REVIEW: “Emancipation” (2022)

December 12, 2022 by Keith Garlington

(CLICK HERE to read my full review in the Arkansas Democrat-Gazette)

Coming off the highs of his first Academy Award win and the lows of his infamous slap of Chris Rock during the live Oscar broadcast, Will Smith has certainly had a lot to navigate over the past year. His shameful and embarrassing behavior tarnished what should have been the biggest night of his career. Sadly, it also seems to have sullied some of the excitement for his follow-up film, the $120 million slavery survival epic(ish) “Emancipation”.

“Emancipation” isn’t a bad movie. In fact, director Antoine Fuqua’s passion for the the material (written by William N. Collage) seeps out of nearly every desaturated image. And Smith delivers what might be the most fiercely committed performance of his career. But Fuqua (who’s known most for his gritty crime thrillers and popcorn shoot ’em ups) lets his urge to entertain muddy things up. He seems caught in between making a prototypical action flick and something more artistic and inspiring. It leaves the film feeling historically less convincing which isn’t good, especially when you’re dealing with such weighty subject matter. Collage’s script contributes to the problem by leaning too heavily on well-worn action tropes and not enough on character dynamics and history. Still, there are things to admire in this $120 million production.

“Emancipation” is taken from the true story of an escaped slave named Gordon (Peter by some accounts). In 1863, Gordon/Peter fled a Louisiana plantation owned by John and Bridget Lyons. For ten days he was chased by bloodhounds across the treacherous swampland, finally making it to Baton Rouge where he joined the Union army. While there, he was forever immortalized through a photo showing his bare back, scarred and mangled from countless whippings. The photo of “Whipped Peter” was first published in Harper’s Weekly but quickly circulated, pulling back the veil on the atrocities of slavery and energizing the abolitionist movement.

While watching “Emancipation” you get the sense that Fuqua and Smith want their film to have a similar impact as that 1863 photo. They’ve made a brutally graphic movie with shock value that is sure to unsettle some and frustrate others. Their intentions are honorable. They want to awaken their audience to the realities of slavery. But there’s a fine line to walk, and sometimes the Hollywood influence can be overpowering.

Despite President Abraham Lincoln’s proclamation that all slaves in the Confederate states were free, many people remained enslaved throughout the South. In Louisiana alone, 350,000 were still in bondage. Their only choices were to stay in captivity until the Union army eventually came or seek freedom on their own. “Emancipation” tells a story set within that dark window of time. Liberation was coming, but for many it was impossible to know when. And the wait seemed like an eternity.

For a slave named Peter (Smith), a god-fearing husband and father of four, the urgency of freedom grows after he’s dragged from his family, thrown into a cage, and hauled to a labor camp where he’s put to work on a Confederate railroad. He promised his children that he would return, but the horrors surrounding him at the hands of brutal white foremen makes fleeing seem unlikely. But when he overhears that Lincoln has freed the slaves, he determines to escape and make his way to Baton Rouge where the Union army is stationed.

With a few swings of a shovel, Peter breaks free and escapes into the forest. He’s immediately pursued by Ben Foster’s Fassel, the film’s ruthless but otherwise empty villain who makes his own sociopathic sport out of hunting down “runners”. Foster is no stranger to playing heavies, but here he’s handed a dry and flavorless husk of a character who only serves the purpose of giving Peter someone to flee.

While the first 30 minutes is spent stressing the physical and emotional horrors of slavery (again, well-meaning but sure to turn off some), “Emancipation” quickly becomes a full-on survival thriller as Peter cuts through the gator-infested bayou with Fassel hot on his heels. Then in the third act, with very little buildup at all, the story takes a “Glory” like turn, complete with large-scale battlefield scenes, fierce combat, and lots of carnage.

These three dramatically different acts may lack the connecting tissue, but they each have their moments in large part thanks to Smith. Story-wise his narrowly confined character doesn’t allow him much room to stretch. But Smith transforms himself for the role, and the sheer physicality he pours into the performance is astonishing.

Then there’s DP Robert Richardson who squeezes nearly every ounce of color from his images to visualize a bleak and forbidding world. His sweeping overhead shots and beautiful framing can come across as showy and even a bit distracting. But more often than not the visuals amaze and show the more inspired side of the movie. They tease what “Emancipation” might have been without the genre trimmings. Thankfully the story of “Whipped Peter” stays intact, and Fuqua deserves credit for his willingness to tell it. “Emancipation is now streaming on Apple TV+.

VERDICT – 2.5 STARS

REVIEW: “The Fabelmans” (2022)

December 9, 2022 by Keith Garlington

Steven Spielberg takes us back to his childhood with “The Fabelmans”, a semi-autobiographical odyssey that sees the acclaimed filmmaker at his most personal. I went in fully expecting to see an epic ‘love letter’ to moviemaking, and it certainly has some of that. But in reality, “The Fabelmans” is more of a testament to why movies are made. It explores what inspires and drives artists to tell the stories they tell. And to no surprise (with Spielberg at the helm), it’s also a testament to the transforming power of the cinematic language, especially in the hands of a gifted visionary and craftsman.

The film features Spielberg exploring key events in his life, making stops along his own personal timeline that impacted his family and shaped his decision to be a filmmaker. Many of the stops highlight specific moments when he began to see his parents, not just as his mom and dad, but as real people. Others show how it was filmmaking that not only helped him to understand the world around him, but also communicate his feelings to others. It doesn’t always come together as seamlessly as you would want, but when absorbed and then considered as a whole, it’s hard not to be impressed (and at times swept away) by what we’re given.

Spielberg’s stand-in is Sammy Fabelman (played as an eight-year-old by Mateo Zoryon Francis-DeFord and later as a 16-year-old by Gabriel LaBelle). We first meet young Sammy in 1952 as he nervously stands in line at his neighborhood cinema. His parents explain what’s about to happen once they go inside for Sammy’s first moviegoing experience. “Mommy and daddy will be right next to you,” his father assures him. “The lights will go down. There may be some organ music as the curtains open. Don’t be scared.” They then follow the line inside as the glowing marquee welcomes them to see “The Greatest Show on Earth”.

**Image Courtesy of Universal Pictures**

Needless to say, the film has an immeasurable impact on Sammy. Before long he’s attempting to recreate DeMille’s famous train crash scene with his own electric train set and a camera. It’s the first leg of his (and Spielberg’s) journey towards becoming a filmmaker. The starry-eyed Francis-DeFord is wonderful at capturing younger Sammy’s awe and wonder. Through him you can see the gears turning as the inquisitive young boy tries to grasp the creative forces behind what he has seen on screen.

While his growing love for cinema certainly has its place in the film, it’s Sammy’s family life, especially his relationship with his parents, that form the crux of the story. The Fabelmans were the only Jewish family in their middle-class New Jersey neighborhood. Sammy’s father Burt (Paul Dano) is a computer engineer and technician for RCA. His mother Mitzi (Michelle Williams) is a skilled pianist. As a couple, they have a compelling ‘man of science’ vs. ‘woman of the arts’ dynamic.

When Burt gets hired by General Electric, Sammy, his parents, his three sisters, and their goofball family friend Bennie (Seth Rogen) move to Phoenix. We then bolt ahead several years where Sammy (now a teenager) is ready to make his first bonafide movie. Inspired by “The Man Who Shot Liberty Valence”, he and a few pals from his Boy Scout troop shoot a Western short he calls “Gunsmog”.

From there Sammy’s passion for moviemaking only grows, but Burt routinely dismisses it as nothing more than a “a hobby”. He means well and he’s a good father. But his linear thinking and blind optimism constantly hinders him from seeing the obvious. Meanwhile his mother’s frustrations and insecurities lead to impulsiveness and eventually a growing emotional detachment. Cracks are forming and only widen after another move. This time to California, where Sammy’s rollercoaster high school years see him experience bullying and antisemitism, but also his first love and (of course) chances to make more movies.

But what’s most fun and revealing is watching Sammy learn the world through his camera. Not only does it allow him to tell stories, but also to truly see people. He finds that not only can the camera reveal the truth, but it gives the person looking through the lens control of that truth. They can conceal it or expose it; twist it or erase it altogether. He also discovers the camera’s ability to sway opinions, earn respect, and win hearts. And Sammy uses it to his advantage (an interesting bit of self-critique from Spielberg perhaps).

As we’re ushered through the family drama, Spielberg’s patchwork approach can feel a little messy. And while I loved most of the performances (Paul Dano is terrific and Judd Hirsch brings a jolt in his brief ten minutes), I sometimes struggled with Williams’ Mitzi – an emotional maelstrom who is rarely given a quiet moment. Yet in the end they all help bring life to Spielberg’s memories. They’re still a little blurry in spots, and some of the pieces are missing. But this inward looking feature achieves what it sets out to do. It sees one of cinema’s all-time greats not just showing how he became a filmmaker, but also what it means to be a filmmaker. Once that aim came into focus for me, my expectations suddenly didn’t matter, and Spielberg had me, just as he always has.

VERDICT – 4 STARS

REVIEW: “Blackout” (2022)

December 8, 2022 by Keith Garlington

Here’s another movie tapping into the well-worn ‘hero with amnesia’ premise. You know the ones – the protagonist wakes up unable to remember who they are. Soon they’re shooting it out with a bunch of goons who want to kill them, all while trying to piece back together their memory. This latest spin on the story isn’t much of a spin at all. But it does star the ever likable Josh Duhamel, so there’s that.

Sharing the same title with as least 30 other movies (according to IMDB), “Blackout” tells a story that ends up being as uninspired as its name. Duhamel plays John Cain, who wakes up in a hospital bed following a serious car accident. It just so happens that Cain has lost his memory. He has no idea who he is or how he got there. By his side is Anna (an incredibly dry Abbie Cornish) saying she’s his wife. Later he’s visited by Eddie (Omar Chaparro) claiming to be his best friend. But why can’t he remember either of them.

It turns out Cain possesses a briefcase full of something the drug cartels are desperate to get their hands on. The problem is he has no recollection of the briefcase or of what’s inside it. But as his memory slowly starts returning, he finds himself questioning the information different people are feeding him. What are lies? What’s the truth? Even more, if Eddie is Cain’s friend why is he suddenly trying to kill our woozy protagonist? Soon we have a full-scale shoot-em-up as the cartel locks down hospital, and Cain tries to escape while sorting out who he can ultimately trust.

Directed by Sam Macaroni and written by Van B. Nguyen, “Blackout” bops along fairly briskly after getting its setup out of the way. The mostly single setting is a compelling choice and Macaroni has a good eye for action. The fistfights and shoot-outs don’t always make sense and some are just plain silly. But they’re stylishly shot, and Duhamel has the physicality to pull them off.

Unfortunately Nguyen’s script isn’t as reliable. First off, she’s bound by a pretty tired premise and doesn’t really offer anything new to the old formula. As for the suspense, Nguyen tries to keep us guessing by spoon-feeding just enough information. But there really aren’t many surprises, and everything plays out in a way most people will have figured out well before the not-so-big reveal. It’s also hampered by some pretty hokey dialogue, especially once Nick Nolte shows up. He plays DEA Agent Ethan McCoy, an old friend of Cain’s trying to help him from the outside. It’s great seeing Nolte on screen again. But the 81-year-old screen veteran struggles, and isn’t helped by some really hammy lines that frankly no one could sell.

So “Blackout” ends up being a pretty generic action-thriller that has some decent shootouts and a couple of good fight scenes. There’s just not enough under the hood to make this thing go. It’s simply too by-the-books and even the charming Josh Duhamel can’t liven it up or give it the kick it needs. It’s a shame because I still believe Duhamel can carry bigger movies and handle meatier roles if only given the chance. Sadly, “Blackout” won’t do anything to enhance those opportunities. “Blackout” is now streaming on Netflix.

VERDICT – 2 STARS

First Glance: “The Guardians of the Galaxy Vol. 3”

December 7, 2022 by Keith Garlington

I’m a little late getting to this, but last week Marvel Studios dropped the first trailer for the upcoming third installment in their “The Guardians of the Galaxy” branch of the MCU. I’ve enjoyed the “Guardians” films, but I’ve never considered them top-tier MCU. The films are full of fun characters, but the hit-and-miss goofiness along with some pretty bland villains have held them back. Still, director James Gunn finds ways to make things entertaining.

His third chapter sees the Guardians at a pretty low point. It’s especially true for Peter (Chris Pratt) who’s still struggling with the loss of his Gamora. But this is a James Gunn movie so you know things aren’t going to stay somber for very long. In fact we get several good laughs in the trailer that fit nicely with the goofy tone of the previous films. But we also get glimpses that make us wonder if we’re in for some heartbreak. Time will tell. I’m pretty interested in seeing where this third (and possibly final) “Guardians” movie goes.

“The Guardians of the Galaxy Vol. 3” opens May 5, 2023. Check out the trailer below and let me know if you’ll be seeing it or taking a pass.

REVIEW: “Broker” (2022)

December 7, 2022 by Keith Garlington

Anytime I see Hirokazu Kore-eda’s name attached to a project you can bet I’ll be watching. The 60-year-old Japanese auteur’s last film was 2019’s “The Truth”, a terrific drama not near enough people talked about. It was Kore-eda’s first movie set outside of his native Japan and not in his native tongue. His latest, “Broker”, sees him once again venturing outside his home country, this time to South Korea. Yet it remains a Hirokazu Kore-eda film through and through.

In “Broker” (written and directed by Kore-eda), the story revolves around a band of outcasts brought together through an unusual series of circumstances and who have all kinds of odds stacked against them. As you would expect from a Kore-eda film, we once again see him plowing that fertile ground of family, both the conventional and (more so in this case) the unconventional kinds. And, as he so often does, Kore-eda tells his story with a heartfelt humanistic touch, ushering his characters (and us) across some morally thorny ground, yet always finding ways to earn our empathy.

Another way you know you are watching a Kore-eda film is by the richness of his visuals. “Broker” is no exception. You can always sense the trust Kore-eda has in his actors by the way he shoots them. So often the camera will sit still, strategically framing a shot in a way that both captures our eye and let’s the performances carry a good portion of the load. And usually when there is movement, it will be slow and steady pans that stay intently focused on the characters. Then you have the incredible detail squeezed into nearly every frame, whether he’s shooting a wider area like a neighborhood street or a small intimate space like a single room. There’s always something compelling to take in.

As for the story, Kore-eda begins with some important table-setting. On a dark and rainy night, a young mother leaves her infant child on the cold concrete in front of Busan Family Church and then scurries off. Watching from a nearby car are two police detectives, Soo-jin (Bae Doona) and Lee (Lee Joo-young). Lee follows the young mother while Soo-jin picks up the well-wrapped child and places it in the church’s “baby box” (it’s like a drop box for infants). Soo-jin then hurries back to her car to avoid being noticed.

Inside, Dong-soo (Gang Dong-won), a part-time employee at the church, retrieves the baby boy from the box and gives him to Ha Sang-hyeon (Song Kang-ho). They erase the security camera footage and any evidence that the child was dropped off. Sang-hyeon then takes the child to his ragtag laundromat which is really just a front for their equally ragtag two-man child trafficking operation. They defend their practice by claiming they’re saving children from the inevitability of growing up in an orphanage. Instead, they find the babies a home, allowing potential parents to bypass the country’s broken adoption process. Of course they do expect a “modest payment” for their services. So as the title intimates, they are brokers, but of a more sordid kind.

But what they didn’t expect was for the mother, Moon Sun-ah (Lee Ji-eun) to show up the next day looking for her son. Before long, she has joined Sang-hyeon and Dong-soo on a long road-trip to meet a couple who are interested in buying her child. Meanwhile the two detectives follow the oddball trio plus one baby, watching from a distance with hopes of arresting them in the act.

It certainly makes for an offbeat scenario – one that could easily veer off into into several directions, either super-serious or farcical. But in the hands of Kore-eda, the film never loses its plausibility despite how crazy the circumstances get. And while fairly serious, the story makes time for more light-hearted moments and even dashes of black comedy. Meanwhile the characters, as morally suspect as they may be, earn and maintain our empathy. Kore-eda guides us past their flaws and urges us to see them in a different light.

There are times when Kore-eda drives close to melodrama, but he never lets his film cross over the line. He keeps things grounded and character-focused, making it easy for us to relate despite the on-screen actions we’re witnessing. At the same time, Kore-eda also poses some thoughtful questions through his characters as they’re forced to face difficult choices, no-win scenarios, and unavoidable consequences. Just more pieces that enhance this technically, narratively, and emotionally savvy journey. Altogether “Broker” is a beautifully composed and constructed character study wrapped in Kore-eda’s signature warmth and grace. “Broker” hits select theaters on December 26th.

VERDICT – 4.5 STARS

REVIEW: “Violent Night” (2022)

December 5, 2022 by Keith Garlington

“Violent Night” is dumb beyond measure, deliriously hyper-violent, and a glaring clone of countless other movies (just with a Christmas time setting). But here’s the thing, this holiday action-comedy is proud to be all of those things. In fact, it’s exactly what director Tommy Wirkola and the screenwriting duo of Pat Casey and Josh Miller are going for. Their firm devotion to their vision is certainly commendable. It’s also what makes the film wear out its welcome well before its numbingly goofy (and proudly blood-soaked) final act.

David Harbour plays Santa Claus, donning the classic red suit and white beard but with a far from festive snarl. We first meet him on Christmas Eve chugging beer at a pub in Bristol, England. Disenchanted with the greed and overall lack of Christmas spirit in the world, the not-so-jolly elf lets out his frustrations to his makeshift drinking buddies before hopping on his sleigh, upchucking all over the bartender (a drunk barfing – there’s a new one), and flying off to continue his deliveries.

Meanwhile in Greenwich, Connecticut, an estranged couple, Jason Lightstone (Alex Hassell) and his wife Linda (Alexis Louder), are taking their daughter Trudy (Leah Brady) to the excessively lavish Lightstone estate, the home of Jason’s crude and obscenely wealthy mother, Gertrude (Beverly D’Angelo) who’s hosting a Christmas Eve party for her family. Between the staff, the security detail, and the team of caterers, it’s far from a cozy affair. But that’s hardly a concern for the garish and self-consumed Gertrude.

Already at the party is Alva (Edi Patterson), Gertrude’s shallow, boozy daughter; Morgan (Cam Gigandet), Alva’s husband and a low-rent action movie star; and Bert, Alva’s obnoxious son from her first marriage and a wannabe social media influencer. They all come together for a night of upper-crust indulgence, fake affection, and family posturing.

But just as the money-grubbing Lightstones are set to begin their festivities, the caterers pull out automatic weapons and start mowing down Gertrude’s staff and security detail. Leading the assault is “Scrooge” (John Leguizamo), a holiday-hating mercenary who fires more dopey Christmas one-liners than bullets (a gag the movie never seems to grow tired of). Scrooge and his team aren’t just their to crash the party. No, he’s there for the $3 million in cash that Gertrude has locked up in a state-of-the-art vault.

What the goons didn’t count on was Santa Claus who stops at the Lightstone compound to leave a present for Trudy (she’s on his nice list). But after he encounters one of the mercs, Saint Nick finds himself forced into action. From there this “Die Hard” knock-off pretty much plays just as you would expect, with Santa as the John McClane character, Scrooge playing a poor-man’s Hans Gruber, and several heavily armed henchmen – some trying to open the vault while others try to track down the poison pill that threatens to derail their heist.

The film shamelessly rips off several other movies, but in the case of “Die Hard”, it’s too much to even be considered an homage. But thanks to its Christmas setting, “Violent Night” is able to have some fun all its own. And that’s fairly entertaining for a while. Unfortunately for me, the film reached a point where I needed more than a hard-R spin on a Christmas movie. But Wirkola and company are relentless, milking their gimmick dry and then still pressing on for another 30 minutes or so.

One bit I did enjoy was its tip of the hat the “Home Alone”. We get about a ten-minute sequence that I won’t spoil, but it sees Trudy going full-blown Kevin McAllister but with much more gruesome results. And despite the lazily conceived potty-mouthed Santa bit, Harbour is (to no surprise) really good in his role. There’s not much depth or nuance in the character (despite the writers trying to manufacture some), but Harbour’s natural personality makes his Santa semi-interesting.

“Violent Night” desperately wants to be a new holiday cult classic, but it’s hardly something that’ll leave a lasting impression. Ultimately it is aggressively what it is. It tries to add some emotional layers by throwing in a couple of sudsy scenes along the way. But in reality, the movie mostly seems interested in pushing its R rating, and it loses itself in that relentless pursuit. It’ll be a blast for some. But for those who burn out on its gimmick, I can see it being an endurance test. “Violent Night” is out now in theaters.