It’s hard to believe it has been 20 years since the release of “Independence Day”. I still remember that summer of 1996. ID4 was a big deal. A fantastic marketing campaign stirred up a ton of interest and when the film was finally released audiences weren’t disappointed. ID4 was a big, silly, science fiction romp that essentially redefined the summer blockbuster. It also represented a huge leap forward in CGI technology and featured some of the most memorable scenes ever created of movie mass destruction. It opened the gates for a slew of other disaster movies that would follow and its eventual sequel some twenty years later.

ID4 worked simply because it was fun. The pure spectacle was something to behold and unlike anything of that time. Most importantly it embraced its silliness and its cheesiness was part of its charm. Now flash-forward to “Independence Day: Resurgence”, a remarkably dull sequel devoid of any of its predecessors charms. Director Roland Emmerich returns along with co-writer and co-producer Dean Devlin. Both tapped into something good back in 1996, but their follow-up is a testament to how far blockbusters have fallen in terms of quality and ambition.

“Resurgence” spends a lot of time hearkening back to the first movie and milking that connection for all it can. Minus a few fun bits of nostalgia, it doesn’t do much to help. Perhaps twenty years is too long ago. Maybe people have simply forgotten these characters. Personally speaking I had no hankering for a sequel. But problems like that can be squashed if you have good story to tell. “Resurgence” has nothing new to say and its redundancy along with a complete lack of inspiration makes it pretty tough to endure.

The cliché-riddled story is pretty basic. A now unified earth has created a global defense force to protect us from any potential alien attack. How do you think that worked? A 3,000 mile-wide alien mothership (that’s stupid in itself) crashes through our atmosphere and attaches itself to earth in order to harvest our planet’s core. Thankfully we have a team of the best fighter pilots, scientists, and ex-presidents to put up a resistance. None of them are the slightest bit interesting, but they do put up a resistance.

It’s hard to say what we get more of, scenes of CGI or horrible lines of dialogue. It’s a close race. And of course we get the obligatory destruction of cities and the killing of millions of faceless people (poor London…isn’t it always London?). Sure, some of the visual effects look really nice and that’s where a bulk of its bloated $165 million budget goes. But it’s nothing we haven’t seen a million times by now and with nothing in the story worth clinging to, the effects ring hollow.

Speaking of hollow look no further than the characters and the performances. It may be a bit unfair to slam the cast when the material is this bad. There is line after line of cringe-worthy dialogue and nearly every character is firmly rooted in one stereotype or another. The cheesiness isn’t charming because the humor is so vapid and not a single relationship feels authentic.

Then you get to the actors none of whom seem completely convinced of what they’re doing. Liam Hemsworth plays a poor man’s Maverick from “Top Gun”. Jessie Usher is shockingly bad as the fighter pilot son of Will Smith’s character from the first film (Smith wisely said “no thanks” to this one). Even the always enjoyable Jeff Golblum is handcuffed by the shoddy script. Bill Pullman, Brent Spiner, and Judd Hirsch also return for a paycheck while none of the newly added twenty-somethings offer even a hint of fresh energy.

“Resurgence” flounders out of the gate, never shows an ability to build suspense, and offers up some of the most uninteresting characters I’ve seen in a while. Its CGI looks good but over time slams against your senses like a wrecking-ball. Maybe if this film went further into the “Sharknado” vein of intentional goofiness and absurdity it could have worked. As it is, “Resurgence” bored me and left me wondering if this was the best they could come up with after twenty years?

VERDICT – 1.5 STARS

Apparently 2016 is a breakout year for Ethan Hawke westerns. Okay, so I’m being a tad facetious, but the 45 year-old Austin, Texas native has released two westerns over the last few months. The first was the crowd-pleasing shoot-em-up remake of “The Magnificent Seven”. And then there is this film, the much leaner and less serious “In a Valley of Violence”.

The film is written, edited and directed by Ti West, a filmmaker most known for his small, fresh takes on the horror genre. West has much the same goal in mind here, but at the same time this is a clear-coated homage plump full of familiar western tropes. West’s tongue-in-cheek handling of the material enables his celebration of the traditional western to also feel surprisingly fresh.

“In a Valley of Violence” proclaims the age-old prophecy (or at least it should be an age-old prophecy if it isn’t) – don’t come between a man and his dog. That’s exactly what happens when a drifter named Paul (Hawke) and his dog Abbie come across the small, rundown town of Denton on their way to the Mexican border. Denton is clearly a dangerous place as evident by its scarcity of citizens and its boarded-up church. But Paul needs supplies so he moseys into town.

And can you ever stop in a small western town without hitting the local saloon? Paul does that very thing and has run-in with a drunken hothead named Gilly (James Ransone). Words are exchanged, a punch is thrown, Gilly’s nose is broken, and the town’s Marshal Clyde Martin (John Travolta) sends Paul on his way with a warning never to return. Sounds fair enough, but it wouldn’t be much of a story if ended on that note. Things sour and we see the violent side of Paul that has been simmering under the surface.

The story doesn’t stray too far from the traditional western revenge tale, but Hawke and Travolta both energize it with some really good performances. There is also some really good supporting work from Taissa Farmiga (younger sister of actress Vera Farmiga). She plays a young woman who helps run the town’s hotel and sees Denton for the unruly dead-end that it is.

It’s an enjoyable small cast who seem to have fun with West’s material particularly the humor. Despite its ominous threatening title, “In a Valley of Violence” is surprisingly funny. Some of its laughs come at the most unexpected times and range from subtle to absurdity. It never goes far enough to turn this into a spoof, but it does keep things light even when the tension amps up.

Despite its violence and dedication to formula, West and company (wisely) never take their movie too seriously. Even when it’s moving by the numbers, it remains quirky enough to feel slightly off-center. Appropriately shot in 35mm and featuring a sparkling Jeff Grace score, the film looks and sounds as it should which will endear it to genre fans. But most impressive is its ability to embrace the conventional and set our expectations only to then shake things up just enough for us to see things through a new lens. That makes this film too appealing to pass up.

VERDICT – 4 STARS

Movies have scoured the landscapes of World War 2 telling stories from practically every perspective, or so you may think. Director Ann Fontaine proves that to be false with her powerful and understated French-Polish drama “The Innocents”, a story of a much different kind of wartime horror.

“The Innocents” is written, directed, shot, and edited by women giving it something we rarely get from war pictures – a female perspective. Based on a little-known true story, the film explores a harrowing scenario with seemingly no scar-free solution. At the same time it looks deeper into subjects such as sexual assault, motherhood, and crises of faith.

The story is set in 1945 shortly after the end of the war. Mathilde (deftly played by Lou de Laâge) is a French Red Cross nurse assigned to help in post-war Poland. After reluctantly accepting a nun’s plea for help, Mathilde follows her to an isolated convent where she discovers a young nun in labor. What follows is a quiet, tense sequence where Mathilde performs a cesarean among sisters who are unwilling to divulge details of their unusual situation.

Soon we learn of their horrific secret. The nuns had weathered persecution during the German occupation, but then the Russians arrived. Over a three-day span Russian soldiers repeatedly stormed the convent and raped the sisters resulting in numerous pregnancies. Fearing disgrace and ostracism the sisters rely on Mathilde to shelter their secret. At the same time obvious inner conflicts between their faith and circumstances add an even heavier level of complexity. For Mathilde caring for the sisters while keeping the secret from her Red Cross superiors proves to be difficult.

A real strength of “The Innocents” is its even-handed approach to its subject matter. There is no pointed lecturing or judgements about faith, unbelief, or the decisions each influences. Instead Fontaine presents her material with a clear-eyed neutrality. She allows her story and well-defined characters to speak for themselves free of gloss or manipulation. It’s such a vital approach for Fontaine and the writing team to take. I can’t imagine the film having near the punch without its real-world grounding.

Specifically, the handling of sisterhood under stress is thoroughly compelling. Despite the nun’s best efforts, their faith inevitably crashes against the ugly, abrasive world outside their walls. Mathilde is the antithesis – an influence from outside but one representing something good. Her growing relationship with the sisters despite not sharing their beliefs is one of the film’s key undercurrents.

And then there is Caroline Champetier’s cinematography which is something to behold. Shot after shot highlight elements of the period, many resembling classic art pieces. We especially see it in her capturing of the convent. She accentuates its cloistered, bygone look, almost as if it’s from another time. It hearkens back to Champetier’s fantastic work in the slightly similar film “Of Gods and Men”.

As you watch “The Innocents” it’s easy to recognize the many parts seamlessly working together. The smart, measured script, Fontaine’s restrained yet sure-footed direction, Champetier’s beautifully moody cinematography, the wonderful performances by the predominantly female cast (particularly Lou de Laâge). They are all vital in telling this incredibly unique story of courage amid the unimaginable. By the end it was clear to me that no character’s innocence would remain intact, but even the smallest light can offer a glimmer of hope. The film helps us remember that.

VERDICT – 4.5 STARS