the supporting cast continue to impress in these roles.

Even so, this particular incarnation of the Spiderman arc is decidedly different than anything I’ve seen before. Peter is no longer the poor kid, as evidently he has the resources to get on a plane and jump the pond. Tony Stark (still Robert Downey, Jr.) seems to have stepped in for his Uncle Ben as the father figure, and now Aunt May (Marisa Tomei) actually knows Peter’s secret identity, too (!).

Because this is the MCU thing, we also get a very healthy dose of Samuel L. Jackson as Nick Fury, which is generally a good thing, but it is also instructive as to the gets at this Spidey as the heir apparent to Iron Man as the leader of the Avengers. Jake Gyllenhaal also shows up as the somewhat “mysterious” Quentin Beck, and he plays a rather pronounced role as the would-be hero. So the movie has more than its fair share of star power.

The verdict: If you like Spiderman or you generally like the MCU (or both), you will likely enjoy what this has to offer. I’m guessing that’s enough folks to make this one the smash hit that it’s become. My kids both saw it on Tuesday and my son was especially excited about the “big twist.” It’s playing in Peoria.

As for me, I mostly enjoyed it, but thought that it was a decided step down from 2017’s excellent Homecoming. And it would certainly not crack the top three if L&D were ever to get around to publishing our Best Spiderman Movie Rankings (available upon request). Word has it that L might unleash a surprise Into the Spiderverse review on us.

Yesterday

D was mentioning to me that Yesterday had a Metacritic score of 54. That sounds bad. Is Metacrtic based on a scale of 100? Let me see. … … … Okay Wikipedia says that in Metacritic if you give something an A it equals 100 and a B- is 67. Oh brother, really? The point is that 54 doesn’t come anywhere near this movie. I’m left to ask, what’s wrong with people? What do they expect and what more can they ask for? If you don’t like The Beatles, or think your brain will explode if you have to hear even one more Beatles song or hear even one more person say they are their favorite band, I can understand that. Even though it’s indisputable about The Beatles being the greatest band of all time, you certainly are entitled to poor taste and your overall contrariness — though you should get that checked out. So okay, if that is you then this film isn’t for you. There won’t be nearly enough point blank range brain spatter, sideboob or underbutt to keep you happy. Hey, I don’t understand you but Yesterday is art and the value of art is certainly still in the eye of the beholder.

Now that that is out of the way, there is another issue I have. If you think the theme of the film is something like, “Imagine a world where The Beatles never existed”, you’d be off. Maybe not way off, but importantly off. The theme is, “What happens when bringing joy to all means devastation to you.” Okay, fine, there is probably a better theme out there but the point is there are many alternate themes. There are a lot of ways you could think about this film and a lot of ways it could affect you. Or maybe you just go for the music and to laugh and have fun?

But do think about this. What if it was up to you to bring The Beatles to the masses? Could you think of all the lyrics to Eleanor Rigby even if you proclaim The Beatles as the greatest or your favorite band? Try it. I don’t think I can get past the first two lines. How about if it was up to you to bring Van Gogh to the masses? Could you paint The Starry Night? It would be tricky and your friends would wonder why you were up all night these days, looking like a maniac, trying to paint these odd landscapes. And though I have many favorite scenes in this film, I really love the scene where Jack, played effortlessly Himesh Patel, is standing alone in the rain, facing the precipice of the choice before him. He looks at his reflection in a storefront window and asks himself, Can you do this?

This is a moment we all face all the time. Can we do this? Can we challenge ourselves. Fill the canvas, the page, the 1s and 0s, the sensors, transform the wild flowers. Take a chance.

After writing this blog for two years now, it’s come clear to me that a great film must: 1. Have a heart. 2. Be thought provoking. — And I don’t mean thought provoking like, “If the concierge at the hotel in John Wick 3 isn’t a fighter how the hell can he survive all those armed storm trooper dudes shooting automatic weapons at him? …Oh because he played a cop in The Wire.” No, not thought provoking like that. Thought provoking like, What is beauty? What is talent? How do you express love? What does a Faustian bargain really mean? If you are not eating all those sandwiches can I have one? This film raises a multitude of questions about the paths we take, about destiny, about art. If Matacritic is still at 54 will it still need me when it’s 64?

Is Yesterday a perfect film? No, but the day I see a perfect film I will stop watching films because the robots or aliens will have taken over. It is however an utterly human film. We heard a few folks clapping during the credits. I can’t remember the last time I heard that. Also, this movie made me happy about life. Like last years’ amazing doc Free Solo, about Alex Honnold, who climbed El Capitan in Yosemite without ropes, Yesterday gave back. I think of it less like a movie and more like a gift. So my advice is to go and enjoy it unless you are knee-deep in a game of Fortnite, passed out with a needle in your arm or copying and pasting bogus Metacritic reviews. Then, you know, carry on, keep calm and keep a stiff upper lip.

Anna

Luc Besson’s Anna stars supermodel actress Sasha Luss as the achingly — in the sense that she produces a lot of physical pain for anyone she who gets on her wrong side — beautiful killer in the titular role. The part is somewhat reminiscent of Charlize Theron’s in the take no prisoners action film Atomic Blonde which recieved a double review from L & D. I was interested in watching Anna knowing it was the work of auteur Writer/Director Luc Besson. He is known for one of my favorite films, Leon: The Professional, which was Natalie Portman’s first film and had a great performance by Jean Reno. You also know his work with The Fifth Element and another one of my favorites, Lucy, starring Scarlett Johansson. Lucy is another style first, kick-ass woman in a take no prisoners role. Besson knows how to visually translate style and action from his screenplays.

I’m a fan of unmotivated elements of style in the films I make and watch. Why did the camera move that way? Well, it just felt right. Or, where did that pink light come from? Well, that pink light came from exactly where you think the music in this film came from. It’s not like there is a musician actively scoring your life. Yet music that isn’t actually in the physical reality of a scene (aka non-diegetic sound) is given a free pass in our movie viewing. It’s a little tougher to get away with unmotivated, unnaturalistic elements in terms of lighting, camera movement and editing but it’s something that I appreciate and an audience will get behind or “suspend their disbelief” if it is done well. And to answer the question, the music and lighting all come from the same place, the imagination of the Director.

Interestingly, most Directors work in obscurity. For example, can you tell me who directed Saturday Night Fever, War Games and Blue Thunder? The answer is John Badham. You’d think that this would be common instead of trivial knowledge. To be known as a Director, it helps to have a distinct style, whether you work within a movement or blaze your own trail. And even then to say something is _________ esque means that you weren’t taken seriously at some point. But also that you stuck to what you thought was the most honest version of storytelling for you — your distinct style. Sometimes films that are made by particular directors don’t have their stamp. Perhaps it was a studio film where they didn’t have control. But in this case Anna is one hundred percent Bessonesque from the John Wick meets Hardcore Henry throwdown in the restaurant to the really beautiful plan sequence (aka oner) in the bedroom closet, which reminded me of the confessional scene in Coppola’s masterpiece, The Conversation. If you have never seen The Conversation on DVD with the audio commentary by sound editor/ designer Walter Murch on, do yourself a cinematic favor and check it out. There are other nods to The Conversaton in Anna as well.

Anna contains a lot of the scenes and elements which we have come to expect from the recent heroine driven international spy genre: the car chase in little European streets, the lesbian love affair, the plain ol’ just ass-kicking of entitled / douchey / know it all men — and it’s all pretty satisfying stuff. It is also executed with a ton of silky yet heart pumping style. I’m already looking forward to Besson’s next offering.

Men In Black: International

Men in Black: International is chock-full of star power: Tessa Thompson, Chris Hemsworth, Liam Neeson, Emma Thompson, and a special guest appearance of Kumail Nanjiani. It is also chock-full of special effects and weird aliens and the like. What it is not chock-full of is a decent story, suspense, a good villain, or consistent laughs. It is mostly harmless summer fun, like a snow cone. Or diet lemonade.

L&D were split on this one, with L seeming to enjoy himself, while D was mostly bored and annoyed. Nanjiani is certainly mostly solid and often very funny, and is what I would rate as the best part of the movie had it not been for Chris Hemsworth strutting around in pink chinos.

But, ultimately, we have a dull movie.

I will chalk this up to (at least) two major shortcomings. First, there is no straight man. MiB worked so spectacularly because Tommy Lee Jones and the staid MiB organization served as a foil to Will Smith’s overall freshness. Ironically, the film took some pains to make Tessa Thompson into the straight man, even though the entire ad campaign around the movie suggested otherwise. What a mess. I walked out of International recanting some of the funnier MiB scenes to L that I still remember all these years later; a day out, I’m not sure I remember what was funny about this recent offering.

Second, who is the villain here, anyway? There are a number of candidates, one becomes obvious, the audience isn’t surprised and doesn’t care. It concludes with some Drama-Free Action.

At one point, I was really reminded of the soft spots in the Star Wars movies — lots of aliens and crazy background serving as stand-ins for interesting characters and a compelling plot. Given the amount of money thrown at this movie, the payoff is abysmal.

We should have seen this coming. We did see this coming. The Taco Bell is closed until further notice.

Taco Bell locations were mentioned several times by readers as having long waits in the drive-thrus at various times, and their inside dining rooms were occasionally closed while the drive-thrus were open.

A call to Pacific Bells, the Taco Bell franchise owner in this area, was not returned.

A check on the Taco Bell on Appleton’s east side, which was identified by readers as having sporadic issues, showed it was currently open and staffed. But it had reduced hours, now closing at 8 p.m. instead of the advertised 2 a.m.

TBI don’t lie.