Author Archives: Keith Garlington

REVIEW: “Die Alone” (2024)

by

5

On the surface, “Die Alone” has all the markings of a standard-issue zombie flick: a deadly virus, a global outbreak, a society in ruin, the dead coming back to life as ravenous flesh-eaters. But “Die Alone” is a different kind of zombie movie. Yes, it proudly embraces a number of familiar horror sub-genre tropes. But it puts its own spin on them resulting in a surprisingly fresh and creative feature.

In unveiling his earthen dystopia, Canadian writer-director Lowell Dean reveals many facets of his world that sparks our interest, yet he intentionally keeps several things vague. Beyond that, he does what many before him have done. Dean focuses on the living people in his world more than the walking dead. It’s those people who prove to be the rays of hope and the most ominous threats.

Image Courtesy of Quiver Distribution

In “Die Alone”, the planet has been decimated by a plant-based virus. It not only kills those infected but reanimates them into deadly flesh-munching zombies who over time become more plant than people. We never get a full explanation of the virus, what caused it, or if there is any sign of a cure. But Dean does throw in some compelling hints in the form of conspiracy theories and hypotheses. One idea is that it’s nature purging itself of the destructive parasite known as mankind.

It’s in this world that we meet Ethan (Douglas Smith) and his girlfriend Emma (Kimberly-Sue Murray) who are driving to their remote lakeside cabin in hopes of waiting out the global catastrophe. But on their way they have a violent car wreck. When Ethan wakes up he discovers Emma is gone. Blood stains show signs of injury, but she’s nowhere to be found. So the injured yet determined Ethan sets out to find her.

As Ethan searches the husk of a vacant town, he’s attacked by a group of armed ruffians. But he’s saved by a mysterious survivor named Mae (a terrific Carrie-Anne Moss) who takes him to her remote farmhouse. It’s revealed than Ethan has amnesia and struggles to remember anything other than the car crash and Emma. He’s haunted by fragmented memories of her that compels him to continue his search. But Mae seems determined to keep him from leaving.

Image Courtesy of Quiver Distribution

As the story progresses is becomes clearer that “Die Alone” has interests that extend beyond the normal zombie fare. Dean uses the cryptic relationship between the younger addled Ethan and the older enigmatic Mae to dig into some of his meatier themes (I’ll let you discover them in order to avoid spoilers). Along the way they encounter a number of people who help define their relationship including a band of dubious drifters, a single mother and her son, and even Frank Grillo playing a protective husband and father.

“Die Alone” steadily builds itself towards a walloping twist that immediately encourages a second viewing. It’s a turn that causes us to reevaluate much of what we have seen and heard while sending the film towards an unexpected conclusion. And that’s what makes “Die Alone” stand out. It may seem somewhat conventional at first, but Dean patiently begins to chip away at our expectations before landing his refreshingly subversive ending. “Die Alone” is now available on VOD.

VERDICT – 3.5 STARS

REVIEW: “Rumours” (2024)

by

6

Cate Blanchett continues her eclectic big screen run with “Rumours”, a movie that can’t possibly be categorized in any single genre. Directed by the filmmaking trio of Guy Maddin, Evan Johnson, and Galen Johnson, “Rumours” is a black comedy and a biting political satire set within a story that subtly mixes end-of-the-world science fiction with classic horror. It’s sometimes surreal, other times absurd, and proudly free of any creative constraints.

While all of that is amazing, “Rumours” is as puzzling as it is entertaining. This is a movie that poses more questions than it cares to answer. It throws in some outlandish twists which (probably) have allegorical purposes but I’ve yet to figure them out. And its melding of the real-world with the fantastical can be more confounding than insightful. At the same time, it’s beguiling in all the right ways and ultimately the cause of the chaos we witness takes a back seat to the bungling response from the seven world leaders we spend our time with.

The story takes place during a G7 summit – an annual gathering where leaders from the world’s wealthiest open democracies (Canada, France, Germany, Italy, Japan, England, and the United States) convene to discuss the globe’s biggest issues. For screenwriter Evan Johnson, this was fertile ground to satirize the inefficacy of world leadership especially in times of crisis. And the punchline to his biggest joke comes with the end credits and the realization that these characters haven’t accomplished a thing. And that’s the whole point.

Image Courtesy of Bleecker Street

Maddin and the two Johnsons put together a pitch-perfect cast who seem to be having a ball from the opening moments to the final frame. Chief among them is Cate Blanchett who plays German Chancellor Hilda Ortmann. She’s hosting the G7 Summit at a rural castle in Dankerode, Germany where seven stuffy world power-players come together to discuss an unspecified global crisis.

Joining Hilda is the embattled yet laughably stoic Canadian Prime Minister, Maxime Laplace (Roy Dupuis); the intensely focused British Prime Minister, Cardosa Dewindt (Nikki Amuka-Bird); the overly pragmatic United States President, Edison Walcott (Charles Dance), the chatterbox French President, Sylvain Broulez (Denis Ménochet), the jittery pacifistic Prime Minister of Italy, Antonio Lamorte (Rolando Ravello), and Japan’s Prime Minister, Tatsuro Iwasaki (Takehiro Hira) who the movie seems to forget about until the final 20 minutes.

After a few goofy photo ops, our seven dignitaries settle around a table in a newly built gazebo. There they begin putting together their provisional statement – an illusion of multilateral accomplishment to be shared with the entire world. But things turn upside down after the group discovers they’ve been abandoned. There are no staff members, no security, no cellphone service. To make matters weirder, they find themselves cut off from the castle by zombie-like “bog men” with muddy gelatinous bodies and some pretty twisted habits.

From there we follow our seven petrified leaders as they reveal how poor they are at world crisis management through how horribly they mismanage their own. It becomes evident that these aren’t the sharpest knives in the drawer, and in many ways they are personifications of their individual nations – something Maddin, Johnson, and Johnson have a field day with.

Image Courtesy of Bleecker Street

“Rumours” is littered with funny details including Dance’s intact British accent, the seemingly endless supply of cured meat in Antonio’s pocket, the group’s crazy obsession with finishing their provisional statement despite a looming apocalypse, and a hysterical third act bit involving an AI chatbot.

It also has its share of head-scratching inclusions. For instance, the sudden appearance of Alicia Vikander whose scenario never makes sense. And what’s with the pink squishy brain the size of a Volkswagen Beetle plopped in the middle of the forest? But if you’re seeking answers to the zaniness you’re already on the wrong track.

“Rumours” is a mannered slice of absurdism that can understandably frustrate with its slow build towards nothing. But if you can get onboard with its audacious approach, it’s hard not to enjoy the pomposity, platitudes and pantsuits. And with such a stellar all-star cast in on the joke, it makes the movie’s blunt-force message not just timely, but often laugh-out-loud hilarious. “Rumours” is now available on VOD.

VERDICT – 3.5 STARS

REVIEW: “Super/Man: The Christopher Reeve Story” (2024)

by

5

There was a day when superhero movies were actually a rarity. There were no big blockbuster franchises or sprawling cinematic universes. Perhaps that’s one reason 1978’s “Superman: The Movie” was such a critical and box office success. Another reason was the film’s lead, a young relatively unknown Christopher Reeve. It was a star-making role for the Juilliard alumni that over time became both a blessing and a curse.

With “Super/Man: The Christopher Reeve Story”, co-directors Ian Bonhôte and Peter Ettedgui examine the man behind the pop culture myth, exposing our penchant for idolizing characters while emphasizing what it means to be a true hero. For some, the documentary has the potential be a stirring introduction while others will see it as a moving reminder of what Christopher Reeve accomplished, endured, and overcame.

Image Courtesy of Warner Bros. Pictures

Bonhôte and Ettedgui tell Reeve’s story through interviews with his children, Will Reeve, Matthew Reeve, and Alexandra Reeve Givens. They also include some of Reeve’s acting contemporaries such as Susan Sarandon, Glen Close, and Jeff Daniels. The doc includes a wealth of archived footage and clips from old home movies. But ultimately it’s the heartfelt testimonies that offer the most insight and that give the movie its emotional weight.

“Super/Man” attempts to balance Reeve’s professional and personal lives, digging into his complicated family history while highlighting his near overnight ascent to global movie star status. With so much to cover, not everything gets the attention it needs. But Bonhôte and Ettedgui give us enough to get to picture. They tell us about his troubled relationship with his parents, mostly with his unsupportive father. We hear how he met Gae Exton, the mother of Matthew and Alexandra. We learn that five months after leaving her he met his future wife, Dana.

Professionally, we get snippets of his life as an off-Broadway actor and his eventual call to audition for the role of Superman where he beat out the likes of Arnold Schwarzenegger, Bruce Jenner, and Neil Diamond (!!!). We see Reeves catapulted to super stardom with the success of “Superman: The Movie” and later desperate to get out from under its shadow. And there’s the tragedy that struck on May 27, 1995 when Reeve’s suffered a spinal injury that left him paralyzed from the neck down.

Image Courtesy of Warner Bros. Pictures

Much of the documentary focuses on the injury, its impact on Reeve and his family, and the resilience he showed to not only keep living but to use his situation as a means to promote disability awareness. Along the way, it stresses Dana’s unwavering care and support for her husband. She’s an essential part of Reeve’s story and a hero of an entirely different kind.

Bonhôte and Ettedgui have definitely done their homework and their movie’s overarching message is easy to grasp. But not all of their choices pan out. For example, their frequent bouncing back-and-forth on Reeve’s timeline hinders more than helps. But it doesn’t lessen the heartbreak or inspiration found of this real-life Superman story. “Super/Man: The Christopher Reeve Story” is now showing in select theaters.

VERDICT – 3.5 STARS

REVIEW: “We Live in Time” (2024)

by

9

Andrew Garfield and Florence Pugh shine and carry “We Live in Time”, a romantic drama built upon and sustained by the sparkling chemistry of its two leads. The film is directed by John Crowley and is more in sync with his terrific “Brooklyn” (2015) than his lesser “The Goldfinch” (2019). Despite being low on theatrics, it’s still a little soapy around the edges. Yet Crowley and screenwriter Nick Payne succeed in telling a modern love story with an earnest classical tenor.

“We Live in Time” is very much an actor’s movie, and no matter where the story goes, it’s Garfield and Pugh who keep its gears turning. There’s nothing here we haven’t seen before and it’s a testament to their acting savvy that we care for their characters as much as we do. It’s fair to say that without them “We Live in Time” could easily fall apart and be tossed in a pile with so many other movies of its kind.

Image Courtesy of A24

Crowley begins his film by telling us exactly where it’s going. We’re introduced to Almut (Pugh) and Tobias (Garfield), a young couple who we see fall in love, have a child, and receive tragic news, all in the first few minutes. The bad news is that Almut has stage 3 ovarian cancer. From there the movie bounces back-and-forth between different points in their relationship, often with no discernible rhythm. It’s a choice that feels unnecessary, but at the same time helps divert our attention away from the conventional aspects of the story.

We do learn quite a bit about the two characters. Almut is an accomplished chef and restaurant owner. Tobias is an IT technician for Weetabix (a British breakfast cereal – I had to look it up). Both have their own strengths, quirks, and insecurities. But they share a connection that’s evident from the first moment they meet. And that happens after Tobias wanders into the street and is struck by Almut’s car. After he heals up, Tobias visits Almut’s restaurant. They begin dating and after a short time-hop they move in together.

Further down their timeline we see the couple deciding to have a child, struggling to get pregnant, and finally giving birth to their darling daughter Ella. And even further down we watch Almut and Tobias forced to make some painful decisions following her cancer diagnosis. As the movie oscillates between the different stages of their relationship, Pugh and Garfield navigate the small intimacies and seismic shifts with an artful precision.

Image Courtesy of A24

Crowley’s choice to reveal his hand early is a bold one, but it does shortchange some of the drama. And when you peel back the nonlinear devices you find the makings of a pretty standard tearjerker. Yet the movie works because Crowley knows what he has in Garfield and Pugh. And Payne’s script provides plenty of serious-minded and grounded material for the actors to work with.

Reactions to “We Live in Time” are sure to vary. Some may have a hard time getting past its obvious conventions. Others may dismiss it for its delicacy and unwillingness to run its audience through the emotional wringer. But it doesn’t take much effort to look beyond those complaints to see an empathetic and authentic drama that explores life, death, and the intrinsic value of human connection. “We Live in Time” is in theaters now.

VERDICT – 3.5 STARS

REVIEW: “Dominique” (2024)

by

7

Oksana Orlan cements herself as an action movie force of nature in “Dominique”, a ferocious pulse-pounding thrill ride that sees her reteaming with director Michael S. Ojeda. The two previously worked together on the 2018 horror thriller “The Russian Bride”. Their latest collaboration is a pure action spectacle, shaped by Ojeda’s assured style and driven by Orlan’s steely charisma and commanding presence.

Written, directed, and edited by Ojeda, “Dominique” takes a fairly familiar formula and energizes it with its reverence for its setting, the power of its performances, and its ruthless willingness to push the envelope. While the action is undoubtedly the main course, Ojeda puts time and effort into establishing relationships which raise the stakes, especially in the film’s unflinching final act.

Image Courtesy of Lionsgate

Orlan plays the title character, Dominique, a hardened Ukrainian assassin attempting to flee her violent past. Her hopes are to begin a new life off the radar in South America. But while flying over Columbia’s La Guajira desert, her plane is shot down by the local De La Cruz cartel. After crash landing and offing some gun-toting thugs, Orlan travels to the small town of San Lucas where she meets a kindly local named Julio (Sebastian Carvajal).

Julio has looked after his pregnant sister Paulina (Maria del Rosario) and her three children since her husband tragically died of heart attack. He’s also a San Lucas police officer working under the brutally sadistic Chief Santiago (Maurice Compte). Santiago is on the payroll of the cartel and has terrorized the city at the behest of the gang’s matriarch, Gabriela de la Cruz (Marcela Benjumea). Sickened by the department’s savagery, the upright Julio notifies internal affairs to help bring the murderous Santiago to justice.

Julio and his family give Dominique a place to stay until she can secure some wheels which allows Ojeda the time to establish these characters and their circumstances. It’s a crucial ingredient for the story. The kind and hospitable family are fascinated by this statuesque and stoic “gringa”. Meanwhile, despite her best efforts, Dominique develops an attachment to her welcoming hosts. And that puts her on a collision course with Santiago who puts the family in his crosshairs after discovering Julio is working undercover.

Image Courtesy of Lionsgate

Ojeda pulls no punches in depicting Santiago’s brutality, revealing a man who will stop at nothing to get what he wants. That realization sets up a jolting mid-point twist that forces Dominique to make a difficult decision. Does she take off before things heat up or does she stay and defend this vulnerable family. You probably know the answer.

The action that follows is kinetic and at times harrowing as Orlan unleashes her fierce physicality to go along with her steel-plated intensity. In many ways her character fits the common one-man-army stereotype. But the actress gives us just enough of a glimpse inside of Dominique’s tough exterior to make her more than a copy-and-paste protagonist. Overall “Dominique” is a terrific showcase for Orlan, from its furious opening to its a bold and gutsy finish. “Dominique” is out now on VOD.

VERDICT – 4 STARS

REVIEW: “Smile 2” (2024)

by

14

2022’s “Smile” was a surprise hit both with film critics and horror fans. The movie was kickstarted by a killer promotional campaign that saw the studio’s marketing team planting actors behind home plate at several Major League Baseball games where they would stare into the television cameras with blank maniacal smiles. It was terrific viral marketing meant to get the small budget feature noticed. Now the sequel, “Smile 2” is here and the studio is hoping to capture that same lightning.

“Smile” mixed psychological horror with the supernatural to deliver a genuinely creepy chiller with a nasty edge. “Smile 2” seeks to follow the same course with a bigger budget and more ambition. But even as it’s aiming higher and upping the ante, the sequel falls short of its predecessor in a number of hard to ignore ways.

Image Courtesy of Paramount Pictures

Writer-director Parker Finn returns for “Smile 2” and begins his sequel with an intense opening that connects it with the first film. From there we’re taken to New York City where pop superstar Skye Riley (Naomi Scott) is preparing for a global comeback tour. Her career was nearly ended due to drug and alcohol abuse which contributed to a highly publicized car crash that killed her boyfriend Paul.

Now clean and sober, Skye is hard at work promoting her upcoming tour at the behest of her mom/manager, Elizabeth (Rosemarie DeWitt). But her comeback is threatened by lingering back pain from her car wreck. So she seeks out Lewis Fregoli (Lukas Gage), an old classmate and known drug dealer, in hopes of scoring some Vicodin to ease her pain. But upon arriving at Lewis’ apartment, Skye is shaken by his disturbing behavior which culminates in him killing himself right in front of her.

Rather than contact the police, a frightened Skye flees to avoid being implicated in Lewis’ death or drug dealing. But little does she know, there’s something much more sinister she needs to worry about. She begins having horrifying visions with many including people with big creepy smiles. Of course the first movie has already let us in on the secret. Skye is the new host of malevolent parasitic spirit that drives its victims to kill themselves. Better yet, it can is only be transmitted when the host commits suicide in front of someone else. Lewis had it and then passed it on to Skye.

The rest of the movie follows Skye as she’s tormented by the vicious spirit that no one else sees. As she’s mentally pushed to the brink, her visions intensify. And as they do, Finn twists our perception of what’s real and what’s an illusion. But even with that, “Smile 2” lacks the element of surprise which played a big part in the first film. This time around we know it’s an evil spirit; we know what it does; we know the only way to get rid of it.

Image Courtesy of Paramount Pictures

Finn does throw in some pretty wicked body horror and things get especially gnarly in the final act. But at the same time he leans too heavily on lame and lazy jump scares that get more annoying as the movie progresses. And even though he tackles some compelling themes such as the lingering effects of trauma and our infatuation with fame and celebrity, the story drags on for too long and gets surprisingly sloppy in its final 15 minutes or so.

Naomi Scott deserves credit for pouring every bit of herself into the lead role. She completely sells Skye’s pop star status and impressively captures her psychological collapse. But much like the movie itself, her performance starts to wear you down. Watching her get ran through the wringer gets tiring as does listening to her scream “F~CK!!!” into the air over and over again. But those aren’t problems with Scott. They’re script issues which when considered as a whole is the biggest reason “Smile 2” falls short.

VERDICT – 2 STARS