Month: June 2019

Today’s quick review: Lu Over the Wall. Kai Ashimoto (Shota Shimoda), a moody teenager who lives in a small fishing town, spends his spare time making music. His talent catches the attention of Yuho (Minako Kotobuki) and Kunio (Soma Saito), two his classmates, who invite Kai to join their band. The trio set to practicing, but much to their shock, their music attracts the attention of Lu (Kanon Tani), an exuberant mermaid who loves to dance.

Lu Over the Wall is a Japanese animated fantasy comedy with a musical twist. All his life, Kai has heard tales of the fearsome, man-eating mermaids that live in the waters around his town. But when he meets Lu, she’s friendly, playful, and innocent. With the help of Lu’s magic, Kai and his friends set out to make their band the best it can be, all while keeping Lu hidden from townsfolk who would assume the worst.

Lu Over the Wall has a loose art style that it couples with sheer enthusiasm. The backgrounds are fairly detailed, but the characters simply drawn and frequently exaggerated. Lu herself is downright rubbery, making her almost as unsettling as she is cute. The film channels its loose art style into heart-on-its-sleeve dance sequences and in-universe musical numbers, although it has an odd habit of interrupting these halfway through.

The story is similarly loose. A coming of age story, the plot focuses on Kai as he tries to cope with life in a small town, the departure of his mom, and the pressures of middle school. Lu and her music help him rediscover the joy in life in spite of all the trouble she brings. From this starting trajectory, the story swerves sharply several times. The transitions are hardly subtle, but each stage of the story has its own charm.

The fantasy side of the story is a jumble of mermaid lore that barely hangs together. The mermaids are musically inclined, sensitive to sunlight, able to transform humans into mermaids, and capable of levitating water with their magic. The movie bends over backwards to make all these traits fit together. It doesn’t quite succeed in making them make sense, but it does manage to fit each one into the plot at a critical juncture.

Likewise, Lu Over the Wall pays attention to its characters. Even the minor supporting characters undergo their own character arcs, and major supporting characters like Yuho and Kunio are almost as important to the story as Kai and Lu. No single character is all that profound, compelling, or insightful, but taken together they make the fishing town come alive. As a result, Lu Over the Wall has more substance than its freewheeling nature would suggest.

Watch Lu Over the Wall when you’re in the mood for an energetic, kid-friendly adventure. Its cartoonish art and lax approach to plot logic place it at the opposite end of the spectrum from the meticulous filmmaking of Studio Ghibli. Those looking for a subtle or careful movie should look elsewhere. But those who want something fun, colorful, and a little sloppy will love Lu Over the Wall. For a somewhat more polished take on a similar concept, try Ponyo.

6.9 out of 10 on IMDB. I give it a 7.0 for color and energy.

Today’s quick review: Super Troopers 2. When the United States annexes a small Canadian town near the border, six former Vermont state troopers (Jay Chandrasekhar, Steve Lemme, Paul Soter, Erik Stolhanske, Kevin Heffernan, and Brian Cox) are called in to handle the transition. After a frosty welcome from the locals, the troopers settle into their new routine of picking fights with the Mounties, slacking on the job, and busting a smuggling ring.

Super Troopers 2 is a raunchy comedy that picks up years after the first film. Super Troopers 2 follows the same formula as the original: crude humor, horsing around, and a bare minimum of plot. The laid-back troopers fall into a natural rhythm of pranks, dares, and other creative idiocy, and the actors play off each other with a natural ease. The humor can be hit-or-miss, but Super Troopers 2 hits the mark often enough to make for a hilarious watch.

However, Super Troopers 2 is a slight step down from the original. None of the gags are as iconic as the best moments from the first film. The sequel isn’t as careful to set up its characters properly and give them all something to do. The movie relies heavily on Canada jokes that quickly get old. The humor also goes too far in places, crossing over from wild to disturbing once or twice before dancing back over the line to levity.

The result is an uneven but entertaining watch that fans of the original will enjoy. For the right viewer, Super Troopers 2 is a fun-loving comedy with a great cast and a high level of creativity. Steer clear if you are at all sensitive to swearing, sex, drug use, or violence. For a better take on the same formula, check out the original Super Troopers. For more slapstick, check out The Naked Gun or Police Academy.

7.0 out of 10 on IMDB. I give it a 6.5 to 7.0 for effective but slightly inconsistent comedy.

Today’s quick review: Police Academy 3: Back in Training. When the governor announces that one of the region’s two police academies will be shut down, Commandant Lassard (George Gaynes) calls up his finest graduates (Steve Guttenberg, Bubba Smith, David Graf, Michael Winslow, and Marion Ramsey) to instruct a new class of recruits and save his academy. But Commandant Mauser (Art Metrano), the head of the other academy, plans sabotage.

Police Academy 3: Back in Training is a police comedy and the third entry in the Police Academy series. Police Academy 3 returns to the academy proper, this time with the original cadets in the roles of teachers. The movie follows the series’ usual recipe of an ensemble cast, character-based humor, and a light plot. However, weaker humor, repeated gags from the previous films, and a thin story make Police Academy 3 a marked step down.

Police Academy 3 suffers from an excess of short-form comedy. Nearly all of the gags are one-shots with little setup and no follow-through. What’s more, the movie has a habit of recycling jokes from the first two Police Academies with only minor changes. The result is stilted, predictable comedy that has a hard time building up any momentum. The jokes are charming enough, but precious few of them are truly funny.

In spite of its weaknesses, Police Academy 3 does have a few things going for it. The movie shows plenty of love for the series’ supporting cast. Most of the characters from the first two movies return in some capacity, although the enormous cast stretches the film’s limited screen time even farther. The tone is reliably tipper, perennial favorites like Michael Winslow are still entertaining, and the finale is one of the movie’s better sequences.

Try out Police Academy 3: Back in Training when you’re in the mood for something breezy and mildly entertaining. Police Academy 3 lacks the quality of humor needed to be a truly successful comedy, but it offers modest value for fans of the series. Skip it if you’re looking to be impressed. For other comedies in a similar vein, check out The Naked Gun, Hot Shots!, Stripes, or the original Police Academy.

5.3 out of 10 on IMDB. I give it a 6.0 for somewhat weaker humor than the previous films.

Today’s quick review: Time Bandits. Kevin (Craig Warnock), a young boy who dreams of adventure, gets his wish when a band of would-be thieves led by Randall (David Rappaport) barge into his bedroom and whisk him along on a journey across time and space. Guided by a map of the universe stolen from the Supreme Being, the bandits intend to rob history’s greatest figures. But as they travel, an ancient evil (David Warner) plots to steal the map.

Time Bandits is a kids’ fantasy adventure from director Terry Gilliam. Time Bandits is a surreal romp through history that portrays the universe as a rather peculiar place. The movie features Terry Gilliam’s distinctive style: a blend of far-flung fantasy, straight adventure, and wry social and moral commentary. The result is an unusually mature kids’ movie that’s all over the map when it comes to plot and characters.

Time Bandits’ greatest strength is its creativity. The movie draws on a variety of historical settings, a quirky alternate cosmology, and the foibles of modern living in weaving its adventure. The various elements don’t always play nicely together, but they do make the film unique and unpredictable. The movie also features an ensemble cast full of familiar faces, including Ian Holm, John Cleese, Sean Connery, Michael Palin, and Jim Broadbent.

However, Time Bandits doesn’t hang together very tightly. The plot develops by the seat of its pants. The bandits’ trips to different time periods are largely disconnected from one another, and the main plot takes a while to get going. The characters are colorful enough, but there’s not much in the way of character growth. The tone is also somewhat mature for a kids’ movie, with more violence than usual and a hefty dose of cynicism.

Give Time Bandits a shot if you’re a fan of Terry Gilliam’s style or unusual kids’ films. Time Bandits is an eclectic movie that takes an investment from the viewer to fully appreciate. For the right viewer, it’s a unique experience, but not everyone will appreciate its style. For a cruder, more satirical historical comedy, try History of the World: Part 1. For a smoother, modern take on a kids’ time travel adventure, try Mr. Peabody & Sherman.

7.0 out of 10 on IMDB. I give it a 6.5 for unfettered creativity harmed somewhat by its loose structure and odd tone.

“They’ve not built a bomb big enough to kill Danny Greene.” —Danny Greene

Today’s quick review: Kill the Irishman. From his humble beginnings as a dock worker, Danny Greene (Ray Stevenson) becomes an influential figure in the Cleveland criminal underworld, first as the head of the longshoreman’s union and later as an independent jack of all trades. But by the 1970s, his success as a criminal and his fierce defiant streak put him at odds with the Mafia, leading to an explosive war for control of Cleveland.

Kill the Irishman is a biographical crime drama about the life of Danny Greene, an Irish orphan who rose up to turn the Italian-dominated world of organized crime in Cleveland on its head. The movie charts his rise to prominence, his setbacks along the way, and the many attempts on his life. Kill the Irishman offers a decent script and a fairly talented cast, but it lacks both the impact and the subtlety to be a great film.

Kill the Irishman has solid fundamentals. The film paints a robust picture of Danny Greene, from his protective nature to his ruthless efficiency as a businessman. The supporting cast includes Val Kilmer as Joe Manditski, a police officer who befriends Danny and narrates the story; Christopher Walken as Shondor Birns, a loan shark who helps Danny get his start; and Vincent D’Onofrio as John Nardi, a Mafioso who goes into business with Danny.

However, Kill the Irishman has a hard time moving past the basics. The plot suffers from the same ebb and flow of most biopics, but takes it a step further by putting Danny in a passive role for most of the movie. Danny endures the attempts to kill him with aplomb, but he never really comes up with a way to strike back. As a result, the second half of the movie feels like a waiting game. Danny can die or escape, but he cannot win.

The characters are also only a partial success. The large supporting cast makes it hard for the film to focus on even Danny’s closest associates, and the film’s best-known actors, Val Kilmer and Christopher Walken, are relegated to minor roles. Danny himself is a nuanced figure, a reluctant criminal who is generous, brave, and loyal. But the film’s tendency to gloss over Danny’s crimes makes it hard to get a complete picture of the man.

Give Kill the Irishman a shot if you’re a fan of grounded, realistic crime stories. Its basic competence makes it a decent watch, but issues with its story and characters keep it from matching the better entries in the crime genre. For a more grisly tale in a similar vein, check out The Iceman. For a fuller and more memorable look into the world of organized crime, check out Casino, Goodfellas, The Untouchables, or Donnie Brasco.

7.1 out of 10 on IMDB. I give it a 6.5 for decent execution and an interesting lead.

Today’s quick review: House of Flying Daggers. In ninth-century China, Jin (Takeshi Kaneshiro), a flirtatious police officer, is sent undercover by his captain Leo (Andy Lau) to infiltrate the House of Flying Daggers, a secretive rebel group. Jin’s mission is to escort Mei (Ziyi Zhang), a blind dancing girl believed to be one of the rebels, to the group’s new leader. But he finds his loyalty put to the test when Mei captures his heart.

House of Flying Daggers is a martial arts romantic drama set near the end of China’s Tang dynasty. The movie features expertly choreographed martial arts action, a dramatic plot, and a tragic tone. On the romantic side, the story plays on the tension between Jin’s duty and his growing affection for Mei. For drama, the movie has plenty to work with: the elusive House, Jin’s undercover mission, and Leo’s attempts to keep the situation under control.

House of Flying Daggers shows skilled craftsmanship throughout. The plot is tense and chock full of surprises; from its simple premise springs a complicated web of intrigue and betrayal. The martial arts are a mixture of grounded fighting and larger-than-life wire stunts. The fights are engrossing and distributed well throughout the movie. The cherry on top is thoughtful direction that savors the movie’s twists and moments of beauty.

The movie does have a particular style that not everyone will appreciate. As effective as they are, the plot twists are somewhat melodramatic. The action is just fanciful enough that it might not appeal to martial arts purists, while the dramatic story and tragic tone may sour the experience for viewers just in it for the action. However, these issues come down to taste and don’t keep House of Flying Daggers from achieving what it wants to.

Try House of Flying Daggers if you’re looking for a more serious action movie. It’s a well-balanced and finely crafted movie that is worth a watch for anyone with compatible tastes. Skip it if you’re looking for pure action. For a historical martial arts movie in a similar vein, check out Hero or Little Big Soldier. For a modern crime drama with a similarly compelling plot, check out Infernal Affairs.

7.6 out of 10 on IMDB. I give it a 7.5 for impressive action, a tight plot, and effective drama.

Today’s quick review: The Ladykillers. Professor G.H. Dorr (Tom Hanks), a smooth-talking criminal, worms his way into the house of Marva Munson (Irma P. Hall), a elderly Christian widow. Dorr and his quartet of accomplices (Marlon Wayans, J.K. Simmons, Tzi Ma, and Ryan Hurst) plan to use Mrs. Munson’s basement to tunnel into a casino’s cash room and make off with a fortune. The only question left is what to do with Mrs. Munson when the job is done.

The Ladykillers is a crime comedy from the Coen Brothers. The Ladykillers brings together a quirky ensemble cast for an ill-fated heist under the nose of an unsuspecting old lady. The movie features colorful characters, a sprinkling of slapstick, and a great foil for the thieves in Marva Munson. However, its peculiar style of comedy lacks the subtlety of the Coen Brothers’ best work, and its more overt gags aren’t strong enough to carry the film.

The Ladykillers takes a long time to warm up. The mechanics of the heist are straightforward, but the movie spends over an hour setting up. Given the character-focused comedy, the back-loaded story shouldn’t be a problem, but the characters never quite click. Dorr’s accomplices are one-note characters, while Dorr himself is too wordy to have much impact. The only clear hit is Mrs. Munson, a strict but kind-hearted woman who earns the viewer’s sympathy.

Try The Ladykillers when you’re in the mood for a caper with an edge to it. The movie fills the niche of a light but not wholly innocent crime comedy. However, its middling execution makes it an easy one to skip. For a more successful effort from the Coen Brothers, check out O Brother, Where Art Thou? or Burn After Reading. For a heist comedy with a more uplifting tone, check out Going in Style.

6.2 out of 10 on IMDB. I give it a 6.0 to 6.5 for decent comedy with an odd tone and pacing.

Today’s quick review: Hidalgo. Frank Hopkins (Viggo Mortensen), a long-distance horse racer mourning the massacre of his people the Sioux, finds new purpose when Sheikh Ridyah (Omar Sharif) challenges him to compete in the Ocean of Fire, a 3,000-mile race across the Arabian Desert and beyond. There, Hopkins pits his scrappy mustang Hidalgo against the Sheikh’s champion Al-Hattal, a thoroughbred of legendary lineage.

Hidalgo is a historical adventure about a man, his horse, and one of the most grueling endurance races in the world. Hidalgo features a dramatic long-distance race, a sprinkling of action, and a rare glimpse at the late 19th century. Between the overwhelming odds, Frank’s perseverance, and the clash of cultures on display, the movie makes for a fairly credible drama. However, it lacks the depth or intensity to be truly moving.

Hidalgo suffers from slow pacing. The race itself is more a trek than a sprint, and the movie takes its time getting set up at the beginning. Further delays come from a handful of subplots that flesh out Frank’s character and showcase the local culture. None of these subplots is out of place, but taken together they sap away what momentum the movie manages to build up. The result is a story that gets where it’s going at its own deliberate pace.

Frank Hopkins makes for a passable protagonist. Three traits explain most of his character: his cowboy personality, his Sioux heritage, and his affection for his horse. Seeing him regain his fire is rewarding, but the shift is too subtle to feel like a real triumph. The same goes for the action. Frank has to fight his way out of several sticky situations, but they feel like exceptions to the rule, brief lapses in an arduous but fundamentally civil race.

Those who enjoy historical dramas or tales of perseverance may want to give Hidalgo a shot. Though fictionalized, the movie does a fine job of capturing its historical setting. And while its drama doesn’t hit as hard as it could have, the story is fundamentally a good one. Skip it if you’re looking for a hot-blooded adventure or a truly moving drama.

6.7 out of 10 on IMDB. I give it a 6.5 for a decent story with slow pacing and mixed payoff.

Today’s quick review: War on Everyone. Bob Bolano (Michael Pena), a talkative cop, and Terry Monroe (Alexander Skarsgard), his hard-drinking partner, use their badges to extort money and drugs from small-time criminals. When Bob and Terry catch wind of a large robbery in the works, they start looking for the mastermind behind it so they can take their cut. But as the investigation turns messy, they must decide how far they are willing to go.

War on Everyone is a crime comedy about a pair of dirty cops. Bob and Terry are quintessential egoists, brazen criminals who see the police force as a means to an end. The movie centers around their antics in pursuit of easy money, ranging from shaking down suspects for cash to their efforts to get in on the pending robbery. War on Everyone offers black humor and a decent plot, but its inconsistent tone and mediocre script keep it from going far.

To the movie’s credit, Michael Pena and Alexander Skarsgard play well off one another. Pena takes on the role of Bob, a brainy cop with a flippant attitude and a tendency to run his mouth, while Skarsgard plays Terry, his laconic bruiser of a partner. Loose morals, affability, and naked greed are their defining characteristics. At their best, the two slip into a natural rhythm that’s perversely enjoyable to watch.

However, War on Everyone struggles to make use of its characters. The plot has a couple of nice twists, but neither the robbery nor the investigation amounts to much in the end. The tone hovers uncomfortably between harmless fun and moral bankruptcy. Bob and Terry aren’t entirely irredeemable, but their likable criminal shtick wears thin quickly. The movie has a hard time humanizing them, in spite of its best efforts.

As a result, War on Everyone is an irreverent and amusing watch that falls short of what it’s trying to accomplish. Bob and Terry have potential, but the film gets as far as their devil-may-care attitude and stops. The best parts of the film resemble Pulp Fiction or Jackie Brown, but War on Everyone just doesn’t have the consistency to reach its full potential. Give it a watch if you enjoy the funny, twisted side of the crime genre.

For another movie about a crooked cop, check out Bad Lieutenant: Port of Call New Orleans. For a crime comedy with better style and a more intricate plot, check out Lock, Stock, and Two Smoking Barrels. For a fuller realization of a similar vision, check out Pulp Fiction.

5.8 out of 10 on IMDB. I give it a 6.0 for two solid leads and a misplayed hand.

Today’s quick review: Crank. Chev Chelios (Jason Statham), a freelance hitman for a West Coast crime syndicate, wakes up to discover that he’s been injected with an exotic poison as payback for his most recent job. The only way to stave off the effects of the poison is to flood his body with adrenaline. Chev must engage in a series of dangerous and outlandish stunts to stay alive long enough to get his revenge on the man who killed him.

Crank is a stylized action movie with a unique premise. The movie follows Chev Chelios on a city-wide rampage as he seeks the thrills he needs to keep his heart pumping. Crank takes this premise and runs with it, subjecting Jason Statham to every chemical and criminal stimulant available. The movie offers little in the way of plot or characters, but it does showcase plenty of creativity when it comes to stunts and presentation.

Crank features a distinctive style that sets it apart from other action movies. The film constantly experiments with its camera, editing, and presentation to convey Chev’s frantic mental state. The tools it uses are blunt but effective. Crank never slows down for more than a moment at a time, and its heavy stylization gives the film an air of freewheeling insanity. However, the style drowns out the substance; Crank bets everything on flash.

Crank is a polarizing watch. The film’s explicit content fits hand-in-glove with its abrasive style. Chev’s rampage escalates from cocaine use and armed robbery to public sex and murder. Chev himself is more sociopath than hero, and the movie’s only moral creed is revenge. The action is also more limited than the movie lets on: Crank only has a handful of fights, and it relies on its extreme stylization and Chev’s temper tantrums to make up the difference.

For those who can stomach its frenetic pace and sordid content, Crank is an inventive, experimental take on the action genre. Its plot logic and tone could have been lifted straight from a mature video game, an effect that even the most far-fetched action movie struggle to capture. However, its style is entireley hit-or-miss. Those hoping for a conventional action movie or substance to back the style will be disappointed.

For an even more ridiculous take on the same basic premise, check out the sequel, Crank: High Voltage. For a movie that goes for something similar but has a greater focus on gunplay, check out Shoot ‘Em Up. For a fast-paced, experimental action movie with a first-person perspective, check out Hardcore Henry.

7.0 out of 10 on IMDB. I give it a 6.0 to 6.5 for an interesting premise with hit-or-miss execution; your score will vary.