Denzel Washington directing? Michael B. Jordan starring? You bet I’m in on the new romantic drama “A Journal for Jordan”. The film is based on the 2008 memoir written by Dana Canedy about her fiancé, United States Army First Sergeant Charles Monroe King. It tells the true story of how the couple met and eventually fell in love. It also tells of Charles’ deployment during the Iraq War, while a pregnant Dana Was back home waiting to deliver their baby boy, Jordan.

Adapted by Oscar-nominated screenwriter Virgil Williams, “A Journal for Jordan” tells a story that you can’t help but admire. Its romantic angle is sweet and sincere while the inescapable sense of tragedy looms over the entire film. On screen, the movie is energized by the chemistry between stars Jordan and Chanté Adams. Behind the camera, Washington’s patient approach is both a blessing and a curse. It gives the movie’s central relationship room to breathe and take root. But it also drags things out longer than they need to go.

In a way “A Journal for Jordan” feels like a movie from another time. Most of today’s franchise-formed preferences have all the patience in the world for the latest big tent-pole blockbuster. But an old-fashioned straight-shooting melodrama (the kind audiences 30 years ago would gobble up no questions asked) is a hard sell these days. That’s one reason I wouldn’t be surprised if the film gets a mixed reception.

Another reason is the overall conventional feel of the story, specifically during the first half. Though sweet and genuine, watching the sprouting relationship between Dana and Charles, complete with its highs and lows, rarely gets out of first gear. Jordan and Adams add a romantic spark and Washington’s unrushed direction allows us time to get to know these characters. But outside of the lingering hand of fate waiting to be dealt, the story never generates much buzz. Washington seems to know this so he shakes things up a bit by moving back-and-forth across the timeline.

Adams gives an eye-opening performance playing Dana who we first meet as an ambitious and hard-working reporter for the New York Times. While visiting her parents for the weekend, she meets Charles for the first time. He’s a noble and gentlemanly soldier who has been in the army for 11 years. The two opposites attract and begin a long distance relationship that (eventually) blooms into a full-blown love story.

But as the world changes post 9/11, Charles is sent to Iraq adding an extra obstacle to their relationship. But Dana is convinced she’s ready to start a family so the two decide to have a baby. She gives Charles a journal to write to his on-the-way son Jordan while overseas. The journal becomes a key piece of the story once Charles is killed by an IED during a mission.

That may sound like a spoiler, but it’s a plot point the movie doesn’t try to hide. In fact, Washington uses it as the film’s emotional center as he traverses his timeline. It adds a tragic layer to the romance we see in the flashback sequences, and it’s the catalyst for how the later-set scenes play out.

When you put it all together it’s hard to knock what “A Journal for Jordan” is going for. The characters feel authentic and true. The true story of their relationship is both inspiring and heartbreaking. And Washington’s deliberate and unvarnished direction is the kind we rarely get these days.

Yet there’s something missing that I can’t quite put my finger on. It’s a little too long and the story doesn’t feel particularly balanced. But there’s something else – something that doesn’t quite give the movie the gut-punch it needs. It tries to compensate with a really effective final scene. But it seems like there was so much more the movie could have done with this deeply moving story. “A Journal for Jordan” is now showing in theaters.

VERDICT – 2.5 STARS

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

NFL quarterback Kurt Warner’s journey from stocking shelves at a grocery store in Cedar Falls, Iowa to being inducted in the Pro Football Hall of Fame in Canton, Ohio is nothing short of remarkable. The personable, faith-driven graduate of the University of Northern Iowa spent four years after college fearing his dream of playing pro football was over. But when a near providential opportunity came his way, Warner went from the supermarket to the Super Bowl.

“American Underdog” sets out to tell the story of Kurt Warner’s rise to football stardom, chronicling the numerous highs and lows that made his journey such an inspiration. The film is directed by Andrew and Jon Erwin whose faith-based catalog includes movies like 2018’s “I Can Only Imagine” and last year’s “The Jesus Music”. Here the brothers deliver a sports biopic that really is about the person more than their accomplishments. That doesn’t mean it avoids all of the usual sports movie trappings. There’s plenty of melodrama and of course we get the overly dramatic ‘big game’, complete with swelling music and obligatory slow-motion. But at its heart, the movie sticks to the personal side of Kurt Warner’s story which proves to be the right move.

This is one of those movies that’s hard for me to dislike even with its noticeable flaws. I’m a sucker for true underdog stories and Warner’s is undoubtedly one of the most amazing in sports history. Here he’s played by the effortlessly likable Zachary Levi (“Shazam”) who may be a tad too old for the film’s early scenes, but who quickly sinks into his role. He gives an earnest and committed performance that highlights Warner’s character yet doesn’t shy away from his shortcomings.

By focusing more on Warner’s personal journey, screenwriters Jon Erwin, David Aaron Cohen and Jon Gunn hand Levi a surprisingly meaty role. While football certainly has its part in the story, the movie is really about overcoming impossible odds to succeed. More than that, it’s about grasping what’s truly important in life. We learn that for much of Kurt Warner’s life, football was most important. But it takes losing his dream and meeting his future wife Brenda Meoni (played with a striking mix of strength and vulnerability by Oscar-winner Anna Paquin) to finally open his eyes to what matters most.

The film’s early scenes touch on Warner’s time as a fifth year senior quarterback for Northern Iowa. After sitting on the bench for four years, Kurt is finally named the team’s starter. Soon he’s cutting his own “highlight” reels to send out to pro scouts. But an unknown quarterback with only one year of college experience at a small Division I school automatically sets him up as an underdog.

It’s during this time that he first meets Brenda, a divorced single mother raising two kids, one being her legally blind son Zack (Hayden Zaller), an underdog in his own right. Despite there being a clear spark between them, Brenda fears a repeat of her painful first marriage, and is quick to push Kurt away. But the movie’s inescapable predictability kicks in (the first of several times) and the two eventually become a couple.

While none of the film’s major plot points will surprise you, it’s what happens in between them that gives the movie its heartbeat. Football takes a backseat to Kurt and Brenda’s struggles. We see them buying groceries with food stamps and scrapping together loose change just to put gas in the tank. They’re hit with both tragedy and hardship leading Kurt to finally swallow his pride and accept a job playing quarterback for the Iowa Barnstormers, a new team in the fledgling Arena Football League. Not only does it help pay the bills, it finally opens the door to his dream of playing in the NFL.

Interestingly, the last 20 minutes is all we get of Warner’s NFL career. We see him get the call to St. Louis where he faces the ire of offensive coordinator Mike Martz (Chance Kelly). “You’re too old to be a rookie. You’re too green to be a pro,” Martz barks. But Kurt has one powerful ally – a gravelly voiced Dennis Quaid playing Rams head football coach Dick Vermeil, yet another fellow underdog who believes Kurt is ready for his shot.

Strangely, “American Underdog” downplays the spiritual side of Kurt Warner’s journey, something he himself has been very vocal about. It’s definitely woven throughout the movie, but there seems to be a concerted effort to be as subtle with it as possible. Perhaps it’s to avoid the schism that often comes with “faith-based” movies. At least it’s there and it helps give a well-rounded and honest portrayal of the man beyond the touchdowns and accolades. A man with a truly inspiring story worth being told. “American Underdog” opens in theaters on Christmas Day.

VERDICT – 3.5 STARS

“Looks can be deceiving.” That wise old adage has been around forever and used to describe all sorts of things. It’s also a fitting way to describe Mickey Reece’s new film “Agnes”. This wobbly and disjointed movie teases itself as horror only to make a jarring turn midway through that sees it transform into something completely different. At first you think you’re seeing some audacious creative choice that will lead to a satisfying payoff. Instead it ends up feeling like something done just to taunt viewers with expectations. More on that later.

The story (written by Reece and John Selvidge) begins with a disaffected priest named Father Donaghue (Ben Hall) being called before his suspiciously cold superiors. He’s told about some strange occurrences happening at a convent named Santa Theresa in the far corner of their diocese. Reports say a young nun named Sister Agnes (Hayley McFarland) is showing all the movie signs of your standard demon possession: levitating, violent convulsions, superhuman strength, and a sudden potty-mouth.

A reluctant Father Donaghue is sent to the convent to investigate and promptly reminded that he is in no position to refuse. Why you ask? Well, apparently there are some accusations against him which he has denied but that have stained his reputation nonetheless. But don’t get too caught up in that stuff. The movie certainly doesn’t. It’s one of several things Reece teases only to drop without ever addressing it again.

The stuffy Bishop and his heads of the parish force Father Donaghue to take along priest-to-be Brother Benjamin (Jake Horowitz), Donaghue’s good-looking and by-the-books former pupil in the faith. The two don’t exactly see eye to eye especially after the unorthodox and occasionally crude Father Donovan expresses his skepticism of demonic possession and the holy rite of exorcism. He sees it as all psychological rather than supernatural. “I’ve seen this more than a few times,” he tells his young associate.

At the convent the two men of the cloth are greeted by the icy Mother Superior (Mary Buss) who doesn’t like the idea of two men hanging around her sisters. We’re also introduced to the troubled Sister Mary (Molly Quinn), a relatively new addition to the flock who’s trying to escape her own tragic past. She’s close friends with the bedeviled Sister Agnes. Things get even weirder with the introduction of the excommunicated Father Black (Chris Browning), with his pseudo-hip wardrobe and bronze spray tan. He and his creepy assistant (who looks plucked right out of a Terry Gilliam movie) come to the convent at the behest of Father Donaghue to confront the spirit. Or is there more going on than meets the eye?

Visually, the film’s first half resembles a low-budget knockoff of better supernatural possession flicks. But storywise Reece tosses in a few unexpected curveballs and turns what looks standard issue into something trickier and delightfully bizarre. But just as you’re getting into the weirdness and mystery of the story, the movie shifts in a wild and unexpected way. It lurches forward in time, leaving behind all of the wacky intrigue and never returning to it.

The movie suddenly turns into a character drama focusing on Mary. She has left the convent and struggles to get by, working double shifts and two jobs just to afford her $600 a month rent. We do get a couple of scenes that reference her past with the Carmelite sisterhood, but mostly its about her hard life and the few people she encounters along the way – her slimeball boss Curly (Chris Sullivan), and stand-up comic (Sean Gunn), etc.

There nothing inherently wrong with Mary’s story and Quinn gives a terrific performance. But Mary’s journey is remarkably undercooked. And while the movie tries to be clever with its dramatic shift in tone and completely new direction, it ends up feeling like two different films connected by the barest of threads. Even worse, neither story gets any kind of satisfying ending. Some may love the ambiguity. I was left thinking of all the ways this could have been a better movie. “Agnes” releases December 10th in select theaters and on VOD.

VERDICT – 2 STARS

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

Just weeks after releasing his much talked about “Justice League” cut, filmmaker and self-promoter extraordinaire Zack Snyder announced he was doing a movie for Netflix that would lay the foundation for a brand-new cinematic universe. The movie was “Army of the Dead”, a surprisingly fun action-horror romp that played a lot like a “Kelly’s Heroes”, “The Italian Job”, “Dawn of the Dead” mash-up. Snyder wasted no time announcing the next installment – a prequel centered around one first film’s more memorable characters. It would be called “Army of Thieves” and the burgeoning franchise faithfuls wouldn’t have long to wait.

“Army of Thieves” is set roughly six years before the events of “Army of the Dead” which places it near the start of the zombie outbreak. But don’t expect the undead to play a role here. Instead, this is a heist movie centered around the comically skittish safecracker Ludwig Dieter (Matthias Schweighöfer). The movie fills in his backstory, revealing what led him into criminal safecracking and how he ended up chosen for the Las Vegas job in the first film. I’m not sure anyone was clamoring for a Dieter origin story, but we got one nonetheless.

“Army of Thieves” introduces us to the jittery German before he became Ludwig Dieter. Here he’s introduced as a lowly bank teller, failed YouTuber, and safecracking enthusiast named Sebastian. After posting a video on his channel about renowned yet tortured safe designer Hans Wagner, Sebastian is surprised by a comment containing a mysterious invitation to what turns out to be a high-stakes underground safecracking competition (are those a thing?).

Sebastian goes and predictably wins, but it turns out to be more than a competition. He’s unwittingly auditioning for a professional thief named Gwendoline (Nathalie Emmanuel) who’s planning a ambitious heist that requires a skilled safecracker. Tired of his boring everyday routine and ready to break free from the monotonous and the mundane, Sebastian agrees to join her and her crew of thieves.

The rest of Gwendoline’s band of criminals are Korina (Ruby O. Fee), a master hacker because you need to get past those pesky security systems; Rolph (Guz Khan), a skilled driver to ensure a clean and swift getaway; and the preening Brad Cage (Stuart Martin), who Gwendoline describes as “our very own real-life action hero.” All three bring personality and flavor to the story, but they’re more cogs than meaningful characters.

The job is a tricky one – break into the late Hans Wagner’s three master safes affectionately named Rheingold, Valkyrie and Siegfried. They’re located in “secure” banks in Paris, Prague and St. Moritz which provides the catalyst for some good old-fashioned movie globetrotting. But hot on their heels is Interpol Agent Delacroix (Jonathan Cohen), a wildly overcooked character whose dogged pursuit of Gwendoline and her crew is driven by motivations that are never all that convincing.

In addition to being the film’s star, Schweighöfer also directs with a sleek Eurocentric style that makes for a nice contrast to Snyder. Not only does “Army of Thieves” have a different look, but Schweighöfer brings along a much lighter touch. Snyder’s movie had plenty of funny moments (most from Schweighöfer himself), but this film goes heavier with the humor and even throws in a romantic angle that’s sweet but too thinly sketched for us to buy into.

There aren’t many surprises in “Army of Thieves” meaning there’s not much suspense. You see it most in the individual heist sequences. For banks that go to all the trouble to have one of the most impenetrable and complex safes ever made, you would at least expect a mildly competent security apparatus. Yet the heists (though framed as daring) are laughably easy to pull off. A hack or two here, a glaringly obvious diversion there. Done. In fairness, each safe gets a little more challenging, but it’s still hard to find much tension.

Interestingly, outside of three unbilled cameos, there’s very little in “Army of Thieves” linking it to its franchise predecessor. We do get a few passing nods to the zombie uprising happening overseas and Sebastian occasionally has these random dreams of being attacked by the undead. But in a sense part of this movie’s charm is that it feels like its own thing. Sure, it’s pretty lightweight and utterly preposterous. But it has its moments and the performances from both Schweighöfer and Emmanuel elevate things enough to hold our attention. “Army of Thieves” premieres today (October 29th) on Netflix.

VERDICT – 3 STARS

It goes without saying that Holocaust movies make for difficult viewings. It also goes without saying that the number of films dealing with the Holocaust are too many to count. Ever since the breadth of the Nazi atrocities against the Jews were revealed, filmmakers from all over the globe have tackled the Holocaust from numerous points of view and have mined countless inspirational and sobering true stories from both inside and outside of the concentration camps.

For a variety of different reasons, some are quick to dismiss Holocaust movies or simply avoid them altogether. Personally, I’m glad filmmakers are still reminding us of horrors we should never forget while also heralding the true stories of heroism and sacrifice from so many who suffered, endured or resisted such abominable evil. As long as there are stories to tell, I hope filmmakers will continue to tell them.

The new Slovak drama “The Auschwitz Report” shares those same beliefs even beginning with philosopher George Santayana’s timeless words “Those who cannot remember the past are condemned to repeat it.” The film comes from director Peter Bebjak and sets its focus on a daring escape of two prisoners Alfred Wetzler (Noel Czuczor) and Rudolph Vrba (Peter Ondrejička). During the war, news of the concentration camps was slow getting to the allies and the Nazi’s went to great links to hide their savagery. Wetzler and Vrba were determined to get news of the atrocities to the outside world – to share the truth hidden behind the veil of Nazi deception and propaganda.

The film’s three-act structure begins on April 7, 1944. The opening scene shows hundreds of Jews – cold, pale, their heads shaved and in dirty striped prison rags – being herded around two prisoners seated and tied to their chairs. “This is what happens to those who try to escape from my camp,” the Nazi officer yells. I’m sure you can guess the outcome. This is Auschwitz. A place of inexplicable barbarity; where the sound of a train whistle sends chills and death is as common as air.

Throughout the first act, Wetzler and Vrba spend most of the time hiding in a small hole underneath a stack of lumber. Bebjak instead focuses on the men from his barracks who stood their ground and refused to reveal the pair’s whereabouts despite tremendous physical and psychological torture at the hands of a depraved Nazi commander (played by Florian Panzner). Bebjak doesn’t sugarcoat the horror, highlighting some of the camp’s brutal rituals while throwing in a handful of effectively uncomfortable flashbacks which show the camp’s processing of new prisoners. It’s harrowing stuff.

The second act moves to the actual escape – more specifically Wetzler and Vrba’s struggles to survive in the cold and rugged woods as they make their way to the border. Along their arduous journey the duo finds help from sympathetic strangers – a young woman in the forest, a kindly couple in a small village, a soldier with connections to the Red Cross. The third act centers on their efforts to convince allied representatives of what was really happening in Auschwitz. In reality, the VRBA-Wetzler Report was one of the first in-person accounts to shed light on the death camps. And their report is directly credited with saving around 120,000 Hungarian Jews set to be sent to Auschwitz.

“The Auschwitz Report” does feel very much like a Holocaust movie (for obvious reasons), but it sets itself apart with some shrewd and thoughtful filmmaking choices. Its three-pronged story leaves a lot of details on the side, but it does a good job centralizing the story around particular acts of bravery. There is a strange collage of audio clips playing over the end credits that makes some questionable equivalents, but for the most part Bebjak message is one of courage and determination. It’s also a searing historical piece that stresses the enormous effort it took to get the world to see what was happening at the hands of the Nazis.

Bebjak also uses an array of clever and powerful visual flourishes to convey his points. There’s a striking mixture of handheld camera an wide-angle shots that are particularly potent during the scenes within Auschwitz. We also see Bebjak playing with perspective, using intense closeups, and shooting from unconventional and often disorienting angles. He and DP Martin Žiaran put a lot of effort into the film’s visual language and often rely on the camera as much as the cast to convey the intensity of emotions.

Co-written by Bebjak, Jozef Pastéka and Tomás Bombík, “The Auschwitz Report” pulls yet another remarkable story from the inhumanity that was the Holocaust. You can’t help but wonder about some of the details that are left behind as the narrative progresses. But at the same time, the film keeps you glued to its story – one that highlights the very best of human nature and the absolute worst. It makes for a sobering call to remembrance and a stern warning against repeating the sins of our often ugly past. “The Auschwitz Report” is available now in select theaters and on VOD.

VERDICT – 4 STARS

The vaguely titled “A Classic Horror Story” is an Italian horror film recently released on Netflix from the directing duo of Roberto De Feo and Paolo Strippoli. It highlights one of the streaming platform’s most welcomed strengths – its embrace of international cinema which includes a plethora of movies from nearly every genre and from all across the globe. Of course not every movie is five-star classic (not even closer really), but they give subscribers a chance to sample the many flavors of filmmaking from around the world.

When it comes to “A Classic Horror Story”, the title pretty much tips us off that this isn’t a movie striving for originality. It’s not reinventing the wheel or introducing anything new to the horror genre. In fact it proudly shows off its influences which include “The Texas Chainsaw Massacre”, “Cabin in the Woods”, and even a touch of “Midsommar”. That’s really nothing new especially for the horror genre where movies borrow from other movies all the time. Here the filmmakers put it out there in the title card so we know exactly what to expect. Or do we?

Its story begins in a roadside diner where a young woman named Elisa (Matilda Anna Ingrid Lutz) is having second thoughts about going through with a scheduled abortion. She’s on her way to her parents house in Calabria and is waiting on her ride-share carpool to pick her up. An old RV finally pulls in driven and owned by the chatty Fabrizio (Francesco Russo), an aspiring filmmaker who is recording the trip for his travel blog. They’re joined by the obligatory jerk Mark (Will Merrick) and his girlfriend Sofia (Yuliia Sobol) who are on their way to a wedding. Also Riccardo (Peppino Mazzotta), a moody doctor with some hefty family drama back home.

The five set off through the winding Italian hills. But everything goes south when the RV slams into the tree knocking them all unconscious. When they finally come to, Mark’s leg is busted up and (more shockingly) instead of being near the road the RV is sitting in the middle of a large open field deep in the woods. And that sets up the next hour-plus that purposely leans into more horror tropes than I can number. There’s a dense eerie forest, the RV won’t start and there’s no cell phone service, there are macabre cult markings, and what’s the deal with this bizarrely shaped cabin?

While none of those things will be new to fans of the genre, De Feo and Strippoli meld them together pretty well. There’s even a little meta commentary that lands better than it should. They also add some impressive visual touches seen mostly in the lighting, some crafty uses of perspective, and some creative camera movements. We end up with a good-looking movie made with a hint of Hooper, a touch of Barker, even a dash of Shyamalan. But it borrows from/pays homage to A LOT of other films – so many that it’s hard to root out this movie’s own identity. The familiarity doesn’t kill our fun, but it does lessen the impact. “A Classic Horror Story” is streaming now on Netflix.

VERDICT – 3 STARS