REVIEW: “A Simple Favor”

November 15, 2019 by Keith Garlington

If you’re following director Paul Feig’s hit-and-miss trajectory “A Simple Favor” was on schedule to be a good movie. Turns out it’s considerably more okay than good. There is just enough dark wit, plenty of snappy dialogue, and an entertaining off-beat tone that makes it fairly fun. But despite those strengths, Feig’s film still comes off as a needlessly abrasive Lifetime Original.

“A Simple Favor” would be a disaster if not for the chemistry between its two leads. Anna Kendrick plays a single mother named Stephanie whose nerdy quirks and can-do spirit doesn’t exactly ingratiate her to her son’s home room teacher and other parents. This role isn’t a stretch for Kendrick who basically plays this type of perky character in every movie she’s in. But to her credit she’s good at them.

Stephanie hits it off with the most unlikeliest of moms – Emily Nelson (played by Blake Lively). She’s a glamorous and overly crass diva who is married to hunky novelist Sean (Henry Golding in what is becoming a pretty routine role for him). Stephanie is quickly seduced by the boozy Emily’s high fashion, fancy home, and care-free attitude. Emily’s interest in Stephanie is harder to figure out and becomes even more of a puzzle once Emily up and vanishes.

From there the movie essentially turns into “Gone Girl” minus the suspense. Feig and writer Jessica Sharzer try to nurture a layer of mystery, but it’s hard to buy any of what they’re selling. You know pretty early that plenty of twists are on the way and the movie doesn’t do a great job of hiding them. And by the time you get to the ridiculous finale it feels like Feig is just throwing a bunch of endings against the wall and seeing which one sticks.

But again, the chemistry between Kendrick and Lively keeps the film afloat. Neither of their characters make much sense and their actions often leave you scratching your head. But both seem to be having a lot of fun. Minus her astonishingly poor judgement and glaring naïveté, Kendrick’s Stephanie adds the most levity especially when she’s shooting her video blog. Lively is often pointlessly racy, but she shows off a savagely fun personality.

But again, I end up right back in the same place. It’s an odd movie that’s all over the genre map yet it doesn’t firmly land anywhere. It certainly has its moments but I couldn’t help but think it could have worked better if it dove further into its zany black comedy. As it is, “A Simple Favor” doesn’t do enough with its two snappy lead performances and it loses its way the further it goes.

VERDICT : 2.5 STARS

REVIEW: “Parasite” (2019)

November 14, 2019 by Keith Garlington

It would be hard not to take notice of Bong Joon-ho’s “Parasite”. The film exploded out of this year’s festival circuit starting with its historic Palme d’Or win at Cannes. Now it sits as one of the best reviewed films of 2019 and Academy Award chatter has already begun. How could you miss that much buzz?

It’s exciting to say that “Parasite” deserves the adulation. The South Korean co-screenwriter and director has put together a stinging class warfare satire that has plenty to say about how ugly and callous people from all social statuses can be. With a delicious black comedy edge, some surprising jolts of heartfelt emotion, and a violent throat punch when you’re least expecting it, “Parasite” is a movie that keeps you engaged and guessing.

The film is set in Seoul and follows the Kim family who reside in a cramped street-level apartment/basement at the end of an alley. Ki-taek (Song Kang-ho) lives with his snarky wife Chung-sook (Jang Hye-jin), their crafty son Ki-woo (Choi Woo-shik), and their artist/top-notch forger daughter Ki-jung (Park So-dam). Both parents are unemployed and forced to do menial pay-nothing jobs such as folding carry-out pizza boxes just to get by.

A friend convinces Ki-woo to take his place tutoring the teen daughter from the extremely wealthy (and gullible) Park family. It pays well and his family needs the money. As for Ki-woo’s concerns that he’s not qualified, his friend confidently advises him to just fake it. The Parks will never know the difference he says. So Ki-woo cooks up a fake identity, gets some documents forged by his sister, and lands the job with the upper-crusters.

The Park family seem nice enough. The stealthily condescending Mr. Park (Lee Sun Kyun) makes his money as the CEO of a big tech company. His friendly and slightly neurotic wife (a really good Cho Yeo-jeong) stays home tending to their social calendar and minding their disaffected daughter and rambunctious son with the help of their reliable housekeeper (Lee Jung Eun).

They all fall for Ki-woo’s scam but he doesn’t stop there. Upon hearing the Park’s are looking for an art teacher, he recommends Ki-jung who assumes her own fake identity and also gets hired. Soon every member of the Kim clan has conned their way into employment by the Parks while keeping their family ties secret. For a while everyone seems happy, the Parks and their oblivious blue-blooded living, and the Kims who are making good money leeching off their employers.

The script from Bong and his co-writer Han Jin-won weaves a fascinating web. The first half plays out like dual family dramas bound together by threads of sharp dark humor. But the moment you think you’ve figured it out, Bong has you exactly where he wants you. The wildly unpredictable second half broadsides us with one twist after another, spinning the story into a darker and unabashedly violent direction. There are moments where you would swear it was all about to fall apart. But Bong has an impeccable control of his material and amazingly keeps it together with the craftsmanship of a true auteur.

Bong is no stranger to dealing with the issue of class. Each of his previous two films “Snowpiercer” and “Okja” addressed it in their own ways. “Parasite” does a great job of rousing our senses to the subject without burying us in it. There are a couple of instances where the dialogue is too pointed, but overall the movie speaks to more than just a single topic. And it doesn’t treat things solely as black or white. You could say the entire movie plays out in the ugly gray areas in between right and wrong, guilty and innocent, heroes and villains.

By the end of it all we find ourselves asking who are the real parasites? Is it the Kims and their shameless willingness to connive and deceive for their piece of the proverbial pie? Is it the Parks and their snobbish expectation of being served by the lower class? Maybe the movie is making the case that we’re all parasites. Maybe we all are out for ourselves and willing to exploit anyone to get ahead. And as the film’s brilliant yet bleak final act shows, those attitudes have some pretty nasty consequences.

VERDICT – 4.5 STARS

Denzel Day #11 : “Man on Fire”

November 13, 2019 by Keith Garlington

Director Tony Scott’s 2004 revenge-soaked thriller “Man on Fire” has a weird allure despite being jarringly formulaic and drowning its audience in a deluge of visual excesses. There is hardly anything about it that feels original and the story evolves into something utterly implausible. Yet there is something about it that has always kept me steadily entertained.

Denzel Washington plays John Creasy , an ex-Marine Special Forces officer turned boozing assassin-for-hire. He has bounced around Central America doing shady contracts and wrestling with sins from his past. An old friend who runs a Mexican security outfit (Christopher Walken) encourages Creasy to take a bodyguard job in the wake of a series of politically-motivated kidnappings. It should be easy work and easy money. Yeah right.

Creasy is hired by Samuel Ramos (Mark Anthony), a well-to-do entrepreneur who lives lavishly in Mexico City with his beautiful American wife Lisa (Radha Mitchell) and their precocious young daughter Pita (Dakota Fanning). Creasy is strictly business: keep an eye on Pita, drive her to school, bring her back home. At night he tries to drown his demons with more alcohol while even contemplating suicide.

But he didn’t expect for the tender and persistent Pita to soften him up. The two form a sweet bond. You know, a ‘child and her bodyguard’ kind of bond. Pita gets a more present father figure. Creasy begins to remember what it’s like to enjoy living. But sadly this isn’t that kind of movie which means that bad things have to happen. Pita is kidnapped and Creasy is severely wounded trying to save her. As he recovers, her abductors make their ransom demands – $10 million.

Ramos agrees to pay but things go terribly wrong during the drop off. Creasy recoups and sets out to enact his own brand of vengeance and justice. With the help of Pita the old Creasy had been suppressed. With her gone he resurfaces with guns, rocket launchers, and a simmering bloodlust towards anyone who participated in or benefited from Pita’s kidnapping. And you quickly understand why he would be battling with demons.

I like the idea of a man struggling with a torturous past that resurfaces, forcing him to confront it. The conflict between ‘old self’ and ‘new self’ amid such a strong thirst for revenge is intriguing stuff. Unfortunately the movie wants to have to have its cake and eat it too. Early on the movie gives several scenes to Creasy’s boiling inner tumult. But once the stylish big screen killing begins any sense of personal struggle goes out the window. I would have loved to have seen a more psychological dig into his troubled psyche.

As it is “Man on Fire” stays on a pretty conventional path. It features a ton of Denzel and a sweet child/bodyguard dynamic (both strengths). The action (often shot like a fever dream) lands somewhere in the middle. At times it’s thrilling, other times it’s overbearing. Worst of all it ends up smothering out the interesting character work we’re teased with early on. It wouldn’t be such a bad thing, but at almost two-and-a-half hours the film really needs more meat on its bones.

VERDICT – 2.5 STARS

REVIEW: “Jojo Rabbit”

November 12, 2019 by Keith Garlington

While Charlie Chaplin, Mel Brooks, and even Donald Duck have taken shots at lampooning Adolph Hitler, Nazi and holocaust humor still falls into touchy territory. But out of all modern day filmmakers, who better than New Zealand native Taika Waititi to make us laugh and squirm by jumping headfirst into hate-fueled marsh of late World War II Naziism.

Waititi earned a lot of attention when he entered into Marvel’s MCU to make “Thor: Ragnarok”. But his biggest fans love him for his more intimate original comedies like “What We Do in the Shadows” and “Hunt for the Wilderpeople”. His new film “Jojo Rabbit” falls in with those smaller gems and you could make a strong case that it is Waititi’s best movie to date.

There are so many great elements at work that make “Jojo Rabbit” such an incredible experience. It’s laugh-out-loud funny with Waititi’s signature off-beat humor hitting most all of its marks. At the same time there are several moments that jolt us back to reality, reminding us that we’re dealing with weighty and often unspeakable matters. Amazingly, Waititi manages these seismic tonal shifts in ways you wouldn’t think possible. And the film’s ability to make you laugh, cry, or be utterly appalled is one of its many strengths.

Set during the waning years of World War II, the story centers on Johannes “Jojo” Betzler (Roman Griffin Davis), a 10-year-old German boy who’s oblivious to the horrors of the war and who blindly loves his Führer. In fact, his imaginary friend is none other than Hitler himself (outlandishly played by Waititi). The bulk of the film is told from his perspective and follows him as he routinely crosses path with the myriad of colorful and often hilarious side characters.

An early sequence gives us a lot of context. Jojo and his best friend Yorki (an infectiously adorable Archie Yates) attend a Nazi Youth Camp. There they’ll be trained in the youthful arts of recognizing Jews, knife throwing, and tossing live grenades. Oh, and during recreation time they’ll get to unwind by burning books. Running the camp is Captain Klenzendorf (Sam Rockwell), a disillusioned sot recently demoted from the battlefield and keenly aware that the Nazi war effort is on its last leg.

So as you can tell much of the humor is built around some ugly and reprehensible history. This includes the abhorrent child brainwashing, vile antisemitism, and of course the Holocaust. Enter Thomasin McKenzie, the fabulous young New Zealander who was so good in Debra Granik’s “Leave No Trace”. She plays Elsa, a Jewish teen who Jojo’s mother (Scarlett Johansson) has been hiding in the walls of their home. When Jojo discovers her not only does Elsa challenge his ignorance and blind hatred but also his entire indoctrinated worldview.

McKenzie has a sublime ability to convey so much through the softest voice and most earnest expression. Even when her character is challenging Jojo she does it with a quiet gentleness that earns every ounce of our empathy. She shares a good chemistry with the younger Davis who exudes a ton of personality. Johansson brings a lot of heart to the story. Rockwell plays a sarcastic goof (something he does really well). And there are other smaller but equally enjoyable roles from Rebel Wilson and Stephen Merchant.

“Jojo Rabbit” advertises itself as an “anti-hate satire” and while its a fitting description that sounds really good, the historical baggage is sure to be too much for some people to handle. Personally, I loved its audacity and even more its capacity to make me both laugh and cry. And hats off to Waititi for not crossing the line into the tasteless and offensive while never skirting around the hateful prejudices or repulsive ideologies.

But as the film’s ending quote from poet Rainer Rilke’s so appropriately states “No feeling is final.” And that is the timely message of “Jojo Rabbit”. A young German boy perfecting his “Heil Hitler!” salute in the opening scene eventually sees through veil of hate. And through his journey Waititi shows that meaningful change is indeed possible. Sure, it could have dove deeper into the Nazi atrocities, but that would make for a much different movie. Other films have already done that well. Let “Jojo Rabbit” speak with its own unique voice because it truly has something beautiful to say.

VERDICT – 4.5 STARS

REVIEW: “The Lighthouse”

November 11, 2019 by Keith Garlington

Robert Eggers grabbed a lot of well-deserved attention for his 2015 period horror film “The Witch”. It was his feature film debut and it instantly revealed his impressive knack for historical detail and slow-boiling tension. Like so many I was drawn to the dark tone and growing sense of unease. But he also exhibited a stunning visual craft that was essential to the film’s effectiveness. “The Witch” left many of us wondering what Eggers would do next.

His followup turns out to be just as unique and original. “The Lighthouse” is an interesting slice of psychological horror that aesthetically could have been plucked straight from the late 1930s. It’s a cerebral dive into paranoia and insanity with two lighthouse keepers serving as our avatars. The story is light but the characters and the performances that drive them are the highlight. Unfortunately they can only carry it so far.

Set in the late 19th century, the film opens with the first of many stunning shots – a sublime mix of sound and visual as a tugboat penetrates the fog on the rough and tumble New England seas. Onboard is a greenhorn named Ephraim Winslow (Robert Pattinson) who’s to be dropped off on a remote island for some contract work. He’ll spend the next four weeks working under an old surly seadog named Thomas Wake (Willem Dafoe) who tends to the island’s lighthouse.

From the very first moments we see the same management of atmosphere and mood that made “The Witch” such a good film. This time Eggers shoots on gorgeously grainy 35mm and with a boxed-in 1.19:1 aspect ratio. This not only makes the film look as though it was made decades ago, but it keeps our focus tight and adds a suffocating claustrophobic sense throughout. And the cinematography and sound design work hand-in-hand to create and maintain a steady foreboding tone.

It also helps that Dafoe and Pattinson are such perfect fits for this dark, dank world. With their grizzled faces, wearied eyes, suspicious demeanors – both give stand-out performances and essentially carry the bulk of the film’s weight on their shoulders. But regardless of how great the film looks or how stellar the two lead performances are, the script (co-written by Eggers and his brother Max) is too bare and eventually the fits of drunkenness and madness, wacky hallucinations and endless yelling grows old.

Don’t misunderstand, I have no doubts Eggers intends there to be meaning behind most of what he gives us. He does some compelling things with his setting, personal demons resurface, even hints of mythology are scattered about. He clearly wants us to put together the psychological puzzle he’s laying out before us. But there needs to be a hook – something that grabs and engages me enough to want to think things through.

The story hints at making a shift after Winslow breaks a cardinal seaman’s rule which possibly triggers a huge storm which pummels the island. But in no time we’re back to scenes that feel like repeats of ones we’ve seen several times before. Gleaning new bits of information from the repetition becomes a frustrating chore. This lasts a while and it isn’t until the final ten minutes that we get what could be considered meaningful progression.

And perhaps most surprising to me is the lack of mystery and suspense. Sure, there are a few questions we wonder about: What is Wake hiding in the locked-up lantern room of the lighthouse? Is the island supernatural? What secrets from their past are these two men hiding? But there rarely seems to be a satisfying path to finding answers. And I found none of it particularly scary. Throwing in an occasional grisly image or weird scenes of pent-up sexual frustration doesn’t do the trick. So we’re left with occasional bursts of the ominous score or the haunting sounds from around the island. Both are great, but hardly enough to sustain any sense of horror.

“The Lighthouse” ends up being a disappointing exercise. I worked really hard to like this movie, overlooking my frustrations and pushing forward for something more than the beautiful B&W visuals and intensely committed performances. But I never found it, at least not enough of it to keep me connected. And it’s such a shame, because I usually really go for movies like this. Sadly, not this time.

VERDICT – 2.5 STARS

First Glance: “Wendy”

November 8, 2019 by Keith Garlington

I have been anxiously awaiting Benh Zeitlin’s second feature since first seeing his sublime debut “Beasts of the Southern Wild”. That was all the way back in 2012. Now seven years later we get the first trailer for his followup “Wendy” and it was worth the wait. The earliest shops shows

From the trailer we can instantly tell this is a fresh take on J.M. Barrie’s Peter Pan. But as Zeitlin showed in “Beasts”, he has a real knack for digging into the imaginations of young children. “Wendy” looks to be trading much of the fantasy element for a more grounded, real-world approach. And many of the images we’re shown aim to convey a healthy array of heartfelt youthful emotion. For an early trailer, it really got to me.

“Wendy” is set for a February 28, 2020 release (limited I’m sure). Check out the trailer below and let me know if you’ll be seeing it or taking a pass.