Category Archives: Movie Reviews – M

REVIEW: “Minions”

by

21

Minions_Revision_PROOF

There is such a thing as shamelessly milking a profitable idea for all its worth. There is also such a thing as a guilty pleasure. These two ideas collided for me in “Minions”. Maybe I’m being a bit unfair. Perhaps these mischievous yellow pills haven’t reached the point of being “shamelessly milked”. But there is no doubt Universal Pictures sees profit in these silly little creatures. There is also no doubt that I have fallen victim to their charm. I find them funny. They are a guilty pleasure of mine. But do they have enough to carry a feature film on their own?

We first saw the minions on the big screen in 2010’s “Despicable Me”. A sequel followed and now they have their own spinoff. “Minions” starts off with a brilliant telling of the creatures’ history narrated by Geoffrey Rush. We learn the minions have been around since the prehistoric times and they exist only to serve villainous masters. Their masters have included cavemen, Dracula, and Napoleon just to name a few. The problem is their waggish incompetence constantly lead to the deaths of their masters and eventually drives them to start a new life in solitude. This early sequence is easily the film’s funniest. From there things get pretty inconsistent.

Minions1

Many years pass and the minions fall into a deep state of depression. A determined minion named Kevin realizes the only way for them to survive is to find a new villain to serve. Along with minion pals Bob and Stuart, Kevin sets put to find a new master and save his kind. It’s a truly noble task. Their quest takes them around the world until they eventually land a job with the world’s most famous villain Scarlett Overkill (Sandra Bullock). She and her eccentric husband Herb (Jon Hamm) head to London where their new minions are to pull of the grandest heist of them all.

While the opening is easily the funniest part, there are still laughs sprinkled throughout the rest of the film. This is mainly because I find the minions inherently funny. They offer several funny fish-out-of-water moments, lots of good-hearted ineptitude, and plenty of quirky sight gags. But the question remains – are they capable of carrying a full movie? “Minions” makes it hard to say yes.

Minion humor can be really funny, but this film shows they need other good characters to work with. Unfortunately they don’t get them. There isn’t a single non-minion character who is the slightest bit interesting or entertaining. Bullock’s Scarlett isn’t funny and much of her dialogue consists of long, drawn out ramblings. Herb is a throwaway character who offers nothing other his weird appearance. Most of the other non-minions basically run around, yell a lot, and act crazy.

Minions2

So that leaves the minions to their own devices and neither they nor Brian Lynch’s script has enough to carry the film. While funny in doses, the normal minion routine runs its course. Eventually we need more than their chirpy, unintelligible chatter and their cute and lovable incompetence. Eventually we need more than a seemingly endless stream of slapstick. But the movie does fall into this rut and the smattering of good gags aren’t enough to keep it afloat.

The youngster target audience will probably love every minute of “Minions”. I was with them to a point, but once the story abandoned the quest to find a master it bogged down and the humor grew inconsistent. I guess it makes sense. In the “Despicable Me” films minions exist to serve and support other characters. Maybe that’s why they were so good in those films but struggle here. Or maybe it’s the script that fails them and leaves the minions to fend for themselves. Whatever the case, these are still funny creatures and we see it in “Minions”. They just deserve better characters to work with especially if you’re making them the centerpiece of a feature length film.

VERDICT – 3 STARS

3 Stars

REVIEW: “Mission: Impossible – Rogue Nation”

by

28

Mission poster

After a couple of shaky early installments the “Mission Impossible” franchise seems to have found its stride. Personally I’ve never considered any of the films bad, but a couple definitely showed a dip in quality. But 2011’s “Ghost Protocol” gave the series a new and stable identity. It was an action-packed blockbuster anchored by an entertaining story and an almost self-deprecating sense of humor. Now we have the fifth film “Rogue Nation” which embraces everything right about its predecessor and then elevates it.

Say what you want about Tom Cruise but he is an actor who has redefined himself and he remains successful because he knows who he is at this stage of his career. His Ethan Hunt character in “Rogue Nation” perfectly encapsulates his current state. Gone are the cheesy “Top Gun” grins, the “Risky Business” dances, and the “Jerry Maguire” flamboyance. In this film Ethan is still an IMF super agent, but he is also overmatched, fragile, and often dependent on others. It’s a refreshing approach that makes Ethan less of a superhero and more of a human being.

The story begins with two separate battles taking place. The first is before a Senate oversight committee. CIA Director Alan Hunley (Alec Baldwin) is seeking to shut down IMF due to their reckless and damaging tactics (see the Kremlin from the last film as an example). Agent Brandt (Jeremy Renner) defends the group but to no avail. IMF is shut down and all field agents are to be placed under CIA control.

MISSION1

But Ethan Hunt is involved in another battle – a covert operation intended to expose a global crime consortium known as the Syndicate. Ethan is lured into a trap and captured by the Syndicate’s mysterious leader Solomon Lane (deviously played by Sean Harris). But an equally mysterious British operative named Ilsa (Rebecca Ferguson) helps Ethan escape without revealing her reasons or motives. Convinced more than ever that the Syndicate must be stopped, Ethan sets out to stop Lane while avoiding the hounding CIA and determining which side Ilsa is fighting for.

Cruise has a lot of input into these films and he wisely surrounds himself with quality filmmakers. Christopher McQuarrie directed, wrote the screenplay, and is a regular collaborator with Cruise. You may remember he won an Oscar for writing the brilliantly verbose “The Usual Suspects”. Here his script features the adrenaline-fueled action sequences, but it also services its characters with good dialogue and smart humor. Then there is the wonderful cinematographer Robert Elswit, an Oscar winner for his work on “There Will Be Blood”. His camera never frames a bad shot and it never lands in a bad place. His action scenes may be the biggest treat particularly an exhilarating car and motorcycle chase through the streets of Casablanca.

Mission2

Getting back to the story and particularly Cruise’s Ethan Hunt, I can’t say enough about how refreshing it is to see this type of lead character in this type of movie be so dependent on others. So many cliches and overused tropes are tossed aside to give us a more human Ethan Hunt even amid his crazy stunts and top-notch spy work. We repeatedly see him being rescued or him relying on the strength and wisdom of others.

This is mostly seen in his relationship with Ilsa. So often she bests him and at other times she saves his life. He’s no knight in shining armor. Actually I think it could easily be said that Ilsa is the toughest character in the film. Cruise’s performance often highlights her strengths. Plus it helps to have such a great performance from Rebecca Ferguson. What’s best about their relationship is that McQuarrie and Cruise don’t force a run-of-the-mill romance on us. I kept waiting for the movie to strike that all-too-familiar note. After all this is Tom Cruise, right? Instead the film deviates from yet another overused story development which was so satisfying.

There are so many other things I could say about “Rogue Nation”. I could talk about the beautiful locations and the global feel. I could talk about the rest of the supporting cast and the strong work they do. I could talk more about the story and its aversion to cliches while still being a big budget blockbuster. Instead I’ll just say “Rogue Nation” is a very good movie from a franchise that doesn’t always get the credit it deserves. It definitely rises about most of the other summer tent pole pictures we’ve seen. Now bring on MI:6.

VERDICT – 4.5 STARS

TEST star

2015 Blind Spot Series: “My Life to Live”

by

9

BLIND SPOT

“My Life to Live”

“Vivre sa vie” or “My Life to Live” is a French New Wave film that also feels distinctly different from some of the more prominent movies of the highly influential movement. Director Jean-Luc Godard released the film in 1962, two years after his groundbreaking debut “Breathless”. Viewers will undoubtedly see similarities between the two films, but “My Life to Live” differentiates itself both in structure, subject, aesthetic, and style. “My Life to Live” undoubtedly attempts to buck common, overused movie trends – something French New Wave films sought to do. At the same time Godard makes “My Life to Live” distinctly its own.

The captivating Anna Karina plays the lead character Nana and she was Godard’s wife at the time. Interstingly, Godard first noticed Karina in a series of Palmolive ads. Godard was preparing for “Breathless”, his feature film debut, and offered Karina a small role in the picture. She turned him down but his persistence led her to be in his next three films and his wife for four years. Their relationship is evident in the movie. Godard’s camera seems enamored by Karina’s face, by her expressions, by her countenance. His concentration on her eyes, the features of her face, the language of her body. Unquestionably much of Godard’s story is told through the lens of his star.

LIFE1

The film is broken down into twelve chapters each with basic synoptic captions. The first introduces us to Nana who is at a cafe with her husband Paul. We learn that she has just left him and their infant daughter to pursue acting. The revealing scene paints a complex picture of Nana. Adding to that complexity is the intriguing camera work by Godard and long-time cinematographer Raul Coutard. The focus is mostly on the back of the two character’s heads. The camera shifts back and forth while strategically giving us glimpses of their faces often through a mirror’s reflection. It leaves us curious about Nana and unsure how we are to feel about her.

Nana’s acting dream seems unrealistic. We see her working in record shop but apparently she can’t make ends meet. She asks different people to borrow money and one particular scene shows her being forcibly removed from her apartment. Out of a sense of desperation she turns to prostitution. But is it desperation or simple necessity? Nana is never easy to read. She approaches life with an open book mentality yet I always found a cloud of mystery around her. At times she seems impervious to possible consequences of her actions. Other times there is a playful life-loving personality that bubbles out. At other times she feels overwhelmed by her circumstances. Mainly she wants to be able to define her life and she wants to be the one to live it.

Life 2

The film’s look into prostitution of the day adds another level of intrigue. We see Nana grow more and more comfortable and content, but at the same time we the audience begin noticing cracks and concerns within her environment. Godard goes to great lengths to educate us on the mentalities, practices, and laws that made up the Paris prostitution scene of early 1960s. It gives us a better perspective even if it sometimes feels a bit dry and procedural. The coolest thing is how the approach to this element draws from the cinéma vérité documentarian style.

“My Life to Life” is a captivating film slowed down only by the occasional lulls – moments when Godard’s experimentation feels like experimentation instead of storytelling or progression. Still, it’s hard not to be drawn in by the portrait Godard paints. And his cinematic model Anna Karina is a mesmerizing expression of energy, wonder, and reality. Surround her with intoxicating style, layers of cultural references, and a grounded story and you have “My Life to Live” – a film that is uniquely its own nestled within the French New Wave.

VERDICT – 4 STARS

4 Stars

THE END

REVIEW: “Mad Max: Fury Road”

by

42

MAX POSTER

Has it really been 30 years since Mel Gibson last drove across George Miller’s dystopian desert wasteland in “Mad Max Beyond Thunderdome”? My how time flies. Between 1979 and 1985 visionary filmmaker Miller gave us three films: the intriguing but lethargic “Mad Max”, the fabulous cult classic “The Road Warrior”, and the fun but commercial “Beyond Thunderdome”. While the second film was the real standout, I have always had a natural soft spot for the entire franchise. So of course I would be enthusiastic when it was announced that a fourth installment was finally seeing the light of day.

For years Miller has toyed with the idea of bringing Max back to the big screen but there were always obstacles that hindered him. Mel Gibson was set to reprise his role and at several points the project seemed good to go. Several years have passed, Tom Hardy replaces the aged Gibson, and “Fury Road” is a reality. What’s truly amazing is that this is the wildest, craziest, and most visually arresting installment yet and all from the mind of its now 70-year old creator.

MAX1

The first three films had a combined budget of less than $20 million. For “Fury Road” Miller was given $150 million and you will instantly see the benefits. The visuals are an essential component to this film. This is an unapologetic, full-throttle thrill ride, and a textbook lesson on how to make an action movie. Make no mistake, the action in “Fury Road”  is intense and relentless. The vehicular carnage is unlike anything most people have seen before. The story is a bit lightweight and clearly intended to serve the plot’s madness. This all may be enough to scare away some people. For me, it was the film’s unflinching, fuel-injected focus that made it the best movie experience I’ve had this year so far.

The film opens with a gruff Hardy saying “My name is Max. My world is fire and blood”. His world is an energy-starved, post-apocalyptic desert wasteland where he is haunted by his past and driven only by survival. Within the first few minutes, the nomadic Max is captured by the army of a savage and wickedly grotesque tyrant named Immortan Joe (Hugh Keays-Byrne). Max’s capture leads him to cross paths with Imperator Furiosa (Charlize Theron) who attempts to smuggle Joe’s five enslaved childbearing wives to safety. This invokes the wrath of the maniacal leader who brings his entire army after them. And guess what, Max is caught right in the middle.

I can’t think of a more fitting actor to take on the role of Mad Max than Tom Hardy. His dialogue is sparse and he mainly tells his story through grunts, expressions, and outright physicality. And he does it all to sheer perfection. It’s a very unorthodox role. He’s not asked to say much and he spends a good third of the movie with his face partially obscured by a metal contraption. But he masterfully sells us this tough, surly, and untrusting Max character. But the real surprise was watching Charlize Theron match his toughness punch for punch and bullet for bullet. She is so good here.

MAX2

But of course the true star and the main attraction is George Miller and his insanely energetic action and presentation. “Fury Road” is a visual delight – a movie filled with “wow” moments, unbelievable stunts, and mind-blowing vehicle action sequences. Miller shoots his action with a chaotic precision and cinematic fluidity. Many modern action directors should take notes. But equally impressive are the stunning amount of practical effects used. When mixed with the top-notch CGI, it makes this one amazing looking film. And going along with the stellar visuals is Junkie XL’s vibrant and invigorating score.

Some of us had given up on Mad Max ever returning to the big screen. After 30 years it was a reasonable conclusion. But after seeing “Fury Road” I can boldly say it was worth the wait. George Miller has given us an installment that stands right there with (and probably an inch or two above) his phenomenal “The Road Warrior”. This is pure action cinema – a beautiful mixture of old-school style and modern movie technology. And after this taste of Miller’s vision, I can only hope he has more Mad Max movies plan for the future.

VERDICT – 5 STARS

5 STARSs

5STAR K&M

REVIEW: “Maggie”

by

18

MAGGIE POSTER

One could make the argument that the cinema landscape has been saturated with zombie movies. There have been numerous interpretations of zombie horror. We have had zombie comedies. We’ve even had a weird zombie romance flick. Yet with so many variations of zombie movies, I’ve seen nothing quite like “Maggie”. Writer John Scott 3 pens a story that pulls the focus off of the normal zombie movie machinations and tropes. Instead he shoots for a more personal approach by spotlighting intimacies rarely considered in these types of films.

“Maggie” is a movie full of surprises. Perhaps the biggest comes in the lead performance from Arnold Schwarzenegger. In a dramatic departure from anything he has done before, Arnie plays a father whose daughter has been bitten and infected with a deadly, incurable virus. The majority of the story focuses on their time together between the onset of the virus and what looks like the inevitable outcome. Schwarzenegger dials it back and shows an understated side to his acting that is absolutely essential to his character, Wade Vogel. His bearded face is worn and weathered and he is clearly a man tormented by his new reality.

MAGGIE1

Abigail Breslin plays his daughter Maggie. We first meet her making a phone call to her father telling him not to come looking for her. Soon after she is caught in town past the city curfew and it is revealed she has been bitten and infected by the fatal disease that has ravaged most of the world’s population. Wade is allowed to take Maggie home for her final days until the virus reaches a point where she must be sent to what is called Quarantine to be “processed”. Joely Richardson is very good as Maggie’s caring but nervous stepmother. She struggles to balance her support for Wade with her fears of Maggie’s condition.

In a way “Maggie” could be called a family tragedy. It just happens to take place during a zombie apocalypse. But zombies are never the focal point. Their threat lingers in the background occasionally showing itself. Director Henry Hobson keeps his film from becoming a ‘zombie movie’. He effectively uses that backdrop to energize the movie’s sad and hopeless setting, but whenever the film is potentially moving into conventional directions his restraint becomes obvious and he pulls us back to the primary focal point.

Maggie2

As a whole, Hobson’s direction is yet another of the film’s surprises. It’s always nice to see a first time director throw aside a number of conventions and add a degree of style. This is clearly seen in the great job he does capturing mood and atmosphere. It’s well realized through Hobson’s camera, by his strategic use of David Wingo’s score, and through the telling expressions of his cast. Without the right tone the story would have fallen flat. I also like the deliberate pace of the story, something that Hobson and Scott clearly aim for. I can see where some may find it slow and even languid, but I never felt that at all. I fell right into the pacing and the story itself.

“Maggie” intrigued me from its first trailer, but the actual movie was even more enjoyable than I expected. It is such an interesting mix of subtle horror and emotional family drama. And even when it leans a little heavy on the melodrama, it feels surprisingly earned and acceptable. There is also an earnest sweetness at the heart of “Maggie”. The central father/daughter relationship is what drives the film and provides its satisfying emotional core. And that relationship is strengthened more by two very good performances particularly Schwarzenegger who shows us a side that I hope to see again.

VERDICT – 4 STARS

REVIEW: “Mood Indigo”

by

13

MOOD POSTER

Filmmaker Michel Gondry has had his hands in all sorts of projects. He’s made music videos, short films, documentaries, and even television commercials. He has also made a handful of feature films of which I have seen two – the visually striking and potent “Eternal Sunshine of the Spotless Mind” and the painfully unwatchable “The Green Hornet”. His most recent film “Mood Indigo” falls somewhere in between the two.

I was really excited for “Mood Indigo” not so much because of Gondry but because of its cast which features some of France’s most recognized performers. Romain Duris, Audrey Tautou, and Omar Sy bring a huge spark to this strange romance fantasy, but they can only do so much. Gondry goes all-in creating his surreal Dali-esque dreamworld. He bombards us with it and within the narrow bounds of a two hour movie it’s just too much.

MOOD1

The film is based on “Froth on the Daydream”, a 1947 novel by Boris Vian. It tells the story of a wealthy and happy man named Colin (Duris). He loves his life. He loves the food and company of his cook Nicolas (Sy). He has a wonderful and trustworthy best friend Chick (Gad Elmaleh). Gondry shows us Colin’s life through a wild assortment of off-the-wall but playful imagery and gadgetry. This is important because it is truly intended to be a visual representation of Colin’s state of mind. The visuals grow more whimsical and colorful when he meets and falls in love with Chloé (Tautou). The two hit it off and in no time are married.

Colin and Chloé’s relationship drive the remainder of the film both visually and narratively. The two are madly in love and Gondry visualizes it in a number of vibrantly wacky and bizarre ways. But that changes when Chloé is diagnosed with a terminal illness. Not only does the story take on a more depressing tone, by the visuals go from bright and playful to dreary and bleak. It’s a direct reflection of Colin’s mood and state of mind as his life literally decays right before our eyes. It’s a fascinating stylistic approach that shows Gondry’s insanely cool creative side.

MOOD2

At the same time it is Gondry’s wild surreal world that is the movie’s biggest flaw. While the craziness does a great job of interpreting feelings it also goes overboard and becomes an annoyance. Gondry never pulls back and he sometimes smothers his story with his relentless imagery. Quite frankly some of it made no sense and came across as indulgent. I appreciate the film telling a good story in a very unorthodox way, but I often found myself distracted from the main story and at times uninterested in what Gondry was doing. Too much is too much.

Gondry’s stylistic excesses hurt the film but they don’t hurt the performances. Duris and Tautou have always been able to act with charisma and charm and it’s no different here. Both gracefully move from jaunty and merry to downcast and broken. But I had the most fun watching Omar Sy. He may be the most unique character in the film and Sy gives one of the best supporting performances of 2014. These three are joys to watch and they are the film’s most appealing components. As with the moving and poignant story, their performances sometimes get overshadowed by Gondry’s relentless visual wackiness. That’s unfortunate because ultimately that is what keeps “Mood Indigo” from being as good as it could have been.

VERDICT – 3 STARS