REVIEW: “Death Proof”

DeathProofPOSTER

Quentin Tarantino’s weirdly audacious “Death Proof” is yet another example of the acclaimed filmmaker recapturing a slice of cinema history. This time he sets his sights on the old grindhouse theater experience. “Death Proof” released in theaters in 2007 as one-half of a schlocky B-movie twin-billing (Robert Rodriguez’s “Planet Terror” was the other film). This was common for the grindhouses that popped up throughout the 70’s but were mostly gone by the late 90’s.

For the most part grindhouse movies were cheaply made exploitation flicks, notorious for their low production value and bad print quality. “Death Proof” sees Tarantino attempting to capture two key facets of the genre. He writes his screenplay to resemble a bad movie you would see in those cut-rate theaters. But he puts just as much effort into making his film look and sound like it has been pulled from a time capsule. Crackling audio, grainy video, missing frames – it all makes for an eye-catching aesthetic which is inexplicably dropped around the midway point for no discernible reason at all.

“Death Proof” is a film of two halves. Both have striking similarities yet one is considerably stronger than the other. The first half starts with three friends Arlene, Shanna and Julia (Vanessa Ferlito, Jordan Ladd, and Sydney Tamilia Portier) heading to a bar on the outskirts of Austin, Texas. There they meet up with Lanna (Monica Staggs) and the four begin their night of partying.

Death1

Unfortunately for them they also meet a grizzled Hollywood stuntman appropriately named Stuntman Mike (a fantastic Kurt Russell). He’s an odd bird with a clear affection for menacing muscle cars and messy nachos. He takes notice of the young women in the bar and after a handful of snappy back-and-forths filled with Tarantino’s signature dialogue, the four friends drive off into the night. Unfortunately for them so does Stuntman Mike.

Up to this point “Death Proof” is hitting most of its marks. Aside from being fairly shallow and unashamedly trashy, Tarantino creates a cool blend of nostalgia and style that allows him to show off his inner film student. So much of what he does both technically and narratively hearkens back to the grindhouse genre. And his character work is equally effective. This is especially true for Russell who has a ton of fun in a role that seems custom-made for him.

If things ended there it would be a pretty satisfying foray into B-movie exploitation cinema. But there is the second half  and that is where the film’s momentum grinds to a halt. There is this weird transition that takes place both visually and from a story standpoint. Tarantino jumps ahead fourteen months and moves from Austin to Lebanon, Tennessee. He moves his focus to four new women played by Rosario Dawson, Tracie Thomas, Mary Elizabeth Winstead, and Zoe Bell. They each work in the movie business (two of them stunt drivers) and are on break from a nearby film shoot.

Death2

Unfortunately their story is pretty lightweight. Tarantino is never able to muster a reason for us to be interested in them aside from their no-nonsense, tough-as-nails personalities. This is perhaps best illustrated in a diner scene clearly influenced by “Reservoir Dogs” down to the way it’s shot. It’s a drawn-out dialogue-driven sequence that could have worked if the characters had anything interesting to say. It’s a real momentum killer.

We’re left hungering for their inevitable encounter with Stuntman Mike who once again has his eyes set a group of unsuspecting young women. The big difference here is that these women fight back. It leads to the much talked about finale featuring some impressive practical effects and classic stuntwork despite being utterly ridiculous. It makes for a mildly satisfying ending but nothing particularly memorable.

And that’s something that could be said about “Death Proof” as a whole. Despite it’s throwback cinema bells and whistles, a pretty good first half, and a really fun Kurt Russell performance, the movie ends up losing steam and the second half can’t maintain the spark of the first 45 minutes or so. It’s a shame because there are some fun, nostalgic ideas throughout. But they aren’t enough to keep Tarantino’s eyes on the road.

VERDICT – 2 STARS

2-stars

5 Phenomenal Movie Remakes Which are Better Than the Original

PHENOM 5

It goes without saying that movie remakes are currently all the rage in Hollywood. We’ve gotten many over the last few years and a lot more are slated for the near future. It’s something I generally push back on but there are several instances where remaking an older movie wasn’t a bad thing. Today’s Phenomenal 5 takes a look at remakes that are actually better than the film they are based on. I tried to stick with movies remade from fairly well known originals. So nothing too obscure. As always I wouldn’t call this the definitive list, but there’s no denying that these five movie remakes are nothing short of phenomenal.

#5 – “A Star is Born” (2018)

STARBORN

Here’s a case of a remake that’s actually better than not one, not two, but three movies that came before it. “A Star is Born” tells a story that people over the years have proven to be drawn to. Bradley Cooper and Lady Gaga form the core of this musical/romantic drama about one music star on the rise, another whose star is fading, and the tumultuous romance they share. It’s a movie full of great performances and even better songs.

#4 – “Cape Fear” (1991)

CAPE

Martin Scorsese and Robert De Niro have had several high-profile collaborations. One that many forget about is their remake of 1962’s “Cape Fear”. De Niro takes the role of Max Cady, memorably played in the original by Robert Mitchum. It features a great supporting cast and Scorsese’s signature cinematic craftsmanship. It’s a tense and gritty thriller and a surprising step up from its well-made inspiration.

#3 – “3:10 to Yuma” (2007)

MCDTHTE EC032

I’ve always liked 1957’s “3:10 to Yuma”, but I truly love James Mangold’s 2007 remake. The action, the tension, the stunning cinematography all helps make this a great film. But ultimately it’s the fantastic chemistry between Christian Bale and Russell Crowe that stands out the most. Their performances drive the movie and add a layer of humanity to the already intriguing story.

#2 – “True Grit” (2010)

GRIT

To be honest I’m not what you would call the biggest fan of John Wayne westerns. But I’m a huge fan of the Coen brothers and their stylish 2010 remake of Wayne’s “True Grit” highlights why I believe they are among the greatest filmmakers working today. Their version is filled with Coen brothers signatures: a knack for great dialogue and the use of language, unique and intriguing characters, and their special brand of humor. It’s better than the original in every way.

#1 – “The Thing” (1982)

THING

First off, I’m a big fan of Howard Hawks’ 1951 science-fiction classic “The Thing from Another World”. But for my money it pales in comparison to John Carpenter’s savagely good 1982 remake simply titled “The Thing”. Carpenter (a huge fan of the Hawks film) took the tension and suspense from the original movie and updated it in a variety of ways. It was first met with harsh reactions from critics, but over time it has received a much-deserved critical reassessment. Now far more people appreciate this sci-fi/horror gem and the great genre filmmaking it represents.

And there you have my list. I know there are several I missed and that’s where you come in. Let me know what I got right and what I got wrong in the comments section below. I would love to hear the movies that you would include.

First Glance: “Marriage Story”

Marriage1

Netflix Originals often find themselves (regardless of how unfair it may be) lumped by many into a sub-theater quality category for lesser movies. They certainly have their share of stinkers (just like the big screen). But I’ve found several Netflix films that I not only loved but that made my year end Top 10 list. Not to mention Netflix offers a great platform for independent filmmakers who can easily get lost in the blockbuster-soaked theater landscape.

Take indie filmmaker Noah Baumbach and his latest movie “Marriage Story”. Netflix produced and distributed, this comedy-drama stars Scarlett Johansson and Adam Driver as a couple on the outs. Interestingly two trailers were dropped, one from her perspective and one from his. As a fan of Baumbach and a bigger fan of Driver, this could really be good. And hopefully this will be a case of Netflix actually getting their marketing right.

“Marriage Story” makes a few festival stops before releasing on Netflix later this year. Check out both trailers below and let me know if you’ll be seeing it or taking a pass.

First Glance: “The Kill Team”

 

KILLposter

The name A24 has become synonymous with attention-getting independent movies. Their list of critically-acclaimed releases is pretty impressive and so far they have dabbled in a number of different genres. A year ago A24 acquired the rights to “The Kill Team”, a feature film adaptation of Dan Krauss’ 2013 documentary.

The first trailer for “The Kill Team” has dropped and for those unfamiliar with the subject matter (like me) it starts off looking like a pretty traditional war flick. But as the trailer plays out you get a better sense of what’s going on. Krauss serves as writer and director of this true story he is clearly invested in. Alexander Skarsgard stands out as a sociopathic Sergeant leading his military team into some pretty dark waters.

“The Kill Team” hits theaters October 25th. Check out the trailer below and let me know if you’ll be seeing it or taking a pass.

The Spider-Man Drama: Disney/Marvel vs. Sony Pictures

SPIDEYpost

By now anyone who is even remotely interested in the lucrative Marvel Cinematic Universe has heard the news. As of now (and that’s an extremely important phrase) Spider-Man will no longer be a part of the MCU. For the benefit of those living under the proverbial rock (don’t worry, it’s often the best place to be), negotiations between Disney/Marvel Studios and Sony Pictures to extend their unique Spider-Man partnership has broken off meaning the immensely popular webslinger is no longer part of the MCU.

A little history, Sony bought the film rights to Spider-Man and his unique universe back in 1999 for a reported $7 million. At that time there was never a thought of a huge Marvel-inspired interconnected cinematic universe. But in 2015 Disney/Marvel and Sony came to an unprecedented agreement to bring Spider-Man to the then blooming MCU. It was essentially a co-production deal that saw Sony keeping the rights to the character and Disney/Marvel getting full creative control.

Even more interesting is that no money changed hands at the time of the deal. That would come later. For Sony it was a good move considering how inconsistent their last three Spidey films had been. Plus Sony Pictures was suffering from some severe financial strain and they desperately needed a big money-maker to go alongside their James Bond films.

For Disney/Marvel the benefits were even more obvious. Aside from having full creative control, Marvel Studios could finally bring arguably their most popular character into their sprawling MCU. Better yet, Sony would only get money from solo Spider-Man films. His appearances in “Captain America: Civil War”, “Infinity War”, and “Endgame” – Sony didn’t get a dime. To top it off, it’s reported that in the deal Disney/Marvel receives all merchandising revenue.

So what has caused the sudden split and who is to blame? Many people were quick to put the blame on Sony Pictures which isn’t surprising. After all, as people we tend to defend what we love. But is that really fair? Is Disney/Marvel simply a victim of Sony’s greed? Should we as fans point fingers at Sony for taking Spidey away from the MCU. Well, maybe not.

It seems the biggest sticking point in negotiations centers around Disney/Marvel’s cut of the profits strictly from the solo Spider-Man films. In the previous agreement Disney/Marvel received 5% of the first-dollar box office gross (again in addition to all merchandising and 100% of the money for appearances in other MCU films). Disney/Marvel is now demanding 50% which Sony promptly (and understandably) declined. It seems Disney/Marvel then picked up their ball and went to (of all places) the media.

So what are we to make of all the drama. First, I still firmly believe a deal will indeed be reached. A lot of this is posturing by Disney/Marvel as well as them wielding the enormous power they have right now. And how better to do it than by provoking a public outcry. This looks to be a powerplay by Disney/Marvel and one of several concerning trends in their current business model.

On the other side Sony would be nuts to end negotiations (and trust me, both sides are still negotiating). They have made a lot of much-needed money by aligning their prized Spider-Man property with the MCU. And it’s all but certain to continue with an extended deal. At the same time it would be crazy for Sony to expect Disney/Marvel to stick to the original 5% considering their two solo MCU Spidey films grossed nearly $2 billion combined.

So, should Sony agree to Disney/Marvel’s 50% demands? Nope. Should Disney/Marvel be content with the current deal’s 5%? Probably not. So it all comes down to a willingness to meet in the middle and use some common sense. Both Sony and Disney/Marvel stand to win by continuing this fascinating partnership and lose by seeing its demise. Personally I applaud Sony for standing up to Disney who has been a bit bullish in getting its way. At the same time, if Sony isn’t willing to offer a bigger piece of the pie to Disney/Marvel it’s hard to see them as the victim.

But don’t worry MCU fans, I’m calling it here – a deal will get done. When it comes down to it, neither Sony Pictures or Disney/Marvel are dumb enough to turn down this kind of money this partnership generates.

Keith Garlington (@KeithandMovies on Twitter)

SPIDEY

REVIEW: “Always Be My Maybe”

ALWAYSPOSTER

“Crazy Rich Asians” opened up a much-needed window into the Asian-American experience. It was also charming and surprisingly funnier that I expected. I was anxious to see what films would follow in its footsteps to broaden the field and offer up new perspectives.

One such film is “Always Be My Maybe”, a Netflix romantic comedy and directorial debut of Nahnatchka Khan. The film follows Sasha (Ali Wong) and Marcus (Randall Park) who as children grew up as best friends and next-door neighbors in San Francisco. An argument during their late teen years pushed them apart and (As many kids do) they went their separate ways.

ALWAYS1

Sixteen years later Sasha is a celebrity chef and rising star in the culinary world. She’s engaged to hunky but narcissistic Brandon (Daniel Dae Kim) and is about to open her new restaurant in the Bay Area. Marcus is still in San Francisco, content living with and working for his widowed father and spending his spare time smoking weed and playing with his neighborhood band.

Their lives have went in dramatically different directions, but when they unexpectedly cross paths again it’s clear that deep down they are still the same people who once had such a tight-knit bond. Now they will have to navigate through sixteen years of baggage and their own stubbornness to see if things can finally work out between them.

“Always Be My Maybe” stands or falls or the chemistry of its two leads. The entire story is dependent on it which is both good and bad. It’s good simply because Wong and Park are great together. Their conversations and needling banter flows naturally and (much like with Ethan Hawke and Julie Delpy in The Before trilogy) you can sense their contributions to the writing process. But it’s bad in that many of the film’s weaker scenes are when they are apart.

You could also argue that the comedy itself is too uneven. Most of the time it’s simply amusing relying heavily on the playful back-and-forths between Sasha and Marcus. But when a certain red-hot entertainment phenomenon appears, the comedy takes a different form, moving from amusing to laugh-out-loud hilarious. Yes, Keanu Reeves pops up for a short time and unquestionably steals the show. And once he’s gone we downshift from hilarious back to amusing. Hardly a huge issue, but it sure leaves you itching for the Keanu-level humor to come back.

ALWAYS2

Several other nagging issues hold the film back. As most of these films tend to be, “ABMM” is utterly predictable almost from the start and you can see it checking off numerous socially hip boxes. We also get the outspoken best friend character which must be a modern rom-com necessity. Michelle Buteau gives a good performance and she has a handful of good lines, but it’s the same old character we’ve seen a billion times and who is only there to fill a role.

But back to Wong and Park. They may not be able to fully cover all of the movie’s issues, but they make “ABMM” worth your time. Their easy-going chemistry works great with the film’s relaxed rhythms. But that’s about all the movie has to offer. If you’re hungry for anything deeper or more original you’re probably not going to leave satisfied.

VERDICT – 2.5 STARS

2-5-stars