Recently I spent a week with my family at a beach condo on the Gulf of Mexico. It was a time full of laughs, fun, and plenty of beach bumming. But something unexpected and extraordinary happened during our trip. I actually watched the first season of the much talked about “Stranger Things”.

To be clear, I didn’t watch it because of any built-up excitement or anticipation. I started watching it simply because I had heard so much about the series and it felt like I was missing out on what could be considered a television phenomenon. Oh, and our condo happened to have Netflix on its big screen TV so that made the decision even easier.

This probably comes as no surprise, but I’m not a television guy. I only write about movies therefore this review will have a movie-like form. But with “Stranger Things” that actually works better that an episode-by-episode breakdown. Yes, Season 1 is broken into chapters with each picking up right where the previous one left off. But all eight chapters/episodes work beautifully as one cohesive whole (very movie-like).

“Stranger Things” is the brainchild of twin brothers Matt and Ross Duffer. They not only conceived the story but wrote the first two chapters of Season 1 and directed all but two. Set in 1983, their series takes place in the fictional town of Hawkins, Indiana. The story is launched by the mysterious disappearance of a young boy named Will Byers (Noah Schnapp). We’re introduced to a host of well-developed characters who are unknowingly being drawn towards the strange circumstances surrounding his disappearance.

First among the characters is Will’s mother Joyce played by an exceptional Winona Ryder. Folks around town think she’s snapping under the weight of grief. Even her older son Jonathan (Charlie Heaton) doesn’t buy into her insistence that Will is trying to communicate with her through supernatural means. Will’s three best friends Mike, Dustin, and Lucas (Finn Wolfhard, Gaten Matarazzo, and Caleb McLaughlin) set out to do their own search and in the process encounter a special young girl (Millie Bobby Brown) who is on the run from some pretty bad people.

Perhaps the most fascinating character is Police Chief Jim Hopper (a superb David Harbour). He’s leading the official investigation despite carrying some pretty heavy baggage of his own. His personal life may be a mess, but he knows how to work a case and what he discovers goes far beyond one missing child. Watching Harbour really dig into this character is one of the season’s biggest strengths.

Several other characters have meaningful roles. Natalia Dyer plays Mike’s older sister Nancy and Joe Keery plays Nancy’s new flame Steve. Their story starts as a fairly familiar teen drama but quickly goes in a much different direction. And Matthew Modine plays Martin Brenner, a scientist with Hawkins Laboratory. Little is known about him or the shadowy operation he’s running just outside of town.

When watching “Stranger Things” so many comparisons immediately come to mind. Perhaps the most satisfying is classic Steven Spielberg meets Chris Carter’s “The X-Files”. You see the influences of Spielberg’s “E.T.” and “Close Encounters”; Ridley Scott’s “Alien” and Stephen King just for starters. And I especially love the cool X-Files vibe. Clandestine experiments, deep cover-ups, government conspiracies – it’s all there.

And of course, how can I not mention something the show is perhaps best known for – the countless 80s pop culture references. My teen years ran through that decade so spotting them is a lot of fun. But they aren’t just added for nostalgia alone. They really do help create a convincing setting for the Duffer brothers and company to play in. And sometimes they play directly into the story. Take Cold War paranoia, something very real during the 80s and cleverly woven into the plot.

“Stranger Things” is a fascinating stew that juggles numerous genres and influences. Yet it all comes together to form an enthralling eight-episode television season that plays like one well-paced and impressively conceived movie. It does a great job of introducing and developing characters while featuring several stand-out performances (Harbour, Brown, and Ryder specifically). And perhaps best of all, it builds real excitement for Season 2, even for a ‘strictly movies’ guy like me. I consider that to be the highest praise!

VERDICT – 4.5 STARS

Remember back when Peter Parker was a ‘friendly neighborhood Spider-Man’? His stories were intimate, personal and tied to his New York City roots. Despite their faults, the two previous series captured that element of the character very well. The MCU has taken Spidey in a different direction. They are much more interested in Spider-Man the Avenger and connecting him to their sprawling cinematic universe. I kinda miss the old days.

“Spider-Man: Homecoming” saw the MCU rewrite many of Peter Parker’s most defining story arcs in order to both “modernize” the character and firmly tie him into their ever-expanding, multi-billion dollar cash cow. His second solo film “Far From Home” doesn’t exactly change course, but it does do several things that makes it a much better and more satisfying installment.

First, while it certainly doesn’t dramatically change Spidey (played by Tom Holland), the film stresses his desire to be a ‘friendly neighborhood Spider-Man’. In his first MCU movies we saw Peter Parker caught up in the excitement and allure of being an Avenger. The events of “Avengers: Endgame” have clearly changed his perspective and he struggles with his desire to be a kid again versus the responsibilities of being an Avenger.

Another welcomed change comes in the handling of some of the side characters. Tops on the list is MJ played by Zendaya. In “Homecoming” every second of her screen time was spent selling her as a rebellious, eccentric loner with few discernible human qualities. “Far From Home” strikes a much-needed balance with the character. MJ still stands out among her classmates, but she’s given more layers and is finally allowed to emote. The same with Peter’s best friend Ned (Jacob Batalon). He’s still there to add humor, but this film makes him feel like more than simply comic relief.

I credit many of these changes (rightly or wrongly) to a more compact and focused writing team. “Homecoming” had six writing credits while this film sticks with two – Chris McKenna and Erik Sommers. Along with returning director John Watts, they are tasked with wrapping up one MCU phase and kicking off another while also expanding Peter Parker’s story. The results are pretty impressive.

The story sees Peter trying to put the events of “Endgame” behind him by going on a class trip to Europe. No Spider-Man, no Avengers. Just a getaway to spend time with his friends and finally tell MJ how he feels about her. Easier said than done. While in Venice, Italy a huge water monster attacks the city but is fought off by the mysterious, super-powered Quentin Beck (Jake Gyllenhaal).

To complicate matters Nick Fury (Samuel L. Jackson) shows up. He and Beck (aka Mysterio) tell Peter that the water monster was one of four Elementals. The most dangerous (Fire) is projected to attack Prague and they need Spider-Man to help defeat it. Peter declines but Fury has a knack for getting his way. This obviously puts a damper on Peter’s desire for a life of normalcy especially when he finds out there is more to the Elementals than meets the eye.

Just as before Tom Holland proves to be the ideal choice to play Peter Parker/Spider-Man. His look, demeanor, earnestness, and naïveté all fit well with the character. It has always been the writing that has either helped or hurt him. Here (aside from a few small residual gripes) the writing and Holland click from the very start.

Back to the supporting side, Gyllenhaal is very good in what is a much different spin on Mysterio’s story. Jackson can do Nick Fury in his sleep. Jon Favreau returns as Happy Hogan and gets several fun scenes. The one remaining sour note for me is Marisa Tomei. Again, it’s no fault of the performance but the writing. Give me Aunt May over Sexy May any day.

“Far From Home” was a nice surprise and a welcomed step up from the previous Spider-Man film. It’s a breezy, light-hearted and fun MCU installment that adds depth to Peter Parker’s world while setting things up for an interesting third film (whatever you do, stay for both end-credits scenes). It may not completely cure all of my ills with the MCU’s changes to Spider-Man’s story, it certainly excites me for where things are at and where they are heading.

VERDICT – 3.5 STARS

A western starring Joaquin Phoenix, John C. Reilly, Jake Gyllenhaal, and Riz Ahmed is an automatic attention-getter. It’s impossible to look at that particular cast and expect a traditional genre piece. “The Sisters Brothers” certainly doesn’t shy away from its western roots. At the same time it can hardly be called conventional.

Phoenix and Reilly play the title siblings, Charlie and Eli Sisters. They’re hired by a wealthy and crooked businessman known as the Commodore (Rutger Hauer) to kill a man named Hermann Warm (Ahmed). It’s believed Warm stole from the Commodore but in reality he possesses a secret formula worth a fortune. The brothers discover the Commodore has hired a tracker named John Morris (Gyllenhaal) who is tasked with locating Warm and then rendezvousing with the brothers.

Director Jacques Audiard and his co-writer Thomas Bidegain give us a story of McGuffins, quick twists, and shifting allegiances. The tone of the movie changes as often as the loyalties between characters (and that’s saying something), so much so it can be a little disorienting. It definitely aims at being a dark comedy and it sports a handful of genuine laughs. But the seriousness of some scenes can make it all tough to figure out.

The performances never miss a step. Phoenix and Reilly have a weird and off-beat chemistry that works really well within this unorthodox story. Both are remarkably versatile actors which proves to be a strength. But I found myself drawn most towards Gyllenhaal who is quickly becoming a favorite of mine. He brings a sophistication and mystery to his character which makes him stand out.

“The Sisters Brothers” Audiard’s non-traditional foray into the Wild West. He nails the 1800’s Gold Rush setting. Despite its shaky tone some of the humor lands really well. And it’s a lot of fun watching such an eclectic cast bite into this fascinating assortment of characters. The story doesn’t play out in the most satisfying way, but it still manages to add a unique and welcomed look into the western genre.

VERDICT – 3.5 STARS

For many the second film in George Lucas’ Star Wars prequel trilogy holds a rather unflattering honor. More than a few consider it to be the worst movie in the entire franchise. As someone who truly loves the series to varying degrees, it’s hard for me to christen any of the films with such a title. But that doesn’t mean I’m oblivious to its flaws.

“Star Wars: Episode II – “Attack of the Clones” does hold a particularly surprising movie record for me. I saw it six times in the theater, more than any other film. Overkill? Perhaps. Star Wars fandom run amuck? Most definitely. I’ve seen it a few times since then but this recent rewatch was the first time in several years.

“Attack of the Clones” takes place ten years after the events of “The Phantom Menace”. Jedi Master Obi-Wan Kenobi (Ewan McGregor) and his apprentice Anakin Skywalker (now played by Hayden Christensen) are summoned to protect Padme Amidala (Natalie Portman) after she narrowly escapes an assassination attempt. The former Queen of Naboo and now Senator holds a key vote in the decision whether or not to create an army to fight a growing Separatist movement.

For me one of Episode II’s biggest attractions (and often overlooked strengths) is in how it draws from numerous classic movie genres. It’s very much a political drama. But there is also a mystery element to it as Obi-Wan sets out to investigate and track down Padme’s potential assassin. We get winks to old-school fantasy pictures in the vein of “Sinbad” and “Clash of the Titans”. And of course the influence of war films, particularly World War II documentary footage, is clearly seen in the final act.

I also think the writing deserves more credit than it receives (at least a portion of it). For me it’s a tale of two parts – the story and the dialogue. Lucas and co-writer Jonathan Halles give us a well-conceived story with tons of depth that moves the overall narrative forward in a satisfying way. I remain impressed with its numerous threads, none better that puppet-master Chancellor Palpatine (Ian McDiarmid) and his secret, multi-layered quest for power.

But then there is the dialogue which ranges from good to atrocious. There are times in Episode II where the dialogue is painfully bad. We see it in a handful attempts at humor but mostly its in some of the film’s heavier scenes. Accentuating the problem is the fact that a couple of the performers haven’t the chops to overcome it. Christensen’s performance is all over the map. There are scenes where he is really good, but others he simply can’t sell and Lucas’ dialogue doesn’t help a bit. Portman is a little better but not much.

Visually you can see Lucas and company flexing the new technology available to them in a variety of ways. There are a couple of scenes that feel like nothing more than showcases for the special effects – an overly long care chase through the city planet of Coruscant, a battle in a Geonosian droid factory. But the CGI can also look extraordinary and it often adds a ton to the settings and action sequences. The clone army battlefield scene is nothing short of spectacular.

Fans of Star Wars have some legitimate gripes about Episode II, but overall I think they often undervalue its contributions to the franchise. It advances the stories of its three pivotal characters in meaningful ways. It’s a technical marvel despite some visual overindulgences. Plus it supplied the framework for what was a fantastic television series “The Clone Wars”. Those are just a few of the key reasons Episode II still works for me.

VERDICT – 4 STARS

It’s the 20th anniversary of the first film in the Star Wars prequel trilogy. It landed in theaters on May 19, 1999 and fans still debate them today. What better time than now to rewatch and finally review these three fascinating movies.

There is perhaps no better monument to geekdom than the Star Wars franchise. Sure, Marvel’s MCU may have something to say about that, but it was George Lucas’ sprawling epic and personal cash cow that first leapt outside the bounds of movies and into television, novels, comic book series, and tons more. That doesn’t even count the loads of money brought in through toys and other merchandise. You don’t have to be a Star Wars fan to appreciated Lucas’ monumental accomplishment starting back in 1977. “A New Hope” was ground-breaking in regards to its visual style and special effects. The film spawned two intensely popular sequels, “The Empire Strikes Back” and “The Return of the Jedi”. But you already know that.

A jolt hit the Star Wars community in 1993 when Lucas announced he would be making a new trilogy, a prequel to the original three films. They would connect directly to the original trilogy and complete Lucas’ vision for the saga. In 1999, “Star Wars Episode I: The Phantom Menace” was released and I’m not sure any movie has ever released featuring more hype and scrutiny. Fanboys and critics alike looked for cracks and flaws in characterizations and continuity. And rarely did it escape comparisons to the original trilogy. This made judging Episode 1 on its own merits nearly impossible. But Episode 1 had a lot on its plate and while it may be among the weaker Star Wars pictures, after revisiting it yet again I found myself once again caught up in this universe I have always loved.

Since Lucas’ intent was to connect the two trilogies into one cohesive saga, I was always curious to see how he would begin his tale. In Episode I, Lucas sets everything in motion by focusing on (of all things) politics as the biggest weapon of manipulation. It’s politics that is first used to kickstart the tragic events that we all know will unfold. Lucas also showcases the Jedi in their prime. We spend most of the time with Jedi Master Qui-Gon Jinn (Liam Neeson) and his apprentice Obi-Wan Kenobi (Ewan McGregor) as they go from political negotiators to planet liberators. A young Natalie Portman plays a Naboo queen who has a major impact on future events. Another key part of the film is the introduction to Anakin Skywalker (played by Jake Lloyd), a young child slave on Tatooine who we know later becomes Darth Vader. Lucas’ focus on Anakin in the first three films ends up reshaping the actual focus of the overall saga, and for my money in a good way.

As a whole, the structure of “The Phantom Menace” is pretty impressive. It was a daunting task to make three films that could directly connect to the beloved original trilogy and do so in a way that’s cohesive and that survives the mythological scrutiny from fans. Episode I does a nice job of putting its key characters in place while only occasionally getting bogged down in its first half table-setting. Rewatching it I was surprised by the narrative layers and interesting world-building. I like the political unpinning and see it as often undervalued and underappreciated.

To no surprise several new characters are introduced. Some of them work really well while others, not so much. The dislike of Jar Jar Binks (Ahmed Best) has been well documented and understandable. Lucas overplays his hand by making the character nothing more than comic relief. Every scene and every line of dialogue seems aimed at nothing more than generating silly laughs. The result is an annoying and often distracting presence. On the flip side is the sinister Darth Maul, physically played by Ray Park and voiced by Peter Serafinowicz. Not only is he one of the coolest and most fercious looking Star Wars characters ever but his lightsaber fight with Obi-Wan and Qui-Gon remains a highlight for the entire franchise.

With “The Phantom Menace” Lucas clearly wanted to show off the benefits of the new technology available to him. In many ways it’s a good thing but in other ways it works against the film. There are instances where the movie becomes a barrage of “watch this” CGI moments. There are several scenes that could have easily been left out and the film would have been better for it. But there are also scenes where the special effects present Star Wars in a dazzling new light. The pod race on Tatooine is breath-taking and the space sequences are amazing. Most of the CGI characters share the space well with human actors and fit flawlessly into their environments. It’s certainly a visual step up in many regards but at times a bit overkill (something that becomes clearer in the next film).

And you can’t talk Episode I without mentioning the return of composer John Williams. He delivers yet another incredible score full of call-backs to the original trilogy and with new music that blends beautifully with the old.

“The Phantom Menace” has always been a satisfying Star Wars installment for me and nothing changed during my rewatch. It opens itself up to criticism through some shaky creative choices while other popular gripes don’t hold water (sorry, but I still don’t find Jake Lloyd insufferable). Most importantly it lays some intriguing groundwork, sparks more conversation between the Star Wars faithful, and offers a return to the magical universe I’ve loved since childhood. It may be flawed but it does what’s most important – it looks, sounds, and feels like a Star Wars picture.

VERDICT – 4 STARS

The trailer for Andrew Bujalski’s “Support the Girls” left me expecting an amusing but lightweight little indie comedy. Turns out I was selling it short. In addition to serving up some genuinely funny laughs, the film surprised me by revealing a ton of heart and an attention to its characters that I wasn’t expecting.

Writer-director Bujalski doesn’t worry too much with plot. Instead this is entirely character-based and follows an overloaded yet resourceful manager of a locally-owned Hooters-styled Texas sports bar. Her name is Lisa and she’s played by a delightful Regina Hall. Essentially she’s the glue that keeps Double Whammies together, whether she’s looking out for her staff of underpaid waitresses or trying to keep the overbearing oaf of an owner (James LeGros) satisfied.

What makes Bujalski’s film work so well is the focus he puts on the bond of sisterhood. Hall gives one of last year’s truest and most lived in performances, strikingly authentic at every turn. Just as important are some of the wonderful supporting work specifically from Haley Lu Richardson (so brilliant in 2017’s “Columbus”). She plays the kind-hearted and always cheery Maci whose sudden bursts of air-headed energy make for some of the movie’s brightest moments.

Even with its layers of warmth and wit there is also a subtle undercurrent of heartache. Bujalski provides plenty of playful moments and certain characters have inherently entertaining personalities. But each have personal real-world problems to deal with – a fractured marriage, an abusive boyfriend, a single mother struggling with child care. And then there is shadow of uncertainty when it comes to their jobs, their futures, and so on.

The opening credits lets you know that the film is operating on a shoestring budget, but within five minutes I was already invested in this slice-of-life working class comedy. The characters aren’t punchlines nor do they feed into common stereotypes. This makes them interesting and worth our time even when they’re doing nothing more than their daily work routines. So I found it easy to believe in what “Support the Girls” was showing me. And while it may seem a bit light, I enjoyed my time with Lisa and her girls.

VERDICT – 4 STARS