Trailer — Independence Day: Resurgence
Posted on May 27, 2016 at 8:00 am
Alice Through the Looking Glass
Posted on May 26, 2016 at 5:50 pm
“Alice Through the Looking Glass” the movie has almost no relationship to Alice Through the Looking Glass, the book by Lewis Carroll in spirit, character, or storyline. That might possibly be all right if the spirit, character, or storyline were in any way worthwhile, but it is not. Gorgeous production design and some cool stunts do not make up for a story that begins as passable and ends as painful.
Tim Burton, who produced this one, previously gave us an “Alice in Wonderland” with an adult Alice (Mia Wasikowska) replacing the little girl of the story and spending way too much time in the above-ground “real” world as she attends a party, turns down a proposal of marriage from the odious Haimish (Leo Bill), and accepts instead the offer from his father to serve as crew on a merchant ship.
In “Looking Glass,” we first see Alice, now captain of the ship, in an exciting escape from pirates that show us her courage and love of adventure. But when the ship returns to port in London, she finds that Hamish’s father has died, leaving him in charge, and he refuses to let her go back to sea. In his home, she finds a mirror over a fireplace that is a portal back to Wonderland, led by the former caterpillar, now-butterfly (voice of of the much-missed Alan Rickman).
Having already imported the talking flowers, chess pieces, Tweedledum and Tweedledee, and the Jabberwocky from “Through the Looking Glass” into the first film, conflating the first story’s Queen of Hearts (the “Off with the head!” one) with the second story’s Red Queen (the chess one) this movie takes — but makes no use of — the first book’s characters like the Cheshire Cat and the White Rabbit, and then has a completely invented story about time travel.
This has many disagreeable aspects, but the worst is when it puts Sasha Baron Cohen as the embodiment of Time into a scene with Johnny Depp as the Mad Hatter and allows them to try to out-grotesque each other in a manner clearly intended to be charming. It is not.
Neither is the plot, which relies heavily on just the kind of treacly heartstrings-plucking backstories that Carroll would never have allowed, asking us to feel sympathy for outrageous behavior and affection for caricatures. The first film’s attempt to create a warm, devoted friendship between Alice and the Mad Hatter was rather ooky. In the sequel, we are asked to believe that she has returned to do whatever it takes to help him because they love each other so much.
To paraphrase the folks behind “Seinfeld,” in the Alice world, there should be no hugging and no apologizing — and no heartfelt professions of affection, especially when they are not in any way justified by the characters’ history with each other.
Alice is needed on the other side of the mirror because the Mad Hatter has found something that has convinced him that his family is still alive, and not killed by the Jabberwock as he had thought. Why is this so important? Is it because he misses them so? Not really. It is because he feels bad about his behavior and needs to see them again so he can be forgiven. The disconnect between the expressions of devotion and the narcissistic reality of behavior is disturbingly cynical. Alice decides the only way she can save his family is to go back in time to the Jabberwock battle, which means she has to retrieve the chronosphere from Time himself, and that leads to more time travel as she solves various not-very-mysterious mysteries and Time chases her to get it back. Not that any of it makes any sense, logically or emotionally.
The production design is imaginative and witty, but it is buried under a gormless, hyperactive mess of a film. The book is endlessly witty and imaginative and delightful with all kinds of wordplay, math puzzles, and chess references from Carroll (aka Charles Dodgson), a math professor. The movie wastes all of that opportunity. Look at the title — the movie should be about a reverse world, not a heist/time travel saga that only concludes you can’t change history. If I had the chronosphere, I’d use it to go back to the moment I sat down to watch this movie so I could go home.
Parents should know that this film has extended fantasy peril with many disturbing images, discussion of loss of parents, brief image of someone dying, and bullying.
Family discussion: If you could go back in time, what time would you pick? Why did the Hatter and the White Queen have a hard time telling their families how they felt?
If you like this, try: the many other movie Alice stories including the Disney animated version and the Kate Beckinsale version of “Through the Looking Glass” and the books by Lewis Carroll
X-Men: Apocalypse
Posted on May 24, 2016 at 5:18 pm
B| Lowest Recommended Age: | Middle School |
| MPAA Rating: | Rated PG-13 for sequences of violence, action and destruction, brief strong language and some suggestive images |
| Profanity: | Brief strong language |
| Alcohol/ Drugs: | None |
| Violence/ Scariness: | Extended comic book/action peril and violence, characters injured and killed |
| Diversity Issues: | A metaphorical theme of the movie |
| Date Released to Theaters: | May 27, 2016 |
| Date Released to DVD: | October 3, 2016 |
| Amazon.com ASIN: | B01G9AXWH2 |
We love superheroes, but most of the time what makes a superhero movie work is the supervillain. Just as the Avengers on the other side of the Marvel Universe move into X-Men territory by having the supes fight each other, with a villain in “Civil War” who is a mere human, with the most human of motives and goals rather than Loki’s “let’s blow up the universe and roast marshmallows on the flames” sort of threat, the X-Men, whose primary plotlines rest on the shifting loyalties of its mutant members, switches direction toward a more Loki-esque bad guy.
That would be the first mutant of all, going all the way back to ancient Egypt, where he was a god. He is resurrected, he is nearly omnipotent, and he is played by one of the most exciting actors in movies, Oscar Isaac. But there are three big problems with Apocalypse, and that means there are three big problems with the movie.
First, we never really understand that “nearly” part about his powers, and therefore we cannot judge the threat he poses in any given confrontation. Second, Isaac is a superb actor with deeply expressive eyes and voice. Yet he is put into a mask that conceals his eyes and given a double-tracked distortion of his voice. The big, hulking outfit also impairs the precise, distinctive physicality he has brought to roles as different as “Star Wars” ace Po Dameron, the title folk musician of “Inside Llewyn Davis,” and billionaire Nathan Bateman (“Ex Machina”). The power of his presence as a performer is all but muted just when we need a character to be terrifying.
Plus, we’ve seen ancient Egyptian super villains before. After the many versions of “The Mummy,” we need something more than he’s from the time of the pyramids plus chanting. But there is a very cool opening sequence that brings us through history to 1983, the pre-digital era when overhead projectors in classrooms represented cutting-edge technology. And Magneto seems to have found peace, in a small town, with a factory job, and a loving wife and daughter.
Of course, that can’t last. And soon he has experienced yet another devastating loss, and returns to his bad, furious, destructive self — until someone who is even more furious and destructive comes along.
When I say that this episode is a “Muppet Babies” take on the X-Men, I do not necessarily mean that in a bad way. Origin stories are intriguing, and the X-Men have always had an adolescent quality, with the onset of their mutant powers coming with puberty and acting as a heightened metaphor to examine the sense of uncertainty, anxiety, and isolation that comes with the physical and emotional changes that separate teenagers from their childhood. It is intriguing to see Scott (Tye Sheridan) rubbing his red eyes as he becomes Cyclops. But Sophie Turner does not have the screen presence of Famke Janssen as the young Jean Grey, in part because her telepathic gift is not as cinematically dynamic.
Quicksilver (Evan Peters) once again provides the high point, not just in a darker showpiece callback to the sensational Pentagon kitchen scene in the last film but in the film’s brief but most emotionally authentic scene, involving his relationship to Magneto. In a movie about mutants with superpowers, the best moment is human.
Parents should know that this film includes extended comic book-style action violence, with characters injured and killed and some disturbing images, skimpy costumes, and some strong language.
Family discussion: What is the biggest challenge in getting the X-Men to work together? Which powers would you like to have?
If you like this try: the other X-Men movies, especially “Days of Future Past”
Captain America: Civil War
Posted on May 4, 2016 at 8:00 pm
B+| Lowest Recommended Age: | Middle School |
| MPAA Rating: | Rated PG-13 for extended sequences of violence, action and mayhem |
| Profanity: | Brief strong language |
| Alcohol/ Drugs: | None |
| Violence/ Scariness: | Extended superhero/action violence with chases, crashes, and explosions, characters injured and killed. |
| Diversity Issues: | Diverse characters |
| Date Released to Theaters: | May 6, 2016 |
| Date Released to DVD: | September 13, 2016 |
| Amazon.com ASIN: | B01D9EUNB4 |
The most important element of any superhero movie is the villain. He (or she) has to pose a credible threat to humanity and challenge particular strengths and vulnerabilities of someone with extraordinary powers. In “Captain America: Winter Soldier” there was a paranoiac Pogo-esque “we have met the enemy and he is us” theme that is expanded in “Civil War.” It goes to the heart of the Avengers themselves as a critical issues divides them so they are fighting each other.
The issue is not one we usually see in superhero movies or indeed action movies in any category: consequences. Part of the fun of action movies is seeing all of the chases, fights, and explosions, without having to worry about the cleanup or what the military euphemistically calls “collateral damage.” But this story has more impact because it acknowledges and engages with the damage that superheroes do while they are preventing worse damage. It falls somewhere between “The Incredibles” and “Eye in the Sky.”
The true meaning of collateral damage is presented early on in “Civil War.” Tony Stark (Robert Downey, Jr.) has just announced that he will fund all of the student research projects at MIT when he is confronted by a mother (a small masterpiece of devastation and fury from the extraordinary Alfre Woodard). Her son was on a humanitarian mission when he was killed in the Sokovia crash of an entire city at the end of Avengers: the Age of Ultron. For her, it doesn’t matter that the entire world was saved in theory by a supervillain who is not around when her son was killed in reality by a man who is. “You think you fight for us,” she says. “You fight for yourself.”
Stark is devastated. “We’re no better than the bad guys.” The man we first saw demonstrating his company’s military weapons as though he was a rock star performing an arena show and who had no problem defending the money he made in munitions finally has to reckon with the truth he barely realized he had been moving closer to. And that is why, after the typical superhero opening action sequence we get a non-typical reaction. With SHIELD collapsed following “Winter Soldier,” the Avengers are operating on their own, without any oversight. A coalition of 117 nations insist that they agree to be subject to a UN commission (the “or what” is not ever spelled out because, what would it be?).
One of the film’s most intriguing developments is that not only do the Avengers line up on opposite sides but they don’t take the positions we might expect. Stark’s post-confrontation grapple with guilt has the most anarchistic of superheroes suddenly looking for the comfort of some rules. And the shock of SHIELD’s corruption has the most Boy Scout-ish of all superheroes, Captain America (Chris Evans) suddenly resistant to putting himself under anyone’s control. Some of the avengers pick a side on principle; some are more instrumental or practical. The Black Widow (Scarlett Johansson), who has her own history of unspeakable crimes, says, “Staying together is more important than how we stay together.”
Directors Anthony and Joe Russo deftly manage an enormous cast of characters. It’s easier to list those who do not appear in this film: Pepper Potts, Thor, Nick Fury, and the Hulk. Pretty much everyone else is here, and superbly added to the mix we have Paul Rudd as Ant-Man, who has some surprises in store, Black Panther (a lithe, powerful, and compelling Chadwick Boseman), avenging the death of his father, and the brand-new Spidey (Tom Holland, with Marisa Tomei as Aunt May). Bucky/Winter Soldier (Sebastian Stan) is here, too, and his storyline nicely mirrors the larger themes. He has been responsible for terrible crimes and abuses and some can never forgive him. But Captain America knows something about military operations. “We try to save as many people as we can,” he says. “Sometimes doesn’t mean everybody.” He knows how a human can become a weapon, and he is determined to get his friend back. Remember, this is not the Justice League. They are Avengers, and another character’s determination to get vengeance provides one of the movie’s most signficiant twists.
I don’t want to give away too much, so I’ll just say the action is everything you’d hope, with superhero-on-superhero collisions beyond the dreams of fanboy heaven. Keep an eye on the motorcycle. And the helicopter. And Ant-Man. And some cool special effects with Stark’s augmented flashback/therapy. And stay through the credits, of course.
Parents should know that this film includes extended sci-fi/comic book action violence with chases, crashes, and explosions, characters injured and killed, and brief strong language.
Family discussion: What are the best arguments for Ironman’s position on the accords? For Cap’s? How is this Spider-Man different from other portrayals of the character?
If you like this, try: “The Avengers” and “Captain America: The Winter Soldier”
Mother’s Day
Posted on April 28, 2016 at 5:20 pm
So, if “Mother’s Day,” the third in Marshall’s big star/tiny script mash-ups keyed to a holiday, was no worse than the first two, I was determined to give it the benefit of the doubt. I have a mom; I am a mom, I wrote a book about the best movie mothers, and so I’m the prime audience for a bunch of stories about the tenderest and often the most fraught of relationships, mother and child. If it managed to be inoffensive, I would have recommended it. But with this film, Marshall and his inexperienced co-screenwriters cross the tipping point from merely synthetic to downright vile, with apparently no notion of the difference between humor that points out the virulence of bigotry and “jokes” that treat racism and homophobia like just another cutesy personality quirk.
As with the earlier films, there are a lot of characters presenting variations on the theme. But the characters do not even rise to the level of stereotypes and the storylines couldn’t fill a fortune cookie. There is a chasm-sized disconnect between the film’s assumptions about our belief in any of them and its ability to deliver that level of interest. Not one thing is believable even in heightened, glossed-over movie terms. Everyone lives in gorgeous homes and there are no concerns about money. Intrusive product placement gives the film a sleasy infomercial vibe even as it pretends to make fun of home shopping channels hawking cheesy merchandise. Some odd random shots of individuals who have nothing to do with the story are either friends of the filmmaker or evidence that at one time the movie was even worse and got recut. It’s creepy that it takes place in the very diverse city of Atlanta but everyone is white except for the characters whose primary job is to serve as a racial stereotype. Pretty much everyone in the film is a stereotype, but the white ones are not offensive, just dull. The non-white ones are both.
A quick recap of the set-ups — very quick so neither one of us will nod off in stunned boredom. Sandy (Jennifer Aniston) is a single mom with two sons who is upset because her ex (Timothy Olyphant) has married a beautiful young woman. Kristin (Britt Robertson of “Tomorrowland”) loves the father of her baby, an aspiring stand-up comic, but she won’t accept his marriage proposal because she was adopted and thus thinks she does not know who she is. Sisters Jesse (Kate Hudson) and Gabi (Sarah Chalke), who live next door to each other, have not told their bigoted, RV-driving, redneck parents about their spouses — Jesse is married to an Indian-American (Aasif Mandvi) and Gabi is married to a woman (Cameron Esposito). And sad widower Bradley (Jason Sudeikis) has to cope with being a single dad of two daughters. Julia Roberts, in a disastrous orange traffic cone of a hairdo (it’s actually a wig leftover from “Notting Hill”), is also on board as a shopping channel mogul presumably because Garry Marshall gave her her big break in “Pretty Woman” and she will do anything for him.
A series of exposition-heavy introductory scenes (Bradley and his daughters standing at the gravesite: “I can’t believe it’s been a year,” another character explaining, “I have abandonment issues,” Sandy, Jesse, and Gabi helpfully recapping everything that is going on in their lives to each other like the crawl at the bottom of the CNN screen) is followed by a series of micro-complications that fall somewhere between a 6th grade skit and a one-season basic cable sit-com, following by a series of contrived and cloying “resolutions.” The only clunky device left out is words of wisdom from a clown. Oops, no such luck. It’s there. And it’s not over! There are the most lifeless bloopers in the credits in the history of bloopers in the credits.
This is all larded with cornball slapstick wildly outdated “hilarity” that includes a man wearing a woman’s pink silk bathrobe, a man falling off a balcony, a man embarrassed at having to buy tampons for his daughter, a woman with her shirt ripped open holding supposedly professional design presentation model that looks like a third grade diorama, and the same woman getting her arm stuck in a vending machine.
It gets worse. Cops run down a speeding vehicle and make the only non-white character lie down on the ground. It gets resolved when one of the officers recognizes him; the issue of racial profiling is portrayed as a joke. So is a crack about a little person named “Shorty.” The stand-up comic ends up holding his baby and not delivering any jokes during his crucial make-it-or-break-it set, jokes which were not only funny but which might have made it funny and meaningful. Same for this wilted bouquet of a movie. Give Mom breakfast in bed instead.
Parents should know that this film includes discussions of bigotry but also insensitive portrayals of racism and homophobia, brief strong language, sad off-screen death of a parent, family issues about divorce and remarriage, some strong language, and alcohol, including scenes with a baby in a bar.
Family discussion: How did meeting Miranda make Kristen think differently about marriage? What should Jesse have told her parents about her husband?
If you like this, try: “Valentine’s Day” and “New Year’s Eve”