REVIEW: “Can You Ever Forgive Me?”

January 30, 2019 by Keith Garlington

“I’m a 51-year-old who likes cats better than people.” That’s how Lee Israel describes herself in Marielle Heller’s film “Can You Ever Forgive Me?” It’s a biopic with Israel as its subject and an adaptation of her 2008 memoir of the same name. It follows her experience as a struggling writer who ends up making ends meet by forging coveted letters from famous deceased authors.

Melissa McCarthy makes a welcomed dramatic turn playing Lee Israel who has fallen on hard times after her writing career stalls. She’s a depressed and cash-strapped alcoholic who can’t keep a job and owes months of back-rent on her filthy Manhattan apartment. She can’t get an advance for a new book because she has burned every bridge her agent (a wonderful Jane Curtin) has laid down for her.

You know where things go from here. A desperate Lee begins forging old letters and selling them to bookstores around the city. The true story goes that she sold over 400 documents, a remarkable crime streak that would seem impossible to pull off. The real Lee Israel was an unrepentant sham and the film definitely captures that. But Heller makes an obvious attempt to lace Israel’s story with sympathy.

McCarthy gives a good performance although it doesn’t require as much range as it may seem. She burrows down into Israel’s unlikability and isn’t asked to go much further. She still manages to give us an good character with several interesting layers. Take what is probably her deepest character flaw – the near arrogant insistence that she is a great writer and everyone needs to recognize it. At one point she states “I’m a better Dorothy Parker than Dorothy Parker”. And the film offers no grand transformation. She maintains this stance to the very end even finding a way to use it to rationalize her crimes.

Richard E. Grant is getting a lot of attention for playing Lee’s only non-feline friend Jack. Grant is effortlessly good in what is a flamboyant and pretty showy performance. Jack is a fellow boozer and much like Lee he’s far from the most likable person. McCarthy and Grant have really nice chemistry and that makes for some entertaining back-and-forths between two otherwise shady people. Unfortunately I began to sour on their banter after a while.

Even though we know how things are going to end, Heller along with screenwriters Nicole Holofcener and Jeff Whitty give us enough to sink our teeth into. But it’s McCarthy who pulls off the impossible. She not only has us caring (to some degree) about such an unpleasant curmudgeon but also (in one way or another) she has us relating to her as well. That can’t be an easy task and it’s just enough to carry the film over the finish line.

VERDICT – 3 STARS

First Glance: “The Man Who Killed Hitler and Then the Bigfoot” Trailer

January 29, 2019 by Keith Garlington

We definitely have our first candidate for Funkiest Movie Title of 2019. “The Man Who Killed Hitler and Then the Bigfoot” would have me onboard just by its title alone. But there are several other things that excite me. First and foremost we get Sam Elliott in a starring role and who doesn’t like Sam Elliott? Second, it has a really cool look to it. Just take a gander at the trailer below.

It looks like “The Man Who Killed Hitler and Then the Bigfoot” opens in select theaters and on streaming platforms February 8th. So tell me, will you be seeing it or are you giving it a pass?

REVIEW: “Polar” (2019)

January 29, 2019 by Keith Garlington

I was hoping the trashy and cringe-worthy opening to Jonas Åkerlund’s “Polar” was an exception – a simple case of a movie getting off on the wrong foot. Turns out it’s more prophecy than anomaly. It serves as a good indicator (and warning sign) of what to expect from this objectionable and utterly frustrating Netflix Original.

For much of its two-hour running time “Polar” feels like two separate movies in one. The first follows an absurd motley crew of killers as they travel across the country looking for hyper-stylized ways to murder people for Åkerlund’s camera. It’s quite vulgar and off-putting. The second focuses on a retiring assassin Duncan Vizla (Mads Mikkelsen) as he takes to a new life off the grid. He moves into a remote mountain cabin in Montana where he befriends a quiet young neighbor Camille (Vanessa Hudgens).

These quieter moments with Duncan are promising and offer a good setup to the violence we know is on the way. Unfortunately whenever the above storylines cross paths Åkerlund ramps up the excess to ludicrous levels. He seems to operate under the mantra of ‘the bloodier and smuttier the better’ as long as you soak it all in blinding bright colors and use plenty a crafty camera angles.

Not that it matters, but the merry band of sadistic killers work for Duncan’s former boss, the embarrassingly bad antagonist Mr. Blut (Matt Lucas). He’s one of those pathetically weak and painfully dumb crime bosses who are nearly impossible to buy into. You can’t help but wonder why his many powerful male and female laptogs follow his orders like lemmings. But I digress.

Mr. Blut wants Duncan dead so that he doesn’t have to pay the $8 million of contractually obligated retirement money. But even the dopiest crime boss should know you don’t double-cross your top assassin, especially when his nickname is “The Black Kaiser” and he’s played by Mads Mikkelsen. Katheryn Winnick plays Blut’s right-hand woman (I think) and the only person with sense enough to know that turning on Duncan is probably a bad idea.

Sadly the blaring, obnoxious part with its ramped up violence and its unabashed scuzziness smothers out the more observational and introspective part. We’re left with a movie that seems to relish the mindless bloodshed, gratuitous sex, and glaring objectification. It’s sold out on looking cool and blinding us with its ‘style’ but doesn’t consider its story or its characters. It’s a shame because Åkerlund delivers some jaw-dropping images and he casts a great lead. But Mikkelsen is too good of an actor for this. He could easily shine in this kind of role, but this relentless mess is a complete waste of his talents.

VERDICT – 1.5 STARS

REVIEW: “Glass” (2019)

January 28, 2019 by Keith Garlington

Has any filmmaker had a more up-and-down career than M. Night Shyamalan? When he hits his target the results are often magical. But when he misses he tends to miss badly and some of those pictures have turned out to be unbearable disasters. Yet he still pushes out his brand of movies and many of us still watch his films hoping we’ll get one of the good ones.

His 2016 picture “Split” was one of the good ones. It was a crafty thriller featuring a fabulous James McAvoy performance. But Shyamalan’s biggest twist came in the film’s final moments – a super cool surprise connecting “Split” to his 2000 movie “Unbreakable”. That brings us to his latest project “Glass”, his first dive into this wild and unexpected shared universe.

As someone who really went for his big twist, I was excited for “Glass”. It had huge potential both as an individual film and as a franchise launching point. Bruce Willis, Samuel L. Jackson, and James McAvoy are all onboard as well as the return of some key characters from the two earlier films (Anya Taylor-Joy from “Split” and Spencer Treat Clark from “Unbreakable”). Yet despite having all the pieces in place for something really special, “Glass” turns out to be a hard nut to crack.

Sarah Paulson is a new piece in Shyamalan’s 130 minute puzzle. She plays Dr. Ellie Staple, a psychiatrist who specializes in treating patients with delusions of being superheroes. Turns out Philadelphia has just the test cases she’s looking for. With Elijah Price (aka Mr. Glass) already in custody, that leaves Kevin Wendell Crumb (McAvoy), a man with 24 distinct personalities known as The Horde, and David Dunn (Willis), a home security salesman who moonlights as a mysterious vigilante.

As the trailer so clearly reveals, Dr. Staple gets her wish. Kevin Crumb and David Dunn are apprehended and sent to Ravenhill Psychiatric Hospital where Elijah has been kept since his arrest 19 years earlier. Dr. Staple is given three days to ‘cure’ them by deconstructing their delusions and disproving their so-called superpowers.

Of course this all plays into Elijah’s hands who (if you recall from “Unbreakable”) believes comic books are a reflection of the real world. His goal has always been to prove to the mankind the existence of super-powered people. And now he finally has his three essential pieces in one place – a hero, a super-villain, and the mastermind.

All of this allows Shyamalan to dig into what interests him most – psychological face-offs over physical ones. I can see this disappointing those with more action-packed expectations. This is not that kind of film nor is it remotely similar to what currently passes for superhero movies. The modest $20 million budget all but spell it out. “Glass” is very much the anti-blockbuster that sets its own rules and proudly sticks to them.

Yet with all of its promise and ambition, “Glass” sometimes has a hard time getting all of its pieces to fit. For example there are some noticeable holes in the story’s logic. There are also some glaringly obvious questions you would expect to be asked or answered by different characters along the way. Shyamalan attempts to offer some explanations to these things but I’m not sure he quite covers it all.

The performances are strong across the board. James McAvoy is given the most to do which is nice considering how good he was in “Split”. My only beef is that he bounces between personalities too frequently. There’s a perfectly satisfying reason for why he does so, but it leaves little time for him to dig deeper into any of them. Jackson and Willis are a lot of fun, Clark adds some extra heart, and Taylor-Joy is good even though some of her character’s motivations are a bit suspect.

Defining how I feel about “Glass” has proven to be a lot tougher than I thought it would be. I left the theater conflicted, but 24 hours later I felt I had a better grasp of what Shyamalan is going for. “Glass” is far from being the dumpster fire some proclaim it to be, but it’s no perfect film either. Still I think there is something to Shyamalan’s slow-boiling psychological approach and there is some real craft behind his visual technique. As it turns out “Glass” actually worked for me and I’m anxious to see it again. But it took some time to get there and I still find myself mulling over the final act..

VERDICT – 3.5 STARS

The 5 Worst Films of 2018

January 25, 2019 by Keith Garlington

Over the past several days we’ve celebrated the best films and best performances from 2018. This is not that. Today I’m wrapping up my look back at 2018 by giving the year’s biggest stinkers their moment to…..shine. While it was a pretty good year for movies it wasn’t without its blemishes. Here are the five worst films I saw in 2018.

#5 – “The 15:17 to Paris”

I admit to feeling bad about this one. I mean at least Clint Eastwood deserves credit for trying something interesting. But when the end product is this flat and the acting this atrocious, it’s hard to give it a pass. It’s an amazing true story but the incredibly messy script doesn’t do it justice and casting the real-life heroes to play themselves proved to be the wrong choice.

#4 – “Winchester”

There’s a good movie here somewhere but we certainly don’t get a sniff of it. My biggest beef with this film is that it is so frustratingly bland. This thing never seems to get its footing. It just sits in neutral spinning its wheels and going nowhere. It’s devoid of any scares whatsoever and the aimless story will have you nodding off before the halfway point.

#3 – “Vice”

I’m still struggling to understand how “Vice” is getting so much awards season attention. With the exception of Christian Bale (who gives a strong performance), there is little to salvage from David McKay’s bloated, messy, and heavy-handed manifesto. Outside of Bale it’s hard to find something to latch onto. A tonal disaster from the start, it’s hard to figure out what McKay wants this to be. It’s an exhausting film.

#2 – “Rampage”

Dwayne Johnson’s beefy personality and cheesy smile can only cover up so much. It certainly can’t save the painfully dumb “Rampage”. Talk about a movie with an identity crisis. On minute it’s trying (and failing) to be funny, next minute it’s deadly serious. One scene seems aimed at kids, the next scene is pushing its PG-13 rating. In the end absolutely none of it comes together.

#1 – “The Strangers: Prey at Night”

Part of my dislike for this film is due to disappointment. But the bulk of it comes from the simple fact that it’s a terrible movie. The first “Strangers” film was a good horror picture with some genuine tension. This uninspired sequel offers nothing new or original. Honestly it doesn’t even try. The shallow story is only outdone by the shallow characters, none of which are the slightest bit interesting. Shamefully lazy and painfully generic. This is one lousy sequel.

So what about you? Agree or disagree with my choices? What would have made your list?

First Glance: “Polar” Trailer

January 24, 2019 by Keith Garlington

Out of this year’s batch of January Netflix Originals none have intrigued me as much as “Polar”. There are several reasons for it, none bigger than the film’s star Mads Mikkelsen. This super stylized action flick is an adaptation of a graphic novel series focused on an international hitman. Who better to play an international hitman than Mads.

The trailer dropped a few days ago and the movie is set to land on Netflix tomorrow (January 25th). Check out the trailer below and tell me what you think in the comments section. Will you be giving “Polar” a look?