Joker (2019) | Spoiler-Free

Note: A special thanks to the people in my Entrepreneurship in Arts & Music class for prompting this site redesign and actual brand building. Hopefully, more to come.

Update: Yep! Over a year later, a lot more.

2019’s Joker has a firm grip on the character, and slowly releases him from our fascination, which has been constant since at least 2008. At least, that’s my hope.

I had a lot of mixed emotions seeing this movie. First, I was paranoid of something like Auora Colorado happening here, but that started to go away after the first half-hour. After that it was a lot of conflicting feelings of how you’re supposed to feel about Phoenix’s Arthur Fleck, and then I arrived at a conclusion I could live with. I hate the Joker. Saying that out loud felt really weird for a guy with a Dark Knight poster in his room, who used to recite those scar stories. One of the reasons may be that we're going from a version of the character that cares about nothing, to one that at the end cares only about himself. Regardless of how that selfishness comes about, it's what makes the character's actions more disgusting. I'm glad WB and DC gave director Todd Philips permission to finally make that happen.

Joaquin Phoenix is a lock for at least an Oscar Nomination. He didn’t only transform himself, he made it effortless as well. It’s hard to imagine that this is the same man who left his own stamp on Johnny Cash's music. The small problem with that is just as Heath Ledger overshadowed Aaron Eckhart’s Harvey Dent eleven years ago, Phoenix may have done the same for Frances Conroy, who plays his mother Penny Fleck. The same can be said for some of his other co-stars, but that's more because of lack of screentime. The main character is fully developed, and everyone else is largely sidelined.

This moment happens like a sudden shock back to reality toward the end of the movie, and it allowed me to breathe a heavy sigh of relieve.

Now, as for the actual filmmaking, Todd Phillips has completely crossed over and aged gracefully since finishing The Hangover Trilogy. (Keep in mind I still have to see War Dogs.) He wants to make a mature film, and for the most part he succeeds. Arthur’s transformation is handled with extreme care, and the movie itself just looks fantastic. Phillips and Director of Photography, Lawrence Sher, create a style and Gotham all their own in New York. The city is still disgusting, but filtered through Arthur, its potential to be its best or worst is in focus.

The only problem with Gotham is how Phillips sees some of its citizens. He believes some people who say “Eat the Rich” mean it, and it’s troubling that he’s bringing it up during this very heated time politically. Basically his wires are crossed when it comes to the hot-button issues plaguing the far-left and the actions of the far-right.

What I hope doesn’t is this potential newfound revulsion of a character that we don’t really need to give the spotlight right now. Give this movie the attention it deserves, then turn to something a little brighter. Hopefully WB and DC actually decide to bury the character for a few years, and when they want that "Joker money," they can just use Harley Quinn. 

I’d like to hear your thoughts on it. Don't just comment about this one, please write your own reviews or even put up your own analysis on YouTube. I may not want Joker to be something we revisit every year, but it does need to be explored as fully as possible.

Finally, I didn’t really get a chance to talk about the whole Incel thing. If you’d like know about that, I recommend checking out a video on YouTube by Contrapoints on what incels are, and another by La'Ron Readus about how that may or may not be related to this movie.

Read More

Booksmart (2019)

Update: I made my own tv spot for this movie, based on the Teenage Dirtbag idea mentioned at the bottom of the review. The spot is here, and 'making of' details about it are here. Enjoy!

After a somewhat disappointing run, overshadowed by blockbusters, Booksmart was re-released in major theaters. Jumping at the opportunity to see it a second time did not disappoint in the slightest, but figuring out what to say about it hasn't gotten any easier. It's a fantastic high school comedy, and directorial debut, from Olivia Wilde. It's most comparable to Superbad, but with two elements that set it apart: well-developed side characters and it looks like an arthouse film. So, how exactly does that raise the bar?

Booksmart is about two overachieving students, Molly (Beanie Feldstein) and Amy (Kaitlyn Dever), who decide to cut loose for the first time and go to one of their friends' grad party. The one problem, they don't have the host's number or address. So, a night "we'll never remember with friends we'll never forget" is exactly what they get.

One scene in Superbad that people may be unexpectedly reminded of is when some jerk named Jesse tells Seth and Evan they're not invited to his grad party, spits on Seth, calls Evan a f****t, and...that's it. He comes back at the end for a comeuppance, but he's so forgettable it's not worth it, and Seth and Evan being outsiders is clear enough through other scenes. There's a lot of stock characters like that in Superbad, not nearly as bad, but just there for one-off, padding moments.

Booksmart, on the other hand, fully utilized its cast and every character feels authentic. Put-downs aren't without just cause, and they're not all that mean-spirited. Booksmart just uses them to get things started. It's a slow intro, that could've been cut down a little, to the real insanity. Once it's set up, the comedy really comes out, and it's from seeing characters, not just the actors giving them life, having a great time. Overall, what I think I may (also) be getting at is it's the more optimistic movie. This chapter was fantastic, you're open to turn back to it whenever you want, but the next one will be even better.

Now, about that arthouse style...it's beautiful. Olivia Wilde and her crew pull out all the stops to make the environment feel immersive. A lot of (I think) natural lighting in cozy locations. This is heightened by some key closeups. This also includes an extensive playlist that includes music from Alanis Morissette and Perfume Genius, and a score from Dan The Automator. It's not as memorable as the soundtracks for Guardians of the Galaxy or Baby Driver, but it's not trying to be that. Instead, the album carries Amy and Molly through their rollercoaster night. Every up and down punctuated with just the right note. That goes for how sound it edited as well.

The animated sequence was by ShadowMachine. A glimpse was in the trailers, and it definitely raised interest in the movie | Copyright 2019 Annapurna

Booksmart is the latest in a long line of recent bold debut titles, like Get Out and Sorry to Bother You, and that alone should be creating a lot more buzz. It's a tough movie to sell because it's "another high school comedy," but it's a step above other high school movies, and the jokes are laugh-out-loud hilarious and shouldn't be given away. What's left is just trust in Wilde and Annapurna Pictures. The studio's been behind some heavy hitters, and this is one of them. 

One more thing, before or after seeing it, I recommend listening to this cover of Teenage Dirtbag. They match up together pretty well.

Another Update: A couple years later, I made a little something for Wilde's second movie, Don't Worry Darling, starting from a Reddit Photoshop Battle.

  

The second one is an update, but I like both

Read More

Men In Black: International (2019)

The last time Chris Hemsworth was in a Sony reboot (Ghostbusters), the studio was too hands-on and micromanaged the project to death. This time, it seems the producers were too hands-off and contributed very little but their names and capital. It's a shame too because what little Men In Black: International has could be the start of a fun reboot. Instead, the movie is completely aimless and only somewhat saved by the cast and location-hopping.

Men In Black: International claims to be an F. Gary Gray film about Agent H (Hemsworth) and new recruit Agent M (Tessa Thompson) hunting a mole in the organization, but it's really a movie led by screenwriters Art Marcum and Matt Holloway, and they wrote something as barebones as it gets.

MIB: International's main plot of finding a mole and saving the world doesn't really kick off until about thirty minutes into the movie. Between M's quick recruitment and then, it's a mess of establishing which extraterrestrials are a threat and why. What's going on is shrouded in mystery, so that it can be paid off later with globetrotting, jokes, and character building.

Some of it works well. Hemsworth and Thompson, naturally, work exceptionally well together. It's a nice twist to have the straight-laced new recruit and a veteran party boy working together. Hemsworth's antics do enough to distance himself from Thor. His overconfidence is much more misplaced, as he survives by luck and a general sense of just squeaking by. The best example of this is probably how he's able to make himself right at home in a nightclub. Thor could drink and dance the night away too but not quite as smoothly as Agent H. Thompson has had much better, more rewarding roles in Dear White People, Sorry to Bother You, and the Creed, but it's great to see her with another role under her belt. M will make a fine agent, if she's allowed to be revisited in the future. Liam Neeson's High T may not be a match for Rip Torn's Zed, but he's not trying to be, and that is one of the most redeeming factors of the movie.

The best thing about MIB: International being underwritten is the nostalgic moments aren't overused, unlike in the reboot of Ghostbusters. The references occasionally pop up throughout, but they're really brought in to showcase how the tech of the organization, and the filmmakers' CGI, have improved over the last seven years. It also lends itself to new jokes. Unfortunately, most of these jokes don't land, another casualty of Marcum and Holloway's work. At least these guys and F Gary Gray know how to pick their locations.

Losing the safety net of easy New York City jokes that were in the other movies ends up being another win for the movie. Paris, Marrakesh, and a couple other choice locations are breaths of excitement in a movie that may have people trying to treat their theatre seat as a nice mattress or couch.

If nothing else, Marrakesh is an interesting location to explore | Copyright 2019 Sony

For anyone who does manage to be on the edge of their seat watching this, that's awesome. There are great characters and great action, it's all just way too few and far between in a nearly two-hour movie.

Update: So the day after writing this, two articles came out about how the production was troubled. So, I may be at least a little wrong about putting so much of the blame on Marcum and Holloway. If my criticism really is misplaced, I offer them my apologies. Hopefully, more info is released because it does make things more compelling.

Read More

Avengers: Endgame (2019) | Short Review

Well, I've seen this movie three times in theatres, which might be a record, so I should probably say something about it. The scariest part about the high expectations for Endgame isn't the first viewing I got in Thursday evening because of fear of spoilers, it was the second and third. How re-watchable is a spectacle that's biggest draw is the surprises? Strip away the callbacks to what came before, and what's left? Thank Christ, tons. Both good and bad.

Avengers: Endgame follows the remaining Avengers as they retaliate against Thanos in the hopes of bringing back the people they lost in Infinity War. Besides wanting to avoid spoilers, this movie has too much ground to cover, so I'm going to talk about a couple that stuck out.

First, there's Thanos (Josh Brolin). With his goals accomplished and his ego a little bit boosted, he becomes a little less relatable in Endgame, and that's a damn shame. He does not become a one-note villain or horribly written, but a new level of cruelty is revealed as he works to maintain the universe he's "saved." As justified as his actions become, his ranking as this century's Darth Vader takes a small hit. Still, Josh Brolin (and the vfx artists at Weta Digital and Digital Domain) gives a perfect performance as the Mad Titan. Between the three, every expression is genuine when it was shot with motion capture, and real when shown on screen. He may not be the best supervillain we've ever had (if you count the shows and outside the MCU), but he's the best larger than life one.

Second, there's the camera work and editing. There's a long take with Hawkeye (Jeremy Renner) chasing and taking down some thugs (yes, this movie still has some garden-variety crime and is all the better for it). The camera's focus and slow movement is representative of the whole movie. Everything is captured in a way that allows it to sink in, which is necessary when so much is being juggled at once. Marvel movies get some heat because, apart from Thor: Ragnarok and Guardians of the Galaxy 1 and 2, they look a little bland and flat on the screen. That is a serious problem, but at least the Russos don't try to trick people into thinking they're flashy by using nauseating editing, unlike early DCEU movies. Luckily, the DCEU's gotten better at both.

Finally, it's just a blast, if you know and love these characters. Endgame is honestly a tough sell if you're new to everything (but that hasn't stopped parents from taking their kids into the theatre). Infinity War (or YouTube recaps) can bring people up to speed, but then enjoyment is solely on the actors' shoulders. All that can be promised is that they're giving it their all, and hopefully it resonates.

For some, myself included, this movie will never fail to make them cry | Copyright 2019 Disney

Read More

Us (2019)

Jordan Peele is creating a new Twilight Zone this year. Pieces of Us feel like they're the perfect pilot for a society-driven anthology series from him. In Us, a family is greeted by their doppelgängers and must survive their mysterious appearance and invasion of their summer beach house. 

There are two things about Us that stand out above everything else. First, is the cast and their characters, and second is every little thought and implication this movie teases. The interpretations, reinterpretations, and misinterpretations will stand the test of time, well after this movie (hopefully) rewards Peele with another Oscar win.

Us is the best ensemble horror film in recent memory. Everyone plays well with each other because it's a family-horror movie that feels authentic. Protection, not survival, is what's emphasized in Us, and the impact of that echoes through the movie. Protection means sticking together, and later exchanging fun stories about the insanity with the people being protected. It's like if The Incredibles was a horror movie, and Violet said "I have the highest kill count in the family." In this case, the daughter, Zora (Shahadi Wright Joseph), said that. Her, and her brother Jason (Evan Alex), are some of the best kids in horror, during a season that's been pretty good to kids in horror, with movies like A Quiet Place. They're not helpless, they're just scared.

It might help that their parents are played by actors with superhero experience. Adelaide and Gabe are portrayed by Black Panther's Lupita Nyong’o and Winston Duke. They work exceptionally well with each other, but also apart from each other, when it's themself vs doppelgänger, which opens up that anthology feel parts of Us has. Duke handles dad jokes like a pro, and it allows the movie to breathe and set a good pace. Nyong’o, meanwhile, handles more of the emotional impact the invasion brings with it. She is the ultimate mother bear, and she's pulling one of the toughest dual-jobs, as the movie's head doppelgänger.

The Doppelgängers feel like repression of dreams plus a loss of free will. Hints are dropped that people with doppelgängers have had pursuits abandoned for one reason or another, and no one was able to help them through that. Even worse, some just started feeling free will wasn't available, and no roadmap for later in life. When asked who they are, Red (Nyong’o's dual role) says "we're Americans." We're Americans, and the dream is a lie, but you seem to have it pretty well, don't you? Why don't we give it a shot? And a compelling case is made in support of that throughout the movie. Peele may just be trying to get all the ideas in his head out, but when it doesn't break the story, the more ideas out there, the better the movie is. Give people as much to work with as possible, especially in a genre can just coast on gore and jump scares. He does that and more.

Instead of gore, we get some really fun action. Weapons go flying across the screen, as characters fight each other. It's incredibly well-executed thanks to how grounded it all looks and how long shots are held. And when it's not that grounded, or cuts a lot, it's creative instead and pushes fight choreography to have new meaning.

Us also offers Kubrick and Hitchcock moments for the film buffs, some cultish, choir music from Michael Abels, for the film score buffs, and a lightly active camera, thanks to Mike Gioulakis, to breeze the audience through this new twist on what only starts out as a classic home invasion story.

Read More

Fantastic Beasts: The Crimes of Grindelwald (2018)

Update: Please do not buy this movie, or other H.P merchandise, new and financially support J.K Rowling because of her anti-trans beliefs. As for Johnny Depp, reports are conflicting, from what I hear. Do your own research and what you feel is right. 

Note: Fiftieth post, and thank you to the friend who drove me 80 minutes (round-trip) to the theatre for this one!

The Crimes of Grindelwald is a magical mess that could only come from the creative cluster-bombed brain of post-Potter-published J.K Rowling. Apologies for the alliteration, it comes with the series.

The Crimes of Grindelwald, first and foremost is a reverse of the first Fantastic Beasts movie. People are the main plot points, and the animals are just along for the ride, and it's a non-traditional wild ride. The Crimes of Gindelwald, short and sweet, is about finding Credence (Ezra Miller), a wizard with almost no control over his powers, before Grindelwald (Johnny Depp) recruits him. But, along the way, a ton of stuff happens because Rowling writes her films in the same lengthy manner she writes her books.

First, we should get Depp out of the way. Personally, he's become incredibly problematic, allegedly abusive (if allegations were proven please correct me), and a shell of who he was. Professionally, he seems to have gotten his act together, and that can't be ignored either. Rowling and Depp together have pulled off something incredible, by creating a timeless take on current, and past, American politics. Depp hasn't had this kind of charisma in years onscreen, but it's easy to hang off his every word, before being reminded that "The beast of burden will always be necessary," when referring to muggles (or anyone considered "other") is the word of a monster. George Lucas was able to do something similar in the Star Wars prequels that demonstrated how political power can be consolidated and abused under one person. That was more through chaos than fear. Rowling leans on fear, racism, and misplaced hope (not Star Wars hope) to make this story hers. Unfortunately, it's just a small piece of the story.

The Crimes of Grindelwald spends most of its time introducing, or re-introducing, characters at an alarming rate. In the Wizarding World, that means they each have fully fleshed out backstories just waiting to be explored. Instead of reserving these backstories for the website Pottermore, Rowling and director David Yates explore them onscreen. Not only that, but a lot of time is spent just jumping from setup encounter to setup encounter, such as members of several Ministries of Magic who are hunting Credence. They don't really catch up to him until the end, and that's when they could've been revealed. They're quick to introduce to new audiences.

As for the characters we know and love...they're still lovely but Tina (Katherine Waterston) and Newt (Eddie Redmayne), and Queenie (Alison Sudol, who'd make a great Harley Quinn) and Jacob (Dan Fogler), are stuck with ridiculous strained relationship subplots. For what it's worth, the actors roll with them, and Rowling's strengths actually shine through. While the major story is a mess, her character work repairs a lot of that damage. The boys fixing out their relationship issues bring out the best moments of the movie, like when Jacob tells Newt that he shouldn't compare Tina's eyes to salamanders (this may work in some situations...give it a shot). The same can be said when the Fantastic Beasts are going in and out of the trunk.

The creature design looks better than ever, although the CGI is a little overused on them since the new batch of films. Animatronics and more practical methods should be considered, when possible. Some faces on the beasts just look a little cartoony. Regardless, Newt swimming with a Kelpie in a glassless tank/lake, and luring a "lion" with a fuzzy bauble at the end of his wand makes up for the look being not quite right.

The Crimes of Grindelwald is Rowling unchecked. One episode of the podcast Potterless, by Mike Schubert, is a great primer for the movie because he mentions how Rowling will go on for pages beautifully describing scenery, recapping past books, and digging in Harry's mind. It's fun to read but difficult to watch, since film is meant to condense those pages and make them pop in a different way. Moving forward, hopefully she and Yates, or she and some fresh blood, keep that in mind.

Note: Thanks again to the friend who drove me to the theatre, and if anyone wants more Harry Pottter in their life, please checkout Potterless by Mike Schubert, the story of a 25-year-old man reading the series for the first time. Each episode he discusses a few chapters with a special guest. It's fun, insightful, and I couldn't have written this without his help either. 

Read More

Spider-Man: Into the Spider-Verse (2018)

"Peter, these are the years when a man changes into the man he's gonna become the rest of his life. Just be careful who you change into." The Spider-Man film franchise began in 2002 and has hit the age of identity crisis. It's gone in three separate directions this year, with Avengers: Infinity War, Venom, and Spider-Man: Into the Spider-Verse, but that's how this empire should run. It's leagues better than when one Spider-Man movie tries to do it all, like when Spider-Man 3 and The Amazing Spider-Man 1 & 2, each attempted that.

Spider-Man: Into the Spider-Verse is directed by Bob Persichetti, Rise of the Guardian's Peter Ramsey (he's finally back), and Rodney Rothman, and written by Rotham and Phil Lord, and they set out to tell the tale "one last time," seven more times...sorta. When The Kingpin (Liev Schreiber) opens a wormhole that teleports other Spideys into Mile Morales' (Shameik Moore) dimension, he has to use his new powers to help send them home before the wormhole becomes unstable.

Telling Miles' story could backfire simply for being yet another Spider-Man origin onscreen, for being another superhero origin, so the filmmakers are smart to speed through the familiar cliff notes of getting his powers and giving him some villains to fight within the first ten minutes. A lasting moment from this intro is Miles exchanging "good mornings" and secret handshakes with a crowd of old classmates, on his way to a new prep school. Rotham and Lord knock Miles down a peg with the new school (and the inescapable woes of adolescence), but he's built up well as the more outgoing and adventurous Anti-Puny-Parker.

This is his story through and through, and the other Spider-People partnering up with Miles luckily reinforces that, mostly to the film's benefit. Into the Spider-Verse features a classic, but worn down, schlubbier, and (at last) adult version of Spider-Man/Peter Parker (Jake Johnson), Gwen Stacy, the Spider-Woman (Hailee Steinfeld), Spider Noir (Nicolas Cage), from the pulpy 1930s, Peni Parker and her spider-co-piloted robot (Kimiko Glenn), and, finally, Spider-Ham/Peter Porker (John Mulaney), who remarkably doesn't just predate The Simpsons Movie, but the show too. Except for Spider-Woman and Jake Johnson's version of Peter, most of visiting Spiders aren't explored too deeply. They're given more than one-liners, but it's really just a promise of what'll come in the sequels. The one-liners are fantastic though. Cage especially steals his scenes with a put-on New York accent, reference to egg-creams, and a passing mention of the "moral ambiguity of your violent actions." Billy Wilder would be proud.

Finally, the animation in Into the Spider-Verse is a long time in coming for the studio, for the genre, for film. There hasn't been a literal, visual adaptation of a comic in a while (except for Captain Underpants), but now the bar's been raised for other movies that want to try it. While it's not relying on a heavy outline style, probably because that would fill the screen too much, the modern visual storytelling in comics is on full display. 2D animation is utilized throughout the movie, and ranges from re-creating comic panels, to Peni's anime style, to the ludicrous antics of Spider-Ham. Text boxes, onomatopoeias, and speech bubbles also highlight how upside-down Miles's world is about to become, but he'll get used to being upside when getting the drop on villains, so it's all good.

Spider-Man: Into the Spider-Verse is a return to where the franchise began writing-wise, with the (typically forgotten) heart of the second generation of Spidey films. As (pile of garbage) Nostalgia Critic, Doug Walker, has mentioned, the Raimi Trilogy featured the same plot structure used in Into the Spider-Verse. The movie doesn't spread itself too thin with unnecessary characters, plot points, or an inflated runtime and budget. But that just means the movie is functional. They also salvaged the message of the Webb films and made it more important than ever. "Anyone can wear the mask. You can wear the mask." Try it on.

Read More

Sorry to Bother You (2018)

When does "It's all bullshit" turn into complacency and complicity? Boots Riley's debut doesn't offer an easy answer, but through the absurd, he reminds people what normal is and that what people do in their lives matters.

Cassius "Cash" Green (Lakeith Stanfield) finds the only job he can get, telemarketing for RegalView, but, naturally he starts with getting hung up on. That is until this black man develops his "white voice" (dubbed by David Cross), starts hitting that quota hard, and the ball starts rolling.

Riley starts off with a fast script that pushes Cash from the cubicle to the private office quickly, but it's a fun ride as calls literally drop Cash and his desk into the homes, and dinner times, of his customers. Riley makes the smart choice of keeping the two parties on the line disconnected. They're not looking at each other, but at their phones, and in Cash's case his call script, just trying to get what they need from each other. A little commerce never hurt anybody.

Except that it could. As Cash moves up and starts getting supervised by a Mr. [Bleep] (Omari Hardwick and white voice dubbed by Patton Oswalt), the means of production are peeled back and reality sets in. It puts Cash and the audience in an understandable position. How long and how hard are people willing to work in an exploitive industry, in an exploitive, unjust world?

Sorry to Bother You will age gracefully, if it ages at all, but it is very much a Post-Trump film that examines what's been accepted over the last two years. For all the fighting on the front-lines people are doing, others are crossing picket lines because being poor is worse than being harassed by rioters. Cash is able to maintain his connection with the audience because of Stanfield's performance and those around him, especially his girlfriend Detroit (Tessa Thompson). She's a fully fleshed out character, with lines she will cross and lines she won't, and she knows what it takes to stand up for something. She lights up the screen with a great look that reflects needed rebellion in times of modern, compromised-based, millennial hardship.

From the tv spots made after the movie initially came out. | Copyright 2018 Annapurna and Disney/Fox

The costumes in Sorry to Bother You are very distinct, with standout suits, performance art pieces worn by Detroit, an eyepatch, the works. With cinematographer Doug Emmett, Riley speaks volumes through what's just in-frame. He's shouting, but not screaming, the audience picks up what they're comfortable with. For instance, some will notice that sets may have a Get Out vibe. Hallways often feel claustrophobic and there's rarely room for characters to breathe in these places. And when there is room, it's because Cash is in the center of that room, with all eyes gazing, curious about his next move. Others will have something else in mind. Sit back, enjoy it, but please come away with something.

On Last Week Tonight With John Oliver, after the 2016 election, Oliver said "Keep reminding yourself this is not normal," knowing that not everyone would be directly affected by the coming policy changes. Riley is saying the same thing, but bringing it to the neighborhoods because it was only a matter of time until everyone was affected. After the madness passes, will things become and stay normal or will the cycle just restart?

For people feeling frustrated with the world around them, watch Sorry to Bother You. If it stirs up anything more than the laughs it promises, run with that. At least talk about it with someone

This is a near masterpiece.

Read More

Ant-Man and the Wasp (2018)

Note: This review was a special request by Marianne Brody. 

Peyton Reed's Ant-Man and the Wasp is the continuation of both Ant-Man and Captain America: Civil War. With a lot of catching up to do, and very little that could just be swept under the rug, Ant-Man and the Wasp writes itself into corners. As quickly as the title characters grow and shrink, the movie impressively writes itself out of those corners, and apart from the original.

Scott Lang (Paul Rudd) has been under house arrest since helping Captain America and Falcon in Germany, and Hank Pym (Michael Douglas) and his daughter Hope van Dyne (Evangeline Lily) have cut ties with Scott and have been laying low because the FBI sees them and their tech as national security threats. All three have to come out in the open when they discover a way into the Quantum Realm to save the original Wasp, Janet van Dyne (Michelle Pfeiffer). Once they're exposed, everyone comes after them. FBI agent Jimmy Woo (Randall Park), Ava Starr/ Ghost (Hannah John-Kamen) and Hank's old partner Bill Foster/Ghost (Laurence Fishburne), and a black market tech dealer named Sonny Burch (Walton Goggins), form a busy, but dynamic, rogues gallery.

Behind the Scenes: Peyton Reed, Paul Rudd, and Evangeline Lily | Copyright 2019 Marvel/Disney

Ant-Man and The Wasp acknowledges what's come before in the MCU, giving the universe real weight and consequences. However, it also starts the movie out on the wrong foot. There's a mean-spiritedness to the trio's early scenes together, and it's made worse when considering that Scott at least was fighting against Tony and Sokovia Accords, something they'd support on principle. Hank and Hope take every possible jab they can at Scott, joking about his (lack of a) relationship with "Cap," his lack of knowledge about the Quantum Realm, even a bit about his house arrest, until they can't anymore When it starts feeling old, the original Ant-Man humor and chemistry opens back up like a window. 

There's one joke in Cassie's, Scott's daughter, (Abby Ryder Fortson) school to bring the band back together. It's because of something that could've happened to any of them (even Hank who gets his hands dirty this time), is temporary, and just works as a great gag in general. The movie really gets moving after this, and is even able to pull it off one more time during one of the last action scenes. 

This is not an action-heavy movie, but the fights are pretty fun and, once five noticeable seconds of car manufacturer product placement is out of the way, the chases are even better. A lot of time is spent with the heroes instead. Yellowjacket, from last time, may have been the bald boardroom member to break the camel's back for corporate MCU villains, even though he may have been one of the underrated ones. This time, every bad guy except Sonny Burch is empathetic and just trying to do their best with given circumstances. Goggins' character actually feels pretty unnecessary compared to the others, but he gives a good performance.

Both movies have had a greedy jerk escape and/or survive at the end. If the MCU wants to take a stab at the Sinister Six, just with Ant-Man and his rogues, they're setting it up well. Here and now though, there's no disgustingly evil villain, there's (mostly) just people trying to get by or, in Ava's case, survive. It's reflected in the trio as well, and in Scott's other cronies, who have now gone legit. Yes, Michael Peña is back as Luis, cranked up to eleven, and he's cranking everyone else up with him. 

The best parts of the fights are when characters are caught off guard. The best and the worst parts of Ant-Man and the Wasp are when the audience is caught off guard. Hang in there for those best parts. 

Read More

Marvel's Runaways: "Reunion" (Pilot)

Does Marvel's Cinematic Universe really need another show that will the expand the world, but actually only mention the Avengers in passing, if at all? Probably not, but after binging the Netflix shows, the variety from this one on Hulu is incredibly refreshing. Mix the MCU, The Breakfast Club, and some identity politics (because that sounds better than saying "woke"), and what pops out is surprisingly a well-crafted episode of what's most likely a well-crafted show.

Runaways is about "six diverse teenagers who can barely stand each other, but who must unite against a common foe - their parents." That summary is a little misleading, these are former friends who drifted apart for years after the death of one of their other friends, and this is their last chance to stay in each others' lives before college and the real drifting starts. It's not typically how these stories go, timeline wise, and it's the first part of Runaways to stick out. Next was the characters themselves.

It's a pretty busy episode, but luckily an exposition-light one. Runaways is primarily character-driven, or at the very least "Reunion" is. They've all become loners in their own way, but also there are glimpses of that reaching out shown. Going out to parties, trying out for sports, offering/requesting tutoring. Indirect ways of saying, "talk to me." "Reunion's" director made sure to emphasize how social media and tech can make this so much more difficult, when used improperly. The selfie, it's ripe for mocking, but a personal attack is still a personal attack.

What hit hard was one of the characters, Gert (Ariela Barer), a social activist, passing out flyers for the club she's starting. It's probably the toughest way, especially in high school, to get back out there, but also the most rewarding.

So one character's a social activist, there's also a reclusive gamer named Alex (Rhenzy Feliz), the sister of the deceased friend whose name is Nico (Lyrica Okano), a church-going girl seeking rebellion called Karolina (Virginia Gardner), a jock going by Chase (Gregg Sulkin), and last but not least, the coming of age Molly (Allegra Acosta).

It sounds stocky because these things always start out that way. It's helped by a cast that has great chemistry with each other, and with the actors playing their parents, and by a warmer feel than these kind of scenarios usually create. Typically these shows or movies start out with a real uphill battle for friendship, and every second is devoted to making that work. Instead "Reunion" was able to spend time on individuals and then bring them together properly. You can bet that it'll go a long way when they start kicking butt together.

Runaways starts slow on the superhero aspects of the show, as it is an origin story. From what's been shown so far, the show has a pretty good visual effects budget and knows how to use it. Feats of super-strength are easy to film, but because of how it's shot,  it's still fun to see someone, in this case Molly, stop a moving van and feel that excitement run through her veins. Even if it didn't, Runaways looks to be putting intrigue before spectacle. In the closing minutes a mystery begins, and when it's a mystery involving parents wearing red robes and standing in a circle, it's a mystery worth checking out.

I'm not one to do season/series long reviews, but wanted to get this one out there because I highly recommend people try it, or at least something like it. If you love it, or if you're looking for something a tiny bit different, I recommend CW's Black Lightning too. It's also set in high school, but if the principal had powers, and it's a mix of The Incredibles, DC, and Luke Cage.

Read More

Solo: A Star Wars Story (2018) | Spoiler Review

I wanted to love Solo, I really did, but it has serious problems that cannot be overlooked, and it makes me question some of what Lucasfilm is doing. How will they move forward after Episode IX? By looking forward.

Solo: A Star Wars Story has a semi-similar issue The Last Jedi had. In The Last Jedi, the humor was forced and similar to Marvel movies. In Solo, callbacks are forced, harder than they were in Rogue One or any other recent Star Wars movie, and they often set back the movie. The references go out of their way to ask and answer questions that could've been left alone, like how Han got his name and how he and Chewie met.

Depending on the viewer, the answers to these questions may fall under character assassination. Chewbacca is a bit of a brute when he's introduced, as he was held prisoner of the Empire, and killed and ate deserters of the army who were dropped in his pit.

Some of these references unnecessarily setup the original trilogy, or foreshadow it in a way that's more like fortune-telling. Rogue One had to setup the original trilogy because it's a tight timeline. On that note, Solo does fix one issue in The Last Jedi, the use of fuel in ships, and that's appreciated. Solo's timeline isn't clear, so talking about a job on Tatooine near the end of the movie is over-icing the cake.

There's still a good cake underneath though. The production issues people were nervous about do not show. This movie should've looked like a mess story and editing-wise, but if any of Phil Lord & Chris Miller's work was used (about 30% of it was), it's mixed seamlessly with Ron Howard's. In fact, there's only one scene for sure I can say with certainty that's done by Howard. The cast is great, not perfect, but great.

Alden Ehrenreich is doing his damn best to capture Han, and Harrison Ford, and make it his own all at the same time. Overall, he nails it. My only complaint with him, and it may be odd, is I wish his voice was deeper. That's all I would've needed to buy it 100%.

Donald Glover faces the same challenge but hits the mark as Lando. He gets everything just right, and adds a great deal to Lando, like his eccentricities, beautiful wardrobe, and his relationship with Han, Chewie, and the Falcon. When either of them is sitting in the captain's seat, I flashback to the original trilogy, and it does feel right, even if most moments like that feel off.

It's just a misfire, a movie that shouldn't have been made, but I don't feel like my time was wasted by seeing it, either.

If you want the full nostalgia treatment, and the Kessel Run (which is a great sequence), see Solo while it's in theaters. If you're nervous about the movie, wait til it can be seen at home, but don't pass on it entirely.

Read More

The Star (2017)

The Star, directed by Timothy Reckart, is what the Bible, and by extension Christianity and other religions, was made for. It's an adaptation of a story. It can be adapted a hundred different ways, and viewed another hundred different ways. Being, partly, a major studio film (Columbia Pictures and their subsidiary Sony Pictures Animation), The Star's target audience is everyone, so it handles religion differently than the faith-based films that have been coming out. Actually, this isn't a faith-based film as much as it is just The Nativity Story for kid. The only problem here is kids over a certain age may not find it funny.

This Nativity Story centers around Bo the donkey (Steven Yuen) wanting to do something important with his life and joining the Royal Cavalry. Instead, after breaking out of the mill he worked at, he winds up in the care of Mary (Gina Rodriguez) and Joseph (Zachary Levi), just as Joseph realizes that she's pregnant. The scene is handled great, as they carefully sidestep the term "immaculate conception," while still stating and accepting that that's what happened. Instead, Joseph instantly jumps into scared and unprepared, but excited, father-mode. If Joseph had asked for an explanation, the movie would've either become inappropriate, boring, or both, so it's best to avoid the conversation. They soon leave for Bethlehem, and the movie is only about a third of the way through and some padding is needed. 

The Star isn't a movie that should have a conventional villain, but it does, unfortunately. When King Herod (Christopher Plummer) is informed that a new king is coming, he requests a soldier and two dogs (Ving Rhames and Gabriel Iglesias) track down and kill the king. It sounds terrible because it is terrible, but it also sparks substantive conversations about religion. There are a few moments like that, such as when God appears to a flock of (literal) sheep and asks them a request. That could play incredibly negatively to a religious-minded audience, but it's done lightly in a sincere adaptation of this story, so it's not a piece of commentary by Ricky Gervais or David Cross.  If nothing else, these moments lead to some mild action, chases, and excitement for the heroes. 

Speaking of which, one of the biggest surprises of this film is the animation. Sony Pictures uses their animation/visual effects studio ImageWorks to do some eye-popping work that ranges from the most photo-realistic (The Amazing Spider-Man movies) to the most rule-breaking and cartoony (Storks and the Hotel Transylvania movies), and The Star appeared to be no exception. But it is. The reason the animation looks more restrained than the off the wall nature of Hotel Translvania and Storks is because Cinesite is the animation studio responsible, and they did great. The animation is very clean and very smooth, and the texturing on every little clay or wooden object really shows. Most importantly, many characters at least look distinctive, even if their traits don't stand out. The best of Cinesite's work in The Star is their depiction of God. He's a beautiful blend of light and particle effects, and he's given just the right amount of personality and time on screen for this movie. 

The Star is a pretty standard, harmless family movie, but that means it's one of the few harmless contemporary Christian films. It may be the start to repairing the divides between religion, Hollywood, and the people. One of the last lines the movie is "[...]he's just a boy." And if these words are just insane ramblings then that means The Star is just a movie. One that may be worth trying.

Read More

Don't Kill It (2016 or 2017) | Short Review

Mike Mendez's Don't Kill It is a backward B-movie, with pretty good writing and acting but weak action and editing. That's enough to save the movie though, as surprising as it sounds. The film is about Jebediah Woodley's (Dolph Lundgren's) hunt for a demon that takes possession of the person who kills it's last host. The demon finds a fun hunting ground in Chicory Creek, Mississippi, and Woodley is given the perfect opportunity to try to contain the threat. 

What's great about this movie is the performances by the leads, Lundgren and FBI Agent Pierce (Kristina Klebe). They work really well together, when the movie isn't trying to push them toward each other. Those moments come off forced, with Pierce going from stick in the mud to potential love interest.

It's slightly balanced with Woodley being consistent. He's a fun guy to watch, and he's set apart a bit from most heroes, even if it's in ways that don't amount to much. It's mainly in the vape, the net gun, and the cowboy hat. It's the little touches that draw people to him. Strip those away and he's the smartest guy in the room, with a solid moral compass. It all adds up to a great savior that could show Evil Dead's Ash a thing or two.

Dolph Lundgren is way past being a national treasure. He's a global one | Copyright 2017 GSC Movies

The writing has a similar approach. For one thing, this is the only movie or show that actually does the police jurisdiction cliché in a way that isn't stupid. The FBI actually justify their reason for showing up, and it's something other screenwriters should take note of. Don't Kill It also builds itself up well, and quickly, making good use of its short runtime by focusing on the demon hunt and Woodley's character. At least that's how it seems on paper.

Mendez also edited the film, and at times it's choppy. It's most noticeable when Pierce is going over her origin. Every line is a separate cut, and every single one feels like it was shot separately from the one before it, so the scene artificially drags on. The action has similar issues. 

The action just feels slow, like it wasn't well choreographed or edited. Impacts don't really connect unless they're gunshots, and the saving grace is that the movie was clearly done practically and on-location. People with a bloodlust are going to have to look elsewhere, but people into mild psychological torture may enjoy the demon reveling in its inability to die. 

Don't Kill It is a fun action movie for all the wrong reasons, but that shouldn't stop it from being checked out. 

Read More

Batman: Gotham by Gaslight (2018)

The Dark Knight Returns introduced the theory that Batman riding a horse is the mark of a good movie. Director Sam Liu's Gotham by Gaslight is compelling evidence and a great movie in its own right anyway.

Gotham by Gaslight is an alternative universe story where a 19th century Batman (Bruce Greenwood) must catch Jack the Ripper. At 78 minutes, that sounds like a streamlined story, but Liu and screenwriter Jim Kreig fit a lot into their runtime. This new setting includes a reestablished origin for Gotham.

Don't worry, Bruce Wayne's parents aren't featured in the movie, but the Monarch Theatre plays a central role, as Jack attacks women who perform there. First up, is a de-powered Poison Ivy (Kari Wuhrer) who starts things off on the wrong foot. The movie opens with her performance, and the animation feels noticeably rigid. While not wanting Poison Ivy to dance to provocatively is a good thing, there are ways to give her a creative, well-animated performance that's clean. She just kind of moves left and right a little. Luckily, once Batman tries to intervene the animation picks up considerably. The fight scenes are choreographed and sound similar to the ones in The Dark Knight Returns. Batman and Jack are fast, but their blows feel heavy and satisfying.

After their first meeting, a lot of time is spent on Bruce Wayne and the locals of Victorian Gotham, and Gotham by Gaslight becomes its own film. The setting and characters are well-developed and set up in a way that suggests Liu and Kreig will return them. Characters featured include Harvey Dent (Yuri Lowenthal), Catwoman (Jennifer Carpenter), and, interestingly, multiple pre-Robin Robins who already know each other. There's no telling how this could evolve, and Gotham by Gaslight encourages second-guessing of ideas.

Similar to the opening of the movie, animation, unfortunately, isn't the only thing that's occasionally rushed. Harvey, also unfortunately, isn't that well written as the links between Jack the Ripper and Two Face are clear to anyone old enough to watch the movie. It's handled in a very upfront matter, and how annoying the audience finds it will vary. At the very least, all the lines are delivered well by the cast, especially Batman's.

Also, is there any correlation between a distinctive cowl and a well-portrayed Batman, or a good Batman movie? | Copyright 2018 Warner Brothers

Bruce Greenwood returns to the booth, after voicing Batman in Under the Red Hood and Young Justice. He's fantastic, and like Kevin Conroy and Roger Craig Smith (Batman: Arkham Origins), he understands what makes Bruce Wayne compelling with and without the cowl. Working with Jennifer's Carpenter's Catwoman and an extended amount of time as Gotham's socialite adds new dimensions to a role he already had down to a science.

Occasionally rushed writing and animation hold back a would-be perfect addition to the DC Animated Universe, but these moments are in a world as well-realized as the one in The Dark Knight Returns. That one, technically, got a sequel, so maybe this one should too?

Read More

A Quiet Place (2018)

A Quiet Place doesn't string audiences along through tension, building it from the beginning until the scares ultimately pay off or fall flat. Instead, it starts with an actual sense of security backed by the film's family. When the monsters appear, we're with this family as tightly as they're with each other, through thick and thin.

John Krasinsky's film is directed extremely carefully, as the premise dictates. It relies on characters, a couple (Krasinksy and Emily Blunt) and their three children (Noah Jupe, Cade Woodward, and deaf actress Millicent Simmonds), making as little noise as possible to avoid the detection of blind monsters with extra-sensitive hearing. Every movement is deliberate to create as little sound as possible. And the use of sound, and shots, is completely engrossing, but loose enough to create needed breaths of fresh air every now and then.

A Quiet Place is surprisingly not scoreless, thanks to composer Marco Beltrami, and speaking is as crucial in the film as communication is in real life. Sign Language is used throughout the film, but what's surprising is what's being signed can be every so slightly heard sometimes by some characters. The variances in the language are brought out through moments like that and shows, if only for a moment, security has broken through the tension. Your heartbeat may spike at a moment's notice, but it is not toyed with.

The family, however, is toyed with. Krasinksy is not starting with a perfect story, as writers Bryan Woods and Scott Beck pull the rug out from under the family with a tight grip every once in a while. The monsters aren't given an unfair advantage, it's just whatever starts a potential attack, to a certain extent, is avoidable, sometimes it's frustratingly avoidable. Once that is out of their hands though, the movie doesn't add insult to injury by placing the family somewhere like a wind chime factory. In fact, great care is taken in showing that their environment is the anti-wind chime factory, with many everyday objects they use replaced with paper and fabric versions, so it evens these "get the ball rolling" moments out pretty well. The only other cheap shot like this that stuck out was some exposition, but at least it was given visually. The history of the monsters and the family's situation is slammed in the audience's face a little harder than it needed to be with some shots that could've been cut. 

Theatrical Poster | Copyright 2018 Paramount Pictures

On that subject, the use of shots, by cinematographer Charlotte Bruus Christensen, beautifully display the Hudson Valley and upstate New York. Parts were filmed in the same county as my college. What's displayed is quite an original site, aside from the woods and beautiful mix of natural and nighttime lighting. Krasinsky and his crew imagine new pits of terror and impersonal, environment-based torture. Those impersonal moments are heightened when the audio-centric monsters, designed by Jeffrey Beecroft and Scott Farrar, attack. The shots are too. Whenever the camera is on them, there's a want for it to stay there, to study the design. It should be considered an honor. One given to the Xenomorphs and Heptapods, and many in-between, that came before.

It's not necessary to encourage viewers to watch where they're going upon exiting the theatre. They'll be doing that on their own, at least until they start driving or return and feel comfortable to crank the volume on something, anything, to make sure they've snapped out of it.

Read More

Hitman: Agent 47 (2015)

Back in December, I said that the 2007 Hitman film, "was able to maintain its faithfulness [to the games] and follow the key lessons of Filmmaking 101. It's not a perfect picture, but it feels like a complete picture." As a reward for its effort, it deserves a better trailer. That project is on hold, but I have a good start on it. When it's finished, both reviews will have links to it at the bottom of the page.

The 2015 film, Hitman: Agent 47, directed by Aleksander Bach, doesn't deserve a fan trailer, it doesn't deserve the sequel it tries to tease, but it doesn't deserve pure hate either. It at least has a few things going for it.

First, and most importantly, the basic story is simpler and easier to follow from the start. Agent 47 (Rupert Friend) is protecting the daughter, Katia van Dees (Hannah Ware), of the man, Dr. Litvenko (Ciarán Hinds), who creates agents.

Well, the basics are simpler. Writers Skip Woods and Michael Finch try to give the movie a heart and soul by giving these characters connections to each other that are a little ridiculous and arcs that are underdeveloped. Ware is forced to go from would-be victim to assassin on par with 47 in a short time-frame, but she's written like a bumbling sidekick a little too often. When she does come into her own, she's great, but seeing where the inspiration for her may have come from, there were better options. If the filmmakers wanted to pull from the games, specifically Hitman: Absolution, they should have made her more competent from the start, or, like that game, made her a kid who's either hidden away from the villains for most of the movie or allowed to make rookie mistakes.

Second, the actors are pretty good. Friend makes the role his own and is very different from Timothy Olyphant's Agent 47, who had some swagger and humor. This time around 47 is scarier, more intimidating, and truly uncompromised. Ware, again, is best when the movie allows her to be. Other than that, she's just solid. Zachary Quinto's agent hunter John Smith is mostly a good match to Friend.

The problem with Friend's Agent 47 is he's an ass for no reason other than because that's seemingly the only way to sell killing machine. He regularly puts people, including Ware, unnecessarily in danger, threatens children (at least not directly, but through their parents). He's just not a fun guy to watch most of the time. He's an overcorrection from eight years ago, to the point where scary is more like a killer in a horror movie more than a man just doing his job. It's clear in the shots that show him by himself, from a distance, standing absolutely still.

Opinions on Friend's 47 will be divisive, just like when Olyphant played him |  | Copyright 2015 Fox

Third, the hand-to-hand combat is well-shot. It may cut too much, but it's tough to get lost in what's going on, and it's another area where Agent 47 could've just fallen apart. The fights can be pretty fun too, the best ones being between Friend and Quinto. On paper, they may sound boring, since two killing machines fighting dredges up memories of Terminators, and X-Men Origins: Wolverine (which I watched earlier today), but their skills vary enough to keep it entertaining.

Other action scenes are ridiculous and there's a noticeable lack of stealth in Agent 47. The most appalling examples involve intentionally blown cover in an international embassy, a blown-up helicopter, and stopping an opponent by throwing a random bystander into him. The point of making movies under this license is it's supposed to inspire something a little more thought out than that. Unfortunately, it didn't this time.

So, some good, some bad, and some ugly. Throw in some intrusive product placement, cinematography that's all over the place, and two out of a handful of jokes that work, and at least it has its moments.

If you're completely new to this franchise, please still give the games a shot.

Update: My fan-made trailer for the 2007 movie and for this one. I may have been overly harsh in my criticism of this movie, but overall I stand by this review.

Read More

The Prestige (2006)

First, watch it twice. If you can, wait roughly a decade between viewings. It makes a difference.

Occam's Razor, or the idea that the simplest explanation is usually the right one, isn't just at the center of Christopher Nolan's The Prestige, but it should be at the center of Hollywood. In the age of big budgets and CGI, the simple camera tricks still are enough. The real legwork begins in pre-production because Occam's Razor doesn't mean create an endless stream of remakes, no matter how complete those scripts start.

Robert Angier (Hugh Jackman) and Alfred Borden (Christian Bale) are competing magicians with different approaches to the art. Angier is more cautious but feeds of the admiration of a crowd. Borden believes in pushing the art and understand that it comes with a price. Yet, both lean on the same showstopper, "The Transported Man," and its many innovations and interpretations.

The film takes audiences through these scenarios, weaving in and out of each, across the long lives and careers of Angier and Borden. It's not always clear when an event is happening, but little details become memorable thanks to strong performances from Jackman and Bale, and this allows pieces to come together when needed.

Supporting the leads are some of the best performances from Michael Caine as Angier's engineer, Cutter, Rebecca Hall as Borden's wife, Sarah, and Scarlett Johansson as Angier's assistant, Olivia. If Angier and Borden are too cold to follow...they don't help things.

That's why the second viewing helps, it was easy to focus on how terrible Angier and Borden are too each other. This time around, the focus was on terrible they were to others, but their better sides came through as well. Just two good men brought down by obsession. A difficult thing to watch, but with hope.

The Prestige shows that when obsession takes root there are glimmers of hope, and (more concretely) ways out and compromises that can be made so that the thoughts subside at least a little, if not completely. Typically, obsession is shown as more inner torment, and situations are all-or-nothing. This gives the outsider's perspective. For people who deal with obsession internally, watching The Prestige may frustrate them, but it may help as well, as the credits roll and the conclusion sets in. There's a clear line, and while that line may move, it's still there and can be stepped away from.

The Prestige, like "The Transporting Man," is a great mystery, but it boils down to a few things, too. Fantastic performances from its cast, continuity editing that doesn't call attention to itself (the time jumping does that enough), beautiful sets, and brilliant storytelling. It's not a trick, but solid filmmaking.

Read More

Spy Hard (1996) | Short Review

While Austin Powers: International Man of Mystery, released just a year later, has more memorable characters, Spy Hard may be the better film.

With a style of humor closer to Airplane and Leslie Neilsen taking the lead, Spy Hard is rapid-fire comedy, instead of prolonging jokes at the risk of killing them. The problem with the spoof genre is the feeling that filmmakers given free reign to be absurd leads them to not care and try anything. Luckily, that's hardly ever a problem here, and when Spy Hard goes too far, it's not really painful.

Spy Hard holds up surprisingly well, and even the dated jokes (except for one that'll be seen as racist today) have some standing on their own, like a sequence related to Home Alone. At one point the movie even ahead of its time, when bringing up the state of the country.

For people who aren't sure about seeing it, start with the theme song by Weird Al. If he can't convince you to check it out, nothing can.

Read More

Hitman: Unrated Cut (2007)

When adapting material to film, is it better to be faithful to that material or make a great film, if both aren't possible? The question of which audience to alienate has plagued Hollywood, and the answer most likely changes based on the time and the movie. Xavier Gen's Hitman tries to balance both but ultimately gambles on putting one side over the other.

Hitman tells the tale of early Russian espionage (as opposed to the current, real stuff), as the upcoming re-election of their president, Mikhail Belicoff (Ulrich Thomsen) attracts the attention of the CIA, Interpol, and FSB (Russia's CIA). The "Hitman," Agent 47 (Timothy Olyphant) must take out the president without being witnessed. The hit doesn't go as planned, and gamers are treated to the story of what happens when the restart button isn't an option, but all other options are waiting to be explored.

Hitman moves quickly, and luckily coherently, from set piece to set piece, as it captures the tone of the games almost perfectly. To start, the sets themselves are meticulously crafted and shot, pulling audiences into 47's everyday life of contingency plans and caution, all dialogue-free and in the first few minutes. Once that's established, viewers are treated to 90 minutes of 47s greatest hits as gameplay elements are crammed into the plot. Still, it works and is a lot of fun to watch because the scenes still are complete and are boosted by the film's own aesthetics and performances by the cast.

Olyphant has the difficult task of balancing the Terminator side of 47 with his deep, deep down caring side. He tends to float more toward caring, but it's brought out mainly because screenwriter Skip Woods has him teaming up with Belicoff's trafficking victim, Nika (Olga Kurylenko). The romantic angle never feels forced, but only by looser standards set by other movies. Olyphant's main problem is he talks too much, but again, he's making the role his own, and most importantly he's having a lot of fun with it. 47 has a touch of swagger this time around, and it means the sickening humor of the series can move from his targets to him this time around, as Nika is kidnapped and stuffed into the trunk of a car with a corpse.

Olyphant is a mixed bag as 47. Some people will like him, but it's not surprising if fans don't | Copyright 2007 Fox

Kurylenko's Nika is a great companion, and she works well with Olyphant. Again, it's a tough role because the obvious choices are to be overshadowed by the hero or try to one-up him in a quipping contest. Instead, they're partners, without putting Nika over her head in some insane fashion. She also contributes to that swagger mentioned above, but more importantly, to that caring side. 47 doesn't usually have anyone to bounce anything off of, and it's refreshing.

Action-wise, it's a mixed bag. Stealth moments happen throughout, thank god, but the more direct approach has editing issues. Fights are edited a little too hastily when it's more than a one-on-one battle. They start fast, but then settle into the pace they should've been building to. It's weird. It's not as bad as improper use of shaky cam, but it would've benefited greatly from a stylized approach. It's worth mentioning, however, that it inspired a future game mechanic.

Fox took a risk with Hitman, one they'd take again with Assassin's Creed in 2016. The key difference is Hitman was able to maintain its faithfulness and follow the key lessons of Filmmaking 101. It's not a perfect picture, but it feels like a complete picture.

Update: My fan-made trailer for this movie and for the 2015 one. 

Read More