Twisters

Posted on July 17, 2024 at 1:33 pm

B +

Lowest Recommended Age:	Middle School
MPAA Rating:	Rated PG-13 for intense action and peril, some language and injury images
Profanity:	Some strong la

24 years ago, a cow flew across the screen and “Twister” became an instant summer movie classic. “Twister” had the magical combination of romance and action with then-state-of-the-art special effects, a human storyline just hefty enough to add urgency without disrupting the real reason we’re there (see above: flying cows), and two future Oscar-winners, Helen Hunt and Philip Seymour Hoffman, along with Bill Paxton, Carey Elwes, and Lois Smith, who adeptly set the tone at the sweet spot between drama and melodrama.

The ingredients that made that storyline work were the ideal recipe: take one pair of parted lovers (the about to divorce storm chasers), some human conflict to unite them (Elwes’ arrogant rich guy), and some beyond-human conflict to unite them even more (see: the title, reference to the ). Add in one newbie to be the receptacle for exposition dumps and for us to look down to even though in real life we would be even more terrified (Jami Gertz, rising above a thankless role). Result: almost half a billion dollars in worldwide box office. Also result: a somewhat sequel, trying to rekindle the magic.

It begins with a nod to the original, which ended (spoiler alert) with the Hunt and Paxton characters successfully launching “Dorothy” (yes, a reference to the Kansas girl who was whisked to Oz via twister). Dorothy was dozens of little data-collecting chrome balls that provided previously unavailable information about the structure of these terrifying, vastly destructive storms. Tornadoes, for those who did not pay attention during the exposition part of the first film, are violently rotating columns of air that reach both the surface of the Earth and a cumulonimbus cloud or, in rare cases, the base of a cumulus cloud. They look like a stormy vortex in the distance, they travel very fast, and they cause hundreds of millions of dollars of damage to property and crops every year. As briefly acknowledged in this new film without any suggestion of climate change as the precipitating (in both senses of the word) factor, the number of storms is increasing.

The opening of “Twisters” takes place five years ago, when a much-too-cheerful and therefore much-too-risk-taking group of students is still working with the Dorothy machine. It is led by Kate (Daisy Edgar-Jones), who is a scientist but also has something of a second sense about storms and the direction they will take. She is hoping to get a grant to help her not just understand twisters but to extinguish them, using the same ultra-absorbent material found in disposable diapers. The group is much too adorable and foolhardy to be there for any purpose but to teach our heroine a very painful lesson. The only survivors are Kate and Javi (Broadway’s Anthony Ramos of “Dumb Money” and “In the Heights”).

In the present day, Kate lives in New York, with businesslike clothes and hair. Her only connection to twisters is safely via computer screens. Javi shows up with some new technology developed by the military. He wants her to come with him to get the first 3D mapping of what goes on inside the twister vortex. At first she says no, but when he reminds her of how many lives can be saved, she agrees to join him in Oklahoma for a week.

There they run into hotshot YouTube stars and self-proclaimed “tornado wrangler” Tyler Owens (Glen Powell) and his ragtag gang, who seem to be out there for thrills and likes. Poncho-wearing fans happily buy their merch and track them as they track the storms with go-pros, a drone, and fireworks they shoot up inside the vortex for fun.

“Twisters” gently updates the technology to the era of cell phones and MRIs, noting that these days “anyone with a $10 weather app” can be a storm chaser. The insertion of a class developer villain making “all-cash offers” to the locals is clumsier. Should they have the option to go somewhere else? And what is he going to do with land that has driven long-time residents out due to extreme weather hazards? While we’re on the subject, shouldn’t there be more storm shelters in these communities?

Like the original, this film lightly sprinkles the emotions of the characters just enough to keep us going between the special effects. The role of exposition dump character this time is played by Ben (Harry Hadden-Paton), a British journalist who is writing about Tyler’s group. Instead of former spouses, Kate and Javi are former colleagues sharing some survivor guilt and Kate and Tyler are in the classic Pride and Prejudice dynamic as they discover their first impressions (BTW the original title of P&P) are not accurate. Oh, if only we had super-powerful military-grade diagnostic machines to examine each other.

We also have a wise and kindly older family member to visit for some moments of respite, in this case, replacing the wonderful Lois Smith in the original, and here the also wonderful Maura Tierney as Kate’s mother.

So, let’s get to what really matters: how about the special effects? They are excellent. Cows do not fly, but a lot does, including large vehicles and roofs. A wind farm is an especially good spot to let us see the impact of up to 360 miles per hour. If there is less excitement on screen, it is due to CGI fatigue in the audience, not the believability of what we see. (Steven Spielberg is one of the producers.)

“Twisters” will not rise to the level of its predecessor, but it is an entertaining summer popcorn pleasure that will continue to build Powell’s stature as one of Hollywood’s most appealing young stars.

Parents should know that this movie has extended and sometimes very scary action sequences of the most severe weather. Characters are injured and killed and there are some graphic images.

Family discussion: What was your first thought when you saw Tyler and his crew? What’s the difference between a tamer and a rustler? How do you know when fear should push you forward?

If you like this, try: “Twister” and documentaries like “Stormchasers” and the Nova episodes “Oklahoma’s Deadliest Tornadoes” and “Deadliest Tornadoes”

Fly Me to the Moon

Posted on July 11, 2024 at 12:12 pm

A-

Lowest Recommended Age:	Middle School
MPAA Rating:	Rated PG-13 for some strong language and smoking
Profanity:	Some strong language
Alcohol/ Drugs:	Alcohol and smoking
Diversity Issues:	Issues of perception, expectations, and treatment of women
Date Released to Theaters:	July 12, 2024

Unless you care more about historical accuracy than a rollicking good story, I think you will really enjoy this movie, one of the most purely entertaining films of the year. And some of it is even true.

There are many places to get the real story of the moon landing. This has some of the story right, and some enhanced for dramatic, comedic, and romantic purposes, all of which are very well served.

Scarlett Johansson, who also produced, plays Kelly, an advertising executive who has the right combination for success in that field: she always understands her market/target/audience and she will say or do whatever it takes on its behalf. She can spin anything and that includes selling her own services.

She is approached by a mysterious man who says his name is Moe Berkus ( Woody Harrelson) and that he works for President Richard Nixon. John F. Kennedy promised an American man on the moon by the end of the decade and the end of the 60s is approaching. For the politicians, this is an essential achievement for the Cold War battle for supremacy of capitalism and democracy. If that sounds more like branding than public policy, you understand why, in the midst of some of the most divisive and troubled years of the 20th century, someone might decide that what NASA needed was an expert in marketing. After all, selling a product, whether breakfast cereal, car, or the space program, is about making the product real, immediate, personal, and aspirational. Kelly and her assistant arrive in Cocoa Beach, ready to sell the moon.

You could say the people in NASA were not happy about this, but perhaps a better term would be horrified. Their culture is about secrecy (national security), science, and control. The person in charge is Cole Davis (Channing Tatum) and he does his best to discourage Kelly. In other words, the ideal set-up for romantic sparks, and when it’s Tatum and Johansson, it’s more like fireworks. They are wonderful together.

The sharp, witty, and wise screenplay is by third-generation Hollywood writer Rose Gilroy (her grandfather was “The Subject Was Roses” screenwriter Frank Gilroy and her parents are Dan Gilroy of “Real Steel,” “Kong: Skull Island,” and “Nightcrawler” and Rene Russo). It skillfully balances the romantic comedy with the dramatic themes and the inherent tension in the goal everyone is working toward. Even if we know that indeed Neil Armstrong and Buzz Aldrin will indeed walk on the moon the question of public support, we get caught up in the surprising challenges along the way. Who could guess that having astronauts sell watches, cars, and underwear — and, of course, Tang — would make them so relatable Americans would start to root for them? What will they have do and which Senators will they have to persuade to get the funding they need? Is there a way to sell space not as a distraction but as an unassailable story of American heroes and know-how?

Cole and Kelly have real differences that give this film a welcome depth. Both on the personal and professional level, the issue of what the truth is and how and when to tell it is presented thoughtfully and with the complexity it deserves, but it is never pedantic or preachy. Jim Rash plays a temperamental commercial director Moe insists join the team to make a back-up for the broadcast. The stunning technological innovations from a group of engineers with an average age of 26, working to solve the biggest jigsaw puzzle in the history of the world, in a building tall enough to enclose four Statues of Liberty on each other’s shoulders.

And there is a wonderful black cat. Plus Johansson’s husband, Colin Jost, in a brief, funny cameo. This movie is romantic, funny, exciting, and meaningful, filled with joy, honoring the heroes of the voyage to the moon for their dedication, innovation, and courage. And it has heartwarming compassion for the vulnerability of its characters that resonates with us long after the movie is over.

Parents should know that this film has some strong language, references to criminal behavior and a shooting in self-defense. For historical accuracy, there is a lot of smoking and a character talks about the impact on his health.

Family discussion: Who changes more, Cole or Kelly? Who is currently in the International Space Station today? Would you like to go to the moon? Visit the Smithsonian’s Air and Space Museum, where you can touch a real moon rock and see the NASA capsules.

If you like this, try: Other films about the Apollo 11 program, including “The Dish,” “Hidden Figures,” “First Man,” Tom Hanks’ excellent miniseries, “From the Earth to the Moon,” and the documentaries “Earthrise” and “Apollo 11”

The Lost City

Posted on March 24, 2022 at 5:49 pm

B +

Lowest Recommended Age:	Middle School
MPAA Rating:	Rated PG-13 for violence and some bloody images, suggestive material, partial nudity and language
Profanity:	Some strong language
Alcohol/ Drugs:	Alcohol
Violence/ Scariness:	Extended peril and violence, leeches, chases, explosions, guns, many characters injured and killed
Diversity Issues:	None
Date Released to Theaters:	March 25, 2022
Date Released to DVD:	July 25, 2022

Let’s get the obvious question out of the way first thing. Yes, “The Lost City” is a lot like “Romancing the Stone,” the 1984 action/comedy/romance movie starring Kathleen Turner, Michael Douglas, and Danny DeVito. Both movies are opposites-don’t-attract-and-then-do stories about shy, bookish-but-beautiful stay-at-home romance novelists who end up on wild jungle adventures with handsome men who are not entirely heroic. Both feature colorful third leads and bad guys scary enough to make the moments of peril exciting.

And that’s a pretty great combination, isn’t it? Especially with four delectable stars at the top of the game: Oscar-winners Sandra Bullock and Brad Pitt plus Channing Tatum and Daniel Radcliffe. Do not listen to those who say that Bullock does not look like a 57-year-old. She looks like a radiantly gorgeous 57-year-old who is completely believable playing someone 20 years younger opposite a leading man who is in reality 14 years younger.

Bullock plays Loretta Sage, a widow still struggling with grief over the loss of her husband and dissatisfaction at her redirection from unsuccessful scholar of ancient civilizations to very successful author of bodice-ripper novels about a pair of very sexy Indian Jones-style adventuresome anthropologists.

Loretta’s purple prose and knowledge of the details of runes and ruins are just one reason for the books’ popularity. The other reason is the handsome, hunky, Fabio-like cover model, Alan (Tatum). He has the broad shoulders, easy charm and flowing locks the fans love. (When I say “has,” I do not necessarily mean growing from his scalp, more like, in his closet to be applied as needed.) He also has something of a crush on Loretta, though he may be confusing both of them for the characters she imagined.

Loretta, who describes herself as a “sabiosexual” (one who is attracted to intellect), thinks of Alan as a brainless pretty boy. She might be a bit jealous of his effortless appeal. She reluctantly agrees to a joint appearance to promote her new book. It does not go well. And then, as she is leaving, she gets into the wrong car and finds herself seated before a lovely array of cheeses and cold meats and an impeccably dressed billionaire who has the most indispensable of all powerful villains, a British accent. He has a clue to a lost treasure, he wants Loretta to translate it, and he won’t take no for an answer.

And so, Loretta is off to the jungle (it was filmed in the Dominican Republic), and Alan, possibly confusing himself with the hero he portrays, goes off to rescue her, with the help of his meditation teacher, a former Navy SEAL played by Brad Pitt, who is as usual the MVP as he is wherever we are lucky enough to see him. This takes nothing away from Bullock and Tatum, who are enormous fun to watch. They have great chemistry and are clearly having a blast. It’s just that Pitt is even more fun. They all get strong support from the rest of the cast, especially Da’Vine Joy Randolph as Loretta’s publisher/publicist and Patti Harrison as the social media liaison. Directors Aaron Nee and Adam Nee keep things moving so the various plot holes fly by without disrupting the popcorn pleasure of seeing Bullock get over her inhibitions and assumptions, Tatum dance, and Pitt be cool in this highly entertaining story.

NOTE: Stay for a post-credit scene.

Parents should know that this movie has extended peril and action with guns, chases, and explosions, and many characters are injured and killed. A character has to take off his clothes to have leeches removed from his body and we see some nudity. Characters use strong language and drink alcohol.

Family discussion: What do Loretta and Alan have in common? What surprised them about each other? Why does Fairfax only want what is impossible to get?

If you like this, try: “Romancing the Stone”

Love, Simon

Posted on March 15, 2018 at 5:15 pm

B +

Lowest Recommended Age:	Middle School
MPAA Rating:	Rated PG-13 for thematic elements, sexual references, language and teen partying
Profanity:	Brief strong language
Alcohol/ Drugs:	Teen drinking
Violence/ Scariness:	Tense family situations
Diversity Issues:	A theme of the movie
Date Released to Theaters:	March 16, 2018
Date Released to DVD:	June 11, 2018

If you are scrolling through Netflix you may run across movies like 2000’s The Truth About Jane, where family or friends discover that someone is gay, get upset, try to deny it or force the gay person into therapy, and then learn in time for a big happy ending at a Pride parade that love is what matters, no matter who the person they love loves. A lot has happened in 18 years, and thankfully we are pretty much past the point where a story about a family freak-out over the discovery that someone is gay is worth making a movie about. Yet there are two elements that are notable about “Love, Simon.” It is the first major studio romantic comedy about a gay teenager. And, much more notable, the real issue is not about his being gay; it is just about his being a teenager.

“Love, Simon” is based on the award-winning book by psychologist Becky Albertalli. It is indeed a comedy. There are many very funny lines, and gems of comic performances by two of the adults in the film. The always-great Tony Hale (“Veep”) plays a high-spirited vice-principal who likes to confiscate cell phones and act like a princi-PAL, and Natasha Rothwell (“Insecure”) is absolutely hilarious as a put-upon drama teacher forced to direct a production of “Cabaret” that is required to include every student who wants to be in the cast. Making the adults in the story the comic relief is a very nice touch.

And it is definitely a romance. I can’t remember when I’ve heard an audience respond with cheers and applause as joyous as they did when the big kiss moment finally arrived. But what makes this film really special is that is about feelings everyone has — the feeling of being alone, outside some sort of magic circle everyone else seems to know how to get inside, the worry about letting people down, the soul-shrinking experience of actually letting them down even more than you feared, the terror of allowing yourself to be vulnerable, the joy of being seen and understood.

Nick Robinson (“The Kings of Summer”) plays Simon, a high school senior who has everything — loving, generous parents (who also happen to be gorgeous — Josh Duhamel and Jennifer Garner), a cute kid sister, and great friends with whom he shares “way too many iced coffees, bad 90’s movies, and gorge on carbs at the Waffle House.” His life is just about perfect except that he has not been able to find a way to tell anyone that he is gay.

The school has a gossipy website where a student who calls himself Blue says that he is gay but cannot come out. So Simon writes him as “Jacques” and the two of them instantly fall into a close, supportive friendship with perhaps a little bit of flirting. What makes this really great in the film is that it allows/requires Simon (whose full name, as he points out, means “he who hears” and “he who sees”) to look at every male student in the school differently, as he wonders which one is Blue and even pictures different students in the situations Blue describes. That experience, as much as the correspondence itself, widens his world and makes him more empathetic, similar to the different perspectives in last year’s “Wonder.”

An obnoxious student discovers the correspondence and threatens to publish it unless Simon helps him get close to Abby, a transfer student who has become a part of Simon’s group of friends.

A brief fantasy sequence about what being gay might be like in college is a lot of fun, and a scene where Simon imagines that heterosexual teens should have to come out to their parents is sharply funny. But what makes this movie special is its tender heart. It is wise about friendships, about those first tentative steps toward intimacy, about being honest, not just about what you are but who you are, and about the unforgettable tenderness of that first kiss.

Parents should know that the theme of this film is a gay high schooler struggling to come out and it includes kisses, a brief crude sexual reference, teen drinking, and brief strong language.

Family discussion: Why could Simon tell Blue and Abby before Leah and his family? Would you like to have a “Secrets” website for your school?

If you like this, try: “G.B.F.,” “Never Been Kissed,” and “Easy A”

Fifty Shades Freed

Posted on February 8, 2018 at 6:36 pm

Lowest Recommended Age:	Mature High Schooler
MPAA Rating:	Rated R for strong sexual content, nudity, and language
Profanity:	Some strong language
Alcohol/ Drugs:	Alcohol
Violence/ Scariness:	Peril and violence including kidnapping, punching, knife, gun, chase
Diversity Issues:	None
Date Released to Theaters:	February 9, 2018
Date Released to DVD:	May 7, 2018

“The worse sin passion can commit is to be joyless,” wrote Dorothy Sayers. And Fifty Shades Freed is Exhibit A. It’s more of an endless perfume commercial than a story, with beautiful people smooching (and more) in a series of increasingly luxurious settings and modes of transportation. Viewers may more likely to find their breath taken away by the Birkin bag Ana carries than the licking-ice-cream-off-Christian’s-chest scene, the “You own this?” about the fancy private airplane response, “We own this” more than “meet me in the Red Room of pain.”

These are people who are supposed to be exceptionally successful at their jobs who are somehow not especially committed to them or particularly good at them. Anna is a college drop-out now elevated to editor at the publishing company that happens to be owned by her new husband, but entirely on her merits, but the job itself is one of those cutesy Hallmark Christmas movie-type careers where all she has to do is congratulate her hunky author on his success and ask him gently about the next book and tell an assistant to increase the font size on a cover. More important, these are people who share a deep kink connection who are pretty, to use their term, vanilla. Anything at all interesting about the issue of the power dynamics between Ana and Christian is so soft-focus that it barely registers.

It seems Ms. James ran out of ideas about a book and a half ago. All they’ve got left is sex in this and that ultra-luxurious location (more shelter porn than porn porn here) interspersed with some very random thriller moments as a figure from the past wants to destroy the perfect prettiness of the romance. This gives us an opportunity for a chase scene on a mountain road that turns out to be, like so much in the film, foreplay, plus some not at all tense would-be thriller moments and one pretty funny joke.* The tedium is occasionally lessened by some pop song montages. The music is not that great, but it is better than the dialogue. And then, the final whack of the cinematic riding crop, the utterly unnecessary remix montage featuring highlights of the films that we were hoping to have forgotten.

*New variation of the Gothika rule: I will give away the joke to anyone who sends me an email at moviemom@moviemom.com to save you the time and money of seeing the film.

Parents should know that this film includes extensive and explicit sexual references and situations with some BDSM activity, nudity, some strong language, alcohol, and peril and violence including kidnapping, a gun, knives, and punching.

Family discussion: Why did Ana object to Christian’s behavior in the red room on one occasion? What made each of them jealous?

If you like this, try: “9 1/2 Weeks”