Big Legend OK
I am a fan of cryptozoology, not in the sense I would live
my life by trying to prove existences. I
know it’s all a bunch of hoopla but, much like Hell/Satan, ghosts and UFO’s,
etc., I like the notion of it. Bigfoot
seems to be the most popular cryptid not only in film, but pop culture in
general. You can probably guess this
film involves Bigfoot, right? I
reluctantly gave this an OK rating and I’ll explain why ahead. First off, maybe I’m getting too impatient for
feature length films anymore. If you’ve
kept up with my reviews or read specific ones, you probably recall me
mentioning several times that some movies would work better as condensed
television episodes or anthology film segments.
Well, you can probably guess that’s how I felt about this film,
right? There is way too much filler here
during which I had to force myself to stay awake and that’s never a good sign
(the movie was roughly 89 minutes). It
starts off rather lame with a straight couple retreating to the woods, getting
engaged, and when night falls, one of them goes to investigate a noise outside
their tent that “might be a bear” (seriously, you would leave your tent to see
if it was a bear?!!), and usually that means at least one of them isn’t going to
be so lucky. Then it takes quite a bit
for something to happen after the guy (sorry for ruining who the victim was)
returns to the woods after a year-long stint in a mental institution to kill
the creature that took his fiancé away (he thinks she might actually still be
alive since her body was never found…umm okay).
Now, the scenes that are actually passable and make it worthwhile---i.e.
the first truck attack, the creature’s bloody attack on a hunter, the final
fight---are what made me give it an OK rating.
The creature itself is practical, or a person in a suit to be exact, and
isn’t as awful as some cinematic Sasquatch creatures have been (yes, you will
get to see it in its entirety). In other
words, it wasn’t CGI which is a plus for me.
A seasoned actor recognizable to horror fans in particular makes an
appearance at the end before we’re informed there is to be a follow-up, hinting
at a possible franchise involving other monsters. I might return if they avoid this one’s
mistakes by giving us more killer (scenes) and much less filler. 7/18/2018
Blumhouse’s Truth or
Dare EH/OK
With Truth or Dare
being the title of other films (the psychotic ‘80’s one comes to mind), I guess
the studio felt if their name preceded the title it would somehow differentiate
it. A group of people play truth or dare
with a stranger they meet in Mexico (why must characters still meet cuties on
vacation that initially appear sweet but subsequently lure them into something
dangerous?); we in the audience know they’re all fucked before they figure it out after several casualties;
the reasoning behind the curse is figured out closer towards the end…sorry, you
can try differentiating the title all you want, but that doesn’t make the plot
unique. The cursed group is in a bit of
a quandary even after returning home---if they refuse to play the game, they
die; if they don’t tell the truth, they die; if they don’t do the dare, they
die. Everyone around them (including
those not in the game themselves) asks the game’s question while their faces
appear to be “messed up Snapchat filters” and only the person who’s turn it is
can see them that way. Is this movie
scary? Not exactly, unless you find the
“messed up Snapchat filtered” faces creepy.
Is it fun? Slightly, barely, not
really. I lean more towards OK but only
in the formulaic, no-surprises-expected, watch-when-you’re-bored kind of
way. There is a rather clever solution
at the end reminiscent of The Ring though. Now that’s a much better movie in which the
titular studio had no part in. 7/17/2018
The Endless OK/G
The two brothers in this film, played by Justin Benson and
Aaron Moorhead, are also the directors; they gave us Resolution, Spring, and a
segment of V/H/S: Viral as well. Resolution
was a good movie (it made my runner-up list for best of 2013) with a trippy as
fuck ending. Spring was a decent romance movie with a Lovecraftian touch. This film begins with a Lovecraft quote and
is very Lovecraftian-ish, suggestively and thematically over visually. These guys must be fans of Lovecraft. It ties in with Resolution, basically being one film together, and answers that
films open-ended questions. That being
said, you don’t necessarily have to see Resolution
before The Endless, but you might
know more than you should if you choose to watch it after this. (Hint---check out Resolution first, it’s a good movie). While I did thoroughly enjoy this and still
recommend it, especially if you liked Resolution,
I ultimately felt like it was more of an idea (and some very good ones it
postulates) than an actual movie. Since
I questioned how I truly felt afterwards, I can’t in my right mind give it a
strictly G rating and I absolutely feel guilty for doing so. Like I mentioned above about this and Resolution being one film, I kinda wish
they did make it one three-hour-plus film since this felt like a small part of the
overall story (even at 111 minutes). This
was just my first impression though. I have
a feeling I might like it better knowing what happens and watching it back to
back with Resolution, so my rating is
temporary. Anyhow, the filmmaking duo
definitely have style and are ones to keep an eye on. I, for one, am curious as to what they put out
next. 7/19/2018
How It Ends OK/G
A new apocalyptic movie from Netflix. Apocalyptic movies are dead but, like every
other subgenre, can still be watchable if done properly, effectively, or at
least entertainingly. This movie isn’t
exactly groundbreaking but I did like much of it, specifically the visuals. The majority of the movie seems like it could
happen as we speak; no Roland Emmerich or Michael Bay effects are needed to
convey a dreary post-apocalyptic world where barren landscapes and abandoned
locations can be equally as effective. It
isn’t without its faults of course either, there are several, like why do
people still feel the need to stop and help others especially during an
apocalypse knowing full well (at least we in the audience do) they likely have
sinister intentions? It takes a less is
more approach by being a road movie but it’s not quite like a Mad Max movie or even The Road (there be no cannibals
here). A man and his intended
father-in-law travel from Chicago to Seattle by car(s) after the power goes out
nationwide, following a lost connection between the man and his intended wife
via phone video. I’m not sure if the
overall message was metaphorical, suggesting that our technology-reliant era
would result in an apocalyptic scenario if all modern technology ceased to
function? It isn’t far from the truth;
many today wouldn’t be able to survive without their phones or computers
(whichever version). There’s no
definitive explanation for the apocalypse, only suggestions like a nuclear bomb
going off, bad air, and a preposterous implication that’s instantly ridiculed,
so don’t expect one. And if you expect
to see any disaster flick effects like those of Roland Emmerich or Michael Bay,
it doesn’t happen until the very end (with the exception of a heavy rain storm
and wildfire that could happen without an apocalypse). No, I didn’t just tell you how it ends and, in regards to the
title, I didn’t feel like it actually ended (even at 113 minutes), leaving me
feeling unsatisfied. 7/23/2018
In Darkness EH/OK
I predicted something from the very beginning and was
right. Maybe I watch too many movies but
I would think filmmakers would too, before becoming one or during their free
time (however much they may have).
There’s more than one twist in this film involving a blind lady living
below a couple where one is thrown out the window one night after a fight,
although none are either new or exactly surprising. I initially thought this could’ve been a
decent thriller and I sorta liked the potential relationship between two of the
characters but…those twists! I can
forgive unoriginal twists if I like a good portion of the film otherwise, but
not if it’s already been used in better films or the final twist makes ardent
filmgoers (like yours truly) shout mentally or to others in attendance, “Well,
I could’ve told you that!” 7/15/2018
Isle of Dogs G
New claymated, although I think the technical term is
stop-motion animated, film from Wes Anderson in which dogs are banished from a
Japanese city to a trash island (of the same name) resulting from a canine
resentment tracing back to a war many years ago. The dogs speak English but the Japanese speak
their native tongue (which you’re informed of at the beginning) with the
occasional translator and instances where actions speak louder than words. It should go without saying that the dogs and
their lovers win at the end, considering they were always the innocent victims
of a nefarious plan from those in power.
I think I liked Wes’ other stop-motion flick, Fantastic Mr. Fox, better which could stem from personal bias since
it was based on a book by one of my favorite authors (nah, I liked that one
better regardless), but this one has enough charm to warrant a look. 7/25/2018
Rampage G
It starts off with a rather feeble Alien homage featuring a giant rat before becoming a fun popcorn
flick the way brainless, big-budget action movies are supposed to be. It takes a bit to get started with some
occasional inactivity here and there, but I’ll have to say I was quite
impressed with the special effects and action sequences even if they looked a
tad extravagant. Basically, an experiment
intended to make specimens grow and become more aggressive lands in the
territories of an albino gorilla, wolf, and crocodile. Even if you didn’t see the previews or play
the video game from the ‘80’s which it’s based (I have not), you can probably
guess what happens to all three.
Apparently it causes them to mutate as well (at least 2 of the 3). There actually is a plot if you can call it
that, but I’m pretty sure anyone planning on watching this care more about the
giant creature mayhem. Granted, this is
no masterpiece and I could probably list some cons if I really wanted to (i.e.
how did they know the gorilla would eat the lady when it showed no evidence of
doing it before?), but I’m recommending it since it was better than I thought
it was going to be and better than it had any right to be. 7/23/2018
Ready Player One G
In the year 2045, well it was developed in 2025 but the film
takes place in 2045, people can become avatars in a virtual reality world
called The Oasis. It sounds like a
pretty sweet gig if this film is any indication for how the future might
be. Who wouldn’t want to be someone else
(anybody or anything) and travel anywhere they want without leaving home? Coin amounts determine how much you can alter
who and where you are and your avatar can die in the game but you won’t die in
reality. This is the latest creation
from Mr. Steven Spielberg (based on a book of the same name), full of popular
‘80’s tunes and a smorgasbord of pop culture references. One doesn’t necessarily need a total
awareness of pop culture (particular from the ‘80’s) to enjoy, but it might
make it more fun and/or cue nostalgia.
There’s a worthy re-creation of Stanley Kubrick’s The Shining, plus Chucky appears elsewhere! One need not be a gamer, now or ever, to
enjoy either. If anything, this might
make people want to seek out the movies or games mentioned they’ve never seen
or played before. It is a bit long at
140 minutes and the special effects are a tad superfluous at times, but I think
it’s a fairly worthy addition to Spielberg’s filmography. 7/24/2018
Robin Williams: Come Inside My Mind EH
Robin Williams. I’d
be amazed if any kid (or adult) growing up in the ‘80’s and ‘90’s didn’t like a
single thing involving the late “funny man.”
My personal favorites were Hook,
Aladdin, Mrs. Doubtfire, and Jumanji (kinda). I remember liking One Hour Photo despite many, not counting critics, being
dissatisfied with his serious performance they were unaccustomed to. I don’t remember being a fan of The Birdcage or Good Will Hunting despite being loved by many (critics and non-critics). This documentary recently released on HBO
doesn’t do the man justice in my opinion.
It provides us with key moments from his childhood to his death, showing
clips of some of his stand-up routines and films intercut with interviews from
stars, family and friends, but nothing you couldn’t find in a written article
or on a timeline. Sure, he had a lonely
childhood, the death of John Belushi deeply upset him, he got entangled with
typical Hollywood drama, had an alcohol addiction, and was diagnosed with
Parkinson’s before taking his own life, but I wanted to literally get inside
this man’s head as the title implies instead of hearing the timeline
footnotes. I would’ve rather seen
private therapy sessions (or re-enactments) to understand what truly troubled
this “funny man,” but all this documentary made me want to do was watch some of
the movies again and the stand-ups I’ve never seen in their entirety. R.I.P. “Funny Man” from my younger
years! 7/21/2018
Submission OK
Stanley Tucci plays a writer and professor at a college in
Vermont and becomes fascinated with one of his female student’s who’s letting
him read a book she’s in the process of writing. A friendship begins between them and you can
probably guess where that leads even before they happen to be alone
together. The male professional is
always going to be the monster whose life is subsequently ruined when it all
comes out. Blah, blah, blah. The younger girl wanted it just as much and
knows she’s going to be the victim when claiming the liaison was against her
will after the guy either upsets her or doesn’t give her what she wants, or
from fear of being slut-shamed after being caught. Blah, blah, blah. Then feminists, both male and female, wonder
why people don’t believe real victims because of girls like her. Yes, the married male should never give in to
temptation either. If it’s consensual,
they’re both at fault and should be punished equally, but that’s just me. Stanley Tucci is very good but it’s a shame
the movie wasn’t too original however relevant.
7/20/2018
Traffik OK
I guess they didn’t want to share the same exact title as the
2000 film by misspelling theirs. That
film dealt with a different kind of trafficking (see, the ‘k’ is only added
when you make it a verb and the noun was never spelled ‘traffick’) and this film
had a dark subplot involving the very real issue (statistics are given at the
end) which should’ve been expanded upon.
I guess the message is to be cautious of who you come across in public,
especially if they’re shady, and always check your belongings afterwards, not
only for your stuff but if they slipped you something; it could save you a heap
of trouble and possibly your life. A straight
couple retreat to a secluded house in the wooded mountains (I was jealous of
the pad) and eventually those they came across at a gas station earlier come to
retrieve an item someone slipped in the woman’s purse. Of course this item has classified
information that can’t get out (pertaining to the title perhaps?). Sounds like the plot of many a movie we’ve seen
already (I won’t name examples; if you’ve seen movies from at least the last 40
years, you’ll find this film very familiar).
I knew from the moment a certain character came on screen that they were
in on the illegal activity (I won’t reveal who in case you haven’t seen many
movies in the last 40 years). The
majority of the film plays like a TV-movie thriller. I didn’t hate it as much as I should have, I
didn’t hate it at all actually, it’s just a forgettable thriller that’s been done
before and I don’t think it was particularly special. 7/24/2018
Us and Them EH/OK
A more appropriate or significant title would be Us vs.
Them in this U.K. film dealing with issues between the haves and the
have-nots, the rich and the poor, etc.
They’re all Caucasians involved so evidently if we all were of one race,
there’d still be differences whether it be class, economic status, gender or
sexual orientation. Three men invade a
rich family’s home (consisting of a man, his wife and daughter) in more of an
attempt to show others like them (via video) how the less fortunate (like the
three men) feel daily, instead of simply robbing them. Not all works out as planned (as always in
these situations in movies). There’s an
apparent Tarantino influence, an instance of a Spike Lee influence (you’ll know
when if you’re familiar with the filmmakers work), plus other U.K. crime
thrillers and general home invasion films.
Class and economic differences (especially since many can relate) will
always make for interesting social commentaries and I’m still generally a
sucker for nonlinear storytelling which an aforementioned director is known
for, but I couldn’t help but feel this was a story I’ve seen one time too many,
in theme and execution. 7/15/2018
Where Is Kyra? EH/OK
Michelle Pfeiffer plays an unemployed, hard up individual
that dresses up as her recently deceased mother in order to receive pension
checks after accidentally providing incorrect information to receive other
payments which could take weeks to repair.
She also tries selling some of her mother’s stuff while looking for work
with no luck. I really do understand her
plight in these relatably tough economic times and I absolutely do feel for her
character, but the movie didn’t have to be so boring. Roseanne
on the other hand, disregarding that controversial incident, also dealt very
much with real life and the struggles of working class Americans but still
managed to be entertaining. 7/15/2018
---Sean O.
No comments:
Post a Comment