REVIEW: “Hustle” (2022)

(CLICK HERE for my review in the Arkansas Democrat-Gazette)

Adam Sandler seems to be a likable guy, but it’s been a while since I’ve really enjoyed one of his movies. The trailer for “Hustle” didn’t inspire much hope. It teased a sports movie that seemed to lean heavy on well-worn tropes and countless cameos (one of Sandler’s favorite gimmicks). And considering I just recently watched a really good basketball movie (more on it next week), I wasn’t itching to immediately watch another one. But the response to “Hustle” has been pretty great with critics I trust speaking highly of it and Sandler’s performance. And trailers aren’t always reliable, right?

“Hustle” turns out to be a mixed bag. It’s made well enough by director Jeremiah Zagar and it has some truly heartfelt moments. Sandler gives a solid performance and Juancho Hernangómez is surprisingly good. But the film has such a copy-and-paste sports story which doesn’t offer much of anything that we haven’t seen before. Co-writers Taylor Materne and Will Fetters stick too close to an overly familiar blueprint which means there isn’t an ounce of suspense about how things will turn out. You pretty much know where it’s going from the very start.

And yes, there is a deluge of cameos. So many that they quickly begin to feel like a crutch. Sandler (who also produces) and the filmmakers stuff in every basketball personality they possibly can. Mark Cuban, Doc Rivers, Julius Irving, Dirk Nowitzki, Allen Iverson, Shaquille O’Neal, Charles Barkley, and that just scratches the surface. It goes well beyond servicing the story, almost to the point of vanity. Yes, we get it Sandman. You know a lot of people. It doesn’t mean you need to cram them into every Happy Madison Production.

Back to the story, Sandler plays Stanley Sugerman, an aging basketball scout for the Philadelphia 76ers. He spends his days spanning the globe, bouncing from country to country in hopes of finding the next big thing in the NBA. His dream is to finally land a coaching job which would allow him to spend more time at home with his wife, Teresa (Queen Latifah) and their teenage daughter, Alex (Jordan Hull).

His dream comes true when Sixers team owner Rex Merrick (Robert Duvall) promotes Stanley to assistant coach. But his excitement is short lived. In the first of several contrivances you can see coming a mile away, Rex suddenly dies, leaving his conceited son Vince (Ben Foster) to handle the day-to-day operation of the team. And one of his first acts is to take Stanley off the bench and put him back on the road. Now Rex has a daughter named Kat (Heidi Gardner) who holds a prominent position with the team. Like her father, she’s close to Stanley. But she suddenly vanishes for no apparent reason other than the writers need her to.

While in Spain, Stanley happens upon a streetball game. There he gets his first look at Bo Cruz (Hernangómez), a 22-year-old phenom in work boots who hustles on the court to help support his mom (Maria Botto) and young daughter (Ainhoa Pillet). In Bo, Stanley sees his ticket back to the Sixers bench. So he takes the young man under his wing and begins prepping him for his shot at playing in the NBA. Over time, the two grow close with Stanley becoming more of a father figure/coach than a down-on-his-luck scout.

Along the way we get several of the tried-and-true sports drama story beats. For example, there’s the mandatory rah-rah training segment as Stanley works to get Bo ready for the NBA Combine. And there are the conventional hurdles that are packed into every one of these movies. You know, the ones that leave our heroes feeling defeated and thinking all is lost. That is until the music swells and they get that one last shot. There was a brief moment where I thought the movie was actually going to do something fresh and unexpected. Alas, it immediately fell back in line and wraps up exactly as expected, bypassing several glaring questions, and going straight for the feel-good jugular.

Sandler and his inherent charm is almost enough to keep things afloat. Sure he’s playing a variation of the same character he’s played in several of his movies, but that’s part of what draws people to him. He also has a natural chemistry with Hernangómez and together they form the heart of the story. But other characters don’t fare as well. Take Foster who is easily dealt the worst hand. His Vince devolves into nothing more than a one-note villain with no nuance whatsoever. And in a truly lazy bit of writing, his story angle wraps up off screen and with one simply line of dialogue from another character.

The movie is at its best in the few moments where it pulls back from basketball and allows its characters to expand beyond the game. I also like how Zagar captures the energy of the big city streetball scene. But beyond that it’s hard to find much in “Hustle” to be excited about. And that’s mainly because we’ve seen all of this before. Throw in some really shaky writing and shoddy character work and you’re left with a cookie-cutter sports movie that may please Sandler diehards but with little to offer otherwise.

VERDICT – 2 STARS

“The Spielberg Summer”

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

TIME magazine called it “The Spielberg Summer”. 40 years ago this month, the acclaimed director of such hits as “Jaws”, “Close Encounters of the Third Kind” and “Raiders of the Lost Ark”, released two big movies one week apart. “Poltergeist” hit theaters June 4th and “E.T. the Extra-Terrestrial” followed close behind on June 11th. Both films were critical and box office successes and further cemented Steven Spielberg as the king of the Hollywood blockbuster.

“Poltergeist” ended up being the highest grossing horror film of 1982 and the year’s eighth highest grossing movie overall. It also earned three Academy Award nominations (Original Score, Sound Effects Editing, Visual Effects), losing all of them to Spielberg’s other film, “E.T.”. A global phenomenon, “E.T.” became the highest grossing film of all-time (toppling “Star Wars”), a distinction it held for eleven years until another Spielberg film, “Jurassic Park” took the honor. Still, “E.T.” left a major mark, earning nine Oscar nominations of its own, including one for Best Picture.

These days we’ve grown accustomed to franchises and tent-pole blockbusters. They’re what drive the current box office. But in 1982 it was a pretty big deal, especially coming from a filmmaker of Spielberg’s caliber. Back then more people held the big screen experience in high regard, and trips to the movie theater really meant something for many of us. In addition to the immersive and communal qualities of watching a movie in a dark room with a group of total strangers, theaters provided our only access to new films. There was no internet meaning there were no streaming services. And the video rental boom was near but it hadn’t fully bloomed yet. So we went to the theater. It was special.

“Poltergeist” is considered a Steven Spielberg film although the level of his involvement has been debated for decades. Spielberg conceived the story, co-wrote the script, and co-produced. But he was already at work making “E.T.” and a clause in his contract forbid him from directing another film while still in production. So Tobe Hooper (“The Texas Chainsaw Massacre”) was brought on to direct. Accounts vary on who had creative control with some going as far as proclaiming Spielberg as co-director. Co-producer Frank Marshall insisted Spielberg was “the creative force of the movie” while in a 2012 interview several cast and crew members credited Hooper.

Controversy aside, “Poltergeist” has Spielberg’s fingerprints all over it. It’s perhaps best known for a chillingly calm five-year-old Heather O’Rourke standing in front of a snowy television screen uttering the words “They’re heeeere.” But watching it again I was reminded of its many strengths that go beyond its fun but somewhat dated special effects. There’s the mischievous jolt it gave to the old-fashioned ghost story. There’s its hefty focus on developing a genuine and relatable family. There’s the terrific Zelda Rubinstein as an eccentric clairvoyant who brings a wonderful energy and kookiness to the film’s second half.

“Poltergeist” was well received by audiences at the time and has won over numerous skeptics in the decades that have followed. Generally speaking, critics also liked it although there were a few notable exceptions (Pauline Kael notoriously dismissed it as a “dumb concoction” and “entertaining hash“). And while it made good money, its box office numbers could have been even higher if not for the movie that came just one week later.

“E.T. the Extra-Terrestrial” was conceived, directed and co-produced by Spielberg, and its creative control was never in question. Despite claims he had plagiarized the film from an unproduced script by Indian filmmaker Satyajit Ray, Spielberg maintained that “E.T.” was inspired by the childhood imaginary friend he invented following his parents’ divorce. Whichever is true, “E.T.” was an instant hit. Including its two re-releases, the film has grossed just under $800 million.

Its massive popularity led to “E.T.” becoming a merchandising goldmine. Plush toys, storybooks, breakfast cereal, lunchboxes – the film generated over $1 billion in merchandising alone. Yet one reason “E.T.” remains one of Spielberg’s most beloved movies is that it wasn’t made just for kids. He gave audiences more than a suburban fairy tale about a young boy who befriends a homesick alien. He gave them a touching portrait of youth that kids of all ages could relate to.

As “Poltergeist” and “E.T.” turn 40-years-old, I can’t help but look back at June, 1982 with a particular sense of longing. Don’t get me wrong, I still enjoy many of today’s blockbusters, and I can get caught up in the near rabid excitement that surrounds certain high-profile releases. But this is a more homogenized era where blockbusters more often than not revolve around sequels and franchise-building. That’s why it’s easy to reflect on “The Spielberg Summer” with such fondness. It reminds me of a time when big summer movies and our first experiences with them were truly memorable. But then again, maybe I’m just old.

First Glance: “Persuasion”

The hard-working Dakota Johnson stars in the upcoming Netflix Original “Persuasion”, an adaptation of author Jane Austen’s final novel. First published in 1817, “Persuasion” was initially well received but has since earned a healthy fanbase. This latest take on the beloved story is directed by Carrie Cracknell and co-written by Ronald Base and Alice Victoria Winslow.

Johnson plays Anne Elliot, a seemingly happy young English woman with plans on marrying her love, Navy Captain Frederick Wentworth (Cosmo Jarvis). But then she’s persuaded by her blue-blooded family to give him up. Years later she finds her self torn between a dashing suitor played by Henry Golding and Frederick who re-enters her life. The period setting looks well realized and the cast (which also includes Richard Grant, Nikki Amuka-Bird, Mia McKenna-Bruce, Ben Bailey-Smith, among others) hints at a fresh new take on the literary classic.

“Persuasion” premieres July 15th on Netflix. Check out the trailer below and let me know if you’ll be seeing it or taking a pass.

REVIEW: “Star Wars: Episode VI – “The Return of the Jedi” (1983)

A long time ago in a galaxy we call our own, an anxious 12-year-old me sat in my bedroom floor. In front of me a mass of Kenner Star Wars toys lay spread out like a Thanksgiving feast. My imaginary battlefield was littered with action figures by the dozens, a Tie-Fighter, an X-Wing, an Imperial walker, an AT-ST, even a Tauntaun for good measure. Yet another battle between the Rebel Alliance and the evil Galactic Empire was about to break out on our tan and beige carpet.

That may sound like a suspiciously vivid memory, but it’s really not. That was a routine event in my room. I was (and in many regards still am) a massive Star Wars fan. And I would play for hours, reliving George Lucas’ stories with my toys and making up plenty of new adventures of my own. Back then I had Star Wars toys galore, Star Wars storybooks, Star Wars blasters, a Star Wars lightsaber, Star Wars pajamas, Star Wars posters, etc. etc. etc. You name it.

And it was all because of the movies. I’ve watched the three original films more than any other movie in my life. And I remember the experience of seeing each of them for the first time. In the early summer of 1983, all I could think about was “Return of the Jedi”, the final film in Lucas’ original three. You couldn’t gauge my excitement for it. It was off the charts. And the movie didn’t disappoint. Even better, it’s still just as good today and even a little weightier considering all of the Star Wars storytelling we’ve had since it was first released.

That was 40 years ago and to celebrate its anniversary, Disney is bringing “Return of the Jedi” back to theaters. This essential third film saw Richard Marquand direct from a script written by Lawrence Kasdan and franchise mastermind George Lucas. The story picks up directly after the events of “The Empire Strikes Back” and kicks off with a terrific opening that is Star Wars in a nutshell. We get a classic location, our favorite heroes, alien creatures galore, a slimy new villain, and a daring rescue. It was an energetic welcome back into the galaxy far far away.

From there the movie begins setting the table for its big conclusion. We learn that the evil Emperor (Ian McDiarmid) and Darth Vader (David Prowse, voiced by James Earl Jones) are nearing completion of a new planet-killing Death Star. It sits under construction in orbit over the forest moon of Endor. The Rebels hatch a daring plan to destroy the Death Star similarly to how they did in the original movie. But to get a shot at the space station they’ll need to lower its protective shield which is powered by a heavily guarded generator on Endor’s surface.

Enter our heroes. Han Solo (Harrison Ford), Leia Organa (Carrie Fisher), Luke Skywalker (Mark Hamill), and Chewbacca (Peter Mayhew), accompanied by droids C-3PO (Anthony Daniels) and R2-D2 (Kenny Baker), lead a team to Endor to destroy the shield generator. In the meantime, Lando Calrissian (Billy Dee Williams), piloting the Millennium Falcon, lead the Rebel assault on the Death Star. The movie ends with an epic three-pronged finish as one team battles on Endor, another in space above, and Luke on the Death Star finally confronting Darth Vader.

While there is an argument to be made that the Endor scenes bog down with the introduction of a furry primitive tribe called Ewoks, I love both the story’s steady buildup and its fulfilling payoff. The back-and-forths between the three big climactic clashes is pure exhilaration for any fan, and the story’s ultimate finish is thrilling while also packing a strong emotional punch. And again, that punch has only been amplified by the wealth of Star Wars storytelling that has come since – storytelling that has made Anakin Skywalker (aka Darth Vader) the centerpiece of the saga.

Joining the fun space opera story and the great assortment of characters are the visual effects which were truly cutting edge for its time. Some may not have aged particularly well (something highlighted most in the various high-definition editions that have released over the years). Also, some of Lucas’ digital tinkering doesn’t help. But you can’t dismiss the amazing vision of Lucas and the work from Industrial Light and Magic who bring that vision to life.

Without fail “Return of the Jedi” ignites a near childlike enthusiasm inside of me every time I watch it. You can chip away at some aspects of the storytelling, and it’s certainly not a sequel that holds up as stand-alone movie. But at that point Star Wars had firmly defined itself as a trilogy, and this film offered a near perfect conclusion. Over time fans have spent countless hours examining and dissecting it while creators are still building upon it and expanding it. The influence of “Jedi” (and the original Star Wars trilogy as a whole) has gone well beyond the first three films and still entertains legions of fans today. It did me all those years ago. And it still does today.

VERDICT – 5 STARS

REVIEW: ”Brian and Charles” (2022)

I have this deep and hard to explain affection for these small quirky indie comedies that are both light-hearted and melancholy. Last year it was “The Man in the Hat”, a wonderfully moving and whimsical road-trip movie starring Ciarán Hinds that deserved a much bigger audience. This year “Brian and Charles” most certainly scratches that itch. Its story about a lonely inventor who builds a seven-foot-tall cabbage-loving robot is every bit as wacky as it sounds. It’s also endlessly charming and as big-hearted as anything else you’ll see this year.

First time director Jim Archer employs a genuinely funny mockumentary style to introduce us to Brian (David Earl), a down-on-his-luck handyman living alone in rural Wales. He spends most of his time doing small jobs in a nearby village and playing darts with himself at home. To help ease his sense of loneliness and boredom, Brian began inventing things – odd creations such as a pine cone bag, an egg belt, and my personal favorite, a flying cuckoo clock.

Image Courtesy of Focus Features

In town, Brian shares small talk with a sympathetic general store owner named June (Cara Chase) and struggles to get a word out to a young woman named Hazel (Louise Brealey) who he clearly has eyes for. Meanwhile his timidity makes him fodder for the village bully, Eddie (Jamie Michie) and his roughneck daughters (Lowri and Mari Izzard). Then it’s back home where he sits alone with his inventions.

One day he spots some junk on the side of the road. In it he finds a mannequin heads which inspires him to build something new – a robot. It takes him 72 hours piecing together whatever parts he has around his house. And with a few clicks of a switch, Charles is “born”. With his mannequin head and washing machine torso, the awkwardly tall Charles (wonderfully voiced by Chris Hayward) is a hilariously unusual sight.

Co-written by the the films stars Earl and Hayward, “Brian and Charles” starts off hysterically exploring a budding friendship. Early on, Brian is more like a father as Charles’ personality goes from playful child to a rebellious teen. But as Charles quickly “matures” the two become chums. In addition to their funny exchanges, there are numerous touches that amp up the humor. Like the hilariously on-the-nose “Happy Together” by The Turtles as the two buddies play in the yard.

Image Courtesy of Focus Features

While Charles offers Brian the companionship he has so desperately longed for, he also opens Brian up to realities in his life – chances that are worth taking, antagonism that’s worth standing up against. And the second half really showcases the film’s humanity as it explores a bevy of themes that include isolation, loneliness, and longing.

Simply put, “Brian and Charles” is an absolute delight. It’s one of the funniest movies of the year and easily one of the most endearing. Its ending may seem a touch too tidy, but it’s such a fitting and warm-hearted finish that hits you right in the feels. And be sure to stay through the end credits. I missed it the first time watching but caught it during my second viewing. You’ll love it. “Brian and Charles” opens in select theaters on June 17th.

VERDICT – 4.5 STARS

REVIEW: “Jurassic World: Dominion” (2022)

Hot on the heels of the mega-hit “Top Gun: Maverick”, “Jurassic World: Dominion” is the next big blockbuster on the 2022 summer movie calendar. It’s predecessor, “Jurassic World: Fallen Kingdom” was a monumental disappointment, lacking the awe and wonder that made even the lesser Jurassic installments entertaining. And its story devolved into something too absurd, even for a movie based on a modern day dinosaur amusement park.

Still, “Fallen Kingdom” earned well over $1 billion at the box office and a sequel was all but assured. Enter “Dominion” which takes place four years after the events of the previous film. To “Fallen Kingdom’s” credit, it did leave the series in an interesting place. If you remember, dinosaurs were suddenly loose across our country. The fabulous Jeff Goldblum pops up in a cameo (reprising his role as Dr. Ian Malcolm) and tells a U.S. Senate committee that we have entered a neo-Jurassic Age where humans and dinos must co-exist.

Image Courtesy of Universal Pictures

That leads to “Dominion”, an ambitious movie that attempts to bring together the old and the new. Chris Pratt and Bryce Dallas Howard return from the “Jurassic World” movies while Sam Neill, Laura Dern, and Jeff Goldblum are reunited from the “Jurassic Park” films. It’s a cool idea and there are moments of nostalgic glee even for a lukewarm Jurassic fan like me. But “Dominion” is a weird movie that struggles to find a rhythm. There’s entertainment to be found, but you have to wade through some messy parts to find it.

With so many characters, director and co-writer Colin Trevorrow backs himself into a corner. He has to introduce each in a way that gives them stakes in the story. He has to develop them so that they have purpose beyond just refilling their character’s shoes. So we get the film’s first half that is literally and figuratively all over the map. It does set the table for its better second half, but getting there is a bit of a chore.

The most disappointing thing is how “Dominion” never really lives up to its promise. Ian Malcolm’s words in the “Fallen Kingdom” cameo made it sound like “Dominion” was going to give us mankind and dinosaurs fighting to co-exist. Instead the bulk of the movie once again moves to a fairly confined space and again features an overambitious (and in this case utterly mad) scientist who never questions what he’s doing. It fits with original writer Michael Crichton’s sharp critique of genetic tinkering. But it doesn’t expand on Crichton’s idea in the way it advertised.

Image Courtesy of Universal Pictures

The movie sets its two batches of character on different paths before inevitably bringing them together in the final third. Everyone’s favorite (and I’m quite sure only) Velociraptor trainer Owen (Pratt) and former Jurassic World park manager Claire (Howard) are living a secluded life high up in the the mountains. They have adopted young Maisie (Isabella Sermon), the world’s first successful human clone (I had completely forgotten her angle). But when a group of baddies kidnap Maisie, Owen and Claire set out to find her.

Meanwhile, paleobotanist Ellie Sattler (Dern) is secretly studying a destructive swarm of giant prehistoric locusts. She traces their origin to an evil corporation called BioSyn that is headed by the slimy Dr. Lewis Dodgson (Campbell Scott). Ellie wants to link Dodgson to the swarm and convinces her old colleague, paleontologist Alan Grant to help. And it just so happens Ellie has an inside man – mathematician and smooth-talker extraordinaire, Ian Malcolm (Goldblum).

As things play out we do get a cool action sequence in Malta (although the story surrounding it is pretty absurd). That’s where we’re introduced to a new character, Kayla Watts (DeWanda Wise). She’s a pilot-for-hire who out-of-the-blue decides to help Owen and Claire. Kayla adds a little toughness to the story but not much else.

Image Courtesy of Universal Pictures

All roads eventually lead to the BioSyn laboratories and dinosaur reserve where the movie finally picks up a little steam. There, Ellie, Alan, and Ian are reunited and do a little super-sleuthing. That also happens to be where Maisie is being held. You can probably already see how all of the character pieces start coming together. The final act plays much more like a traditional Jurassic Park movie, with our heroes caught in a madman’s domain where dinosaurs are roaming free. Here we get some genuinely fun moments and it’s where the characters feel most like themselves.

Again, “Jurassic World: Dominion” is messy and it takes forever to get its footing. And I can’t help but be disappointed by it shortchanging the who “coexisting” angle. And there are logic questions galore. For example, I’m still trying to figure how the dinosaurs multiplied to such vast numbers and spread all over the globe in only four years. But “Dominion” is a pretty dramatic step up from “Fallen Kingdom”. There is a big variety of dinosaurs for old and new for fans. And we get plenty of scene-stealing lines from the terrific Jeff Goldblum (he’s also part of the funniest laugh-out-loud joke I’ve seen in a movie this year). But these things can’t fully cover the film’s numerous shortcomings. I can appreciate the ambition, but this is a case where Trevorrow and company bit off more than they could chew. “Jurassic World: Dominion” opens today (June 10th) exclusively in theaters.

VERDICT – 2.5 STARS