Month: November 2019

Today’s quick review: Bulletproof Monk. For sixty years, a nameless Buddhist monk (Chow Yun-Fat) has guarded a mystical scroll that contains unfathomable power. As the time approaches to pick his successor, he meets an unlikely candidate in Kar (Seann William Scott), a pickpocket and amateur martial artist. But Struker (Karel Roden), an aging Nazi war criminal, has his sights set on the scroll, and he wills top at nothing to get it.

Bulletproof Monk is a martial arts action comedy that pairs a jovial monk with an overconfident thief. The film features martial arts wire stunts, a decent lead duo, and a light tone throughout. Much of the comedy comes from the monk’s attempts to make Kar a better person, while the action makes heavy use of the monk’s physics-defying skills. However, a mediocre script limits the film’s potential, keeping it from being anything more than a popcorn watch.

How much you get out of Bulletproof Monk will depend on how much you like its two leads. Neither one is all that deep a character, and neither is especially well-acted, but both Chow Yun-Fat and Seann William Scott are easy to like, and their banter is charming enough. The stunts are enough to give the film some excitement, but there’s nothing all that surprising or technically impressive, and Kar comes off as a mid-rate fighter at best.

Watch Bulletproof Monk when you’re in the mood for an uncomplicated popcorn flick. The movie has little in the way of plot or drama, and neither its comedy nor its action hold any special appeal. But those looking to relax in front of something light could do worse. Bulletproof Monk lacks the quality to win over skeptical viewers, but there’s fun to be had for those who are willing to roll with the punches.

For a martial arts film that plays with similar ideas, try The Forbidden Kingdom or The Medallion. For a superhero take on a similar premise, try Captain America: The First Avenger or Doctor Strange.

5.5 out of 10 on IMDB. I give it a 6.0 to 6.5 for decent fun but shaky craftsmanship.

Today’s quick review: Ant-Man and the Wasp. Scott Lang (Paul Rudd), an ex-con under house arrest for his activities as Ant-Man, gets roped back into the superhero life when his mentor, Dr. Hank Pym (Michael Douglas), learns that he hold the key to rescuing Hank’s missing wife. To do so, the two men and Hope Van Dyne (Evangeline Lilly), Hank’s daughter and the new Wasp, must steal back vital technology from the intangible thief Ghost (Hannah John-Kamen).

Ant-Man and the Wasp is a superhero action comedy set in the Marvel Cinematic Universe. Picking up two years after the events of Captain America: Civil War, the movie follows Scott Lang, who wants nothing more than to finish out the remainder of his sentence in peace, as he once again dons the size-altering Ant-Man armor for a good cause. Inventive action and punchy comedy abound, but with arguably a rougher treatment than the original Ant-Man.

One of Ant-Man and the Wasp’s biggest draws is its cast. Paul Rudd makes for a likable father and hero: well-intentioned and competent, but far from perfect. He falls into an easy rhythm with Michael Douglas, playing the surly Dr. Pym, and Evangeline Lilly, playing the sharp Hope Van Dyne. Michael Pena again steals the show as Scott’s loyal, fast-talking friend Luis, while new additions Hannah John-Kamen and Laurence Fishburne fit in quite nicely.

Another big draw is the action. Dr. Pym’s size-altering technology gets pushed to new extremes in and out of combat, letting Ant-Man and the Wasp engage in all sorts of inventive stunts. Ghost turns out to be a good match for them, as her phasing ability leads to even more creative fight scenes. The film’s action is backed by light, capable comedy that makes use of Pym’s technology and the characters’ own vivid personalities in equal measure.

Still, Ant-Man and the Wasp has a few flaws that make it a step down from the original. The plot has interesting ideas but rough edges, with a less focused story and only loose reasons for why the adventure happens as quickly as it does. The sequel also has less heart than the first film, though still enough of it to be fulfilling. Finally, the technological explanations are lacking, with more hand-waving than is strictly necessary.

In spite of a couple of faults, Ant-Man and the Wasp is a fun, adventurous watch that fans of the superhero genre will enjoy. Its lower stakes and more personal story make it a pleasant break from Marvel’s large-scale crossover movies, while the film’s comedic tone and its heroes’ unique powers set it apart from the rest of the genre. Check it out if you enjoyed the first one. For a superhero movie in a similar vein, try Spider-Man: Homecoming.

7.4 out of 10 on IMDB. I give it a 7.5 for a fun mix of action and comedy that’s missing some of the polish of the original.

Today’s quick review: Incredibles 2. The Incredibles get another shot at the superhero life when Winston Deavor (Bob Odenkirk), an enthusiastic corporate sponsor, offers to fund them. Elastigirl (Holly Hunter) is chosen to spearhead the program, resuming her crime-fighting activity and pushing for superhero legalization, while Mr. Incredible (Craig T. Nelson) stays home with the kids (Sarah Vowell, Spencer Fox, and Eli Fucile).

Incredibles 2 is an animated superhero action comedy that picks up where the first Incredibles left off. After a brief stint as heroes, the super-powered family is forced back underground by the government, only to find a lifeline in the form of wealthy philanthropist Winston Deavor and his tech-savvy sister Evelyn (Catherine Keener). The film offers family comedy and superhero action in the classic mold, all backed by rock-solid execution.

Incredibles 2 has much of the same charm as the original. Great character dynamics, a light sense of humor, large-scale action scenes, and a phenomenal brass soundtrack all contribute to a fun, energetic watch that hits the target it’s aiming for. The Incredibles behave like a family, and their distinctive personalities give the film much of its appeal. The action doesn’t slouch either, with a few new tricks to mix things up.

The new additions to the universe are generally good ones, but tastes may vary. The new villain, Screenslaver, is enough of a hook to drive the superhero side of the plot. The new crop of heroes is a mixed bag; they serve a useful purpose, but their designs are a step down from the Incredibles and Frozone (Samuel L. Jackson). The family side of the story is also less polished, with solid individual scenes that lack an overarching sense of purpose.

Watch Incredibles 2 when you’re in the mood for something upbeat and well-rounded. Fans of the original will be pleased with the second entry in the series, while newcomers can join the fun without feeling too lost. Whether the sequel matches the first or falls a little short will come down to personal preference, but Incredibles 2 is well worth checking out. For another Disney superhero movie in a similar vein, try Big Hero Six.

8.1 out of 10 on IMDB. I give it a 7.5 to 8.0 for a good mixture of comedy and action backed by all-around solid craftsmanship.

Today’s quick review: Under Siege 2: Dark Territory. While on a cross-country train trip with his niece Sarah (Katherine Heigl), ex-Navy SEAL Casey Ryback (Steven Seagal) becomes the only hope of stopping a terrorist attack when Travis Dane (Eric Bogosian) hijacks the train. Dane, the disgruntled inventor of an American weapons satellite, plans to take control of his creation and use it to hold the capital of the United States hostage.

Under Siege 2: Dark Territory is an action movie starring Steven Seagal. The sequel to Under Siege swaps the USS Missouri and its payload of nuclear weapons for a passenger train and the keys to a satellite with enormous destructive power. Under Siege 2 offers a fair amount of action as Casey Ryback fights to regain control of the train. However, poor dialogue, a weaker premise, and less imagination make it a step down from the original.

As far as action is concerned, Under Siege 2 is decent but unexceptional. Ryback’s journey through the train has the usual assortment of gunplay, martial arts, and improvised weaponry. But the train makes for cramped quarters, even more so than the battleship of the first film, and there’s no uptick in creativity to exploit the unusual setting. The result is adequate action that’s lacking any real set pieces or jaw-dropping stunts.

When it comes to story, Under Siege 2 is on shakier ground. The core plot points are passable, but the scaffolding for them is weak. The premise relies on a futuristic weapons satellite rather than a more conventional threat, in contrast with the more believable premise of the first film. There’s also little in the way of subplots to pad out the main story, and the train makes a sparse and generic setting compared to the USS Missouri.

As for acting, Under Siege 2 comes up short. Steven Seagal does well enough during the fight scenes, but the rest of the time he has none of the charm he had in the original, thanks to both uninspired dialogue and a mediocre performance. His sidekicks, Sarah and a young porter named Bobby (Morris Chestnut), are neither funny nor memorable. The only performance that leaves a good impression is Eric Bogosian as the unhinged Travis Dane.

Watch Under Siege 2: Dark Territory when you’re looking for popcorn action and aren’t feeling too particular about story. Under Siege 2 checks the boxes when it comes to action, but it’s outclassed by other action movies in terms of both plot and spectacle. For a better take on a similar premise, try the original Under Siege. For similar but on a bus, try Speed. For a thriller variant on a plane, try Non-Stop. For generally better action, try Die Hard.

5.4 out of 10 on IMDB. I give it a 6.0 to 6.5 for decent action but little else.

Today’s quick review: Vengeance. On the way home from a party, Teena Maguire (Anna Hutchison), a young widow, is beaten and raped in front of her daughter Bethie (Talitha Bateman). The four assailants hire hotshot attorney Jay Kirkpatrick (Don Johnson) to get them off the hook. When it looks like Kirkpatrick might succeed, John Dromoor (Nicolas Cage), a police officer with an interest in the case, decides to take justice into his own hands.

Vengeance is a gritty crime drama about trauma and revenge. Vengeance follows Teena and her family through her assault and its aftermath, including the timely intervention of John Dromoor. The film aims to be a sober look at crime and the legal system with just a touch of vigilantism. However, slow pacing, unlikable characters, and mediocre writing and directing keep Vengeance from capitalizing on what could be a compelling dramatic premise.

The highlight of the film is a pair of fine performances from Anna Hutchison and Talitha Bateman. Teena and Bethie are sympathetic without being cloying, and their characters are the best-developed of any in the movie. But the supporting cast fares poorly. Nicolas Cage takes a back seat for most of hte movie, with only a few chances to show any emotion, while the rest of the cast is deliberately grating, from the lawyers to the judge to the defendants.

As for the plot, Vengeance is a slow burn. The bulk of the film is spent on Teena’s assault and recovery; the vigilante aspects don’t appear until the hour mark. The skeleton of the plot works well enough on paper, but the scenes that are meant to be the most dramatic have nothing special to say. Vengeance has comptent storytelling but no real focal point to give it direction, while the shift to vigilantism cuts short the original conflict.

Watch Vengeance only if you’re a fan of dark, realistic drama and don’t mind sacrificing some quality to get it. Vengeance makes a credible attempt at telling a dramatic story, but its heavy tone and middling execution make it a niche pick at best. Steer clear if you want action or escapism. For a crime thriller with a similar premise and a better plot, try Seeking Justice. For a more violent movie in a similar vein, try Rage or Acts of Vengeance.

5.2 out of 10 on IMDB. I give it a 5.5 for two good performances without the scaffolding to back them up.

Today’s quick review: Chain Reaction. Eddie (Keanu Reeves), a University of Chicago student, discovers the missing piece to the hydrogen energy project his lab has been working on. But before the results can be published, the lab is blown up, and Eddie and Lily (Rachel Weisz), a physicist on the project, are framed for the crime. With the help of Paul Shannon (Morgan Freeman), the project’s backer, Eddie and Lily must go on the run to clear their names.

Chain Reaction is an action thriller about the discovery of a cheap, clean source of energy. In terms of premise, plot, and characters, Chain Reaction is a typical entry into the genre. Its initial university setting and low levels of violence distance the film from the more action-heavy thrillers out there, but the appeal is the same as ever: watching Eddie and Lily avoid the police while puzzling out who framed them.

Chain Reaction sticks to the basics but executes them well. The setup is quick and to the point: a brief introduction to the lab members and their project before the explosion kicks off the plot. The plot itself is well-paced and has a few nice developments, although the mystery is somewhat lacking. The action is enough to excite but not to impress, just a few chases and short fight scenes with stunts that are a little too grounded in reality.

Watch Chain Reaction when you’re in the mood for a competent thriller that’s not too dark or too violent. Although it lags its competition in terms of action, fast pacing and a decent plot make Chain Reaction a fine popcorn pick. For an action thriller in a similar vein, try The Fugitive. For one with a similar premise and more romance, try The Saint. For a sci-fi action thriller starring Keanu Reeves, try Johnny Mnemonic.

5.6 out of 10 on IMDB. I give it a 6.5 for a decent but unspectacular execution of the action thriller formula.

Today’s quick review: Last Man Standing. Drifter John Smith (Bruce Willis) decides to lay low for a while in the dusty Texas town of Jericho, located near the Mexican border. The town is ruled by two rival gangs of rumrunners, one led by Doyle (David Patrick Kelly) and the other by Strozzi (Ned Eisenberg). Smith decides to play both sides against each other in hope of turning a profict, but soon finds himself mired in a deadly gang war.

Last Man Standing is a Prohibition-era crime movie with noir and Western elements. Bruce Willis stars as John Smith, a quiet man with few scruples and a knack for gunplay. The story follows him as he ping-pongs between Doyle’s gang and Strozzi’s, selling his services to the highest bidder and taking every opportunity that comes his way. The film features a decent lead and a fair amount of action, but suffers from an aimless plot and uninteresting characters.

Last Man Standing’s biggest draw is Bruce Willis himself. John Smith is not Willis’ best cahracter, but his grit, resourcefulness, and skill with a gun make him a viable protagonist, and his noir-style narration is the film’s best writing. The other major draw is the film’s action. The gunfights are loud and unrefined, and generally consist of Smith saturating his enemies with bullets. For pure spectacle, they work fairly well.

But beyond its lead and its action, Last Man Standing is a mixed bag. None of the other characters are all that interesting, and Doyle and Strozzi are a missed opportunity. As small-time crooks, they fit the setting well, but neither one comes across as menacing when Smith is in the room. The plot, adapted from Yojimbo and A Fistful of Dollars, has good ideas but middling execution, with interesting twists but not as much tension as it could have.

Watch Last Man Standing if you’re a fan of crime movies with an emphasis on action. Last Man Standing does not excel at the things it tries, but it has just enough in the ways of action, story, and character to make for a decent watch. Steer clear if you want a more compelling drama. For the same story in Western form, with better characters and direction, try A Fistful of Dollars. For an action-heavy Prohibition-era crime movie, try Gangster Squad.

6.4 out of 10 on IMDB. I give it a 6.5 for a strong premise, mediocre execution, and one or two high points.

Today’s quick review: Amelie. Amelie Poulain (Audrey Tautou) is an imaginative young waitress with a taste for the little things in life. Her ordinary life turns around when a chance discovery lets her bring joy to a stranger. Inspired by the experience, Amelie takes to helping the people around her achieve their dreams. But her own happiness seems out of reach until she stumbles upon Nino Quincompoix (Mathieu Kassovitz), a kindred spirit.

Amelie is a French comedy and romance with a touch of magical realism. Amelie embraces the magic in everyday life, as seen through the eyes of its main character. Artistic direction, observant writing, charming comedy, a light tone, and an endearing performance from Audrey Tautou all make Amelie a pleasant, stimulating, and thoroughly enjoyable watch. Not every viewer will like its particular flavor, but the film is an easy one to like.

Amelie’s chief draw is its title character. Amelie Poulain is an introverted woman with a knack for helping others. Her optimism and curiosity are infections, and Audrey Tautou’s performance is the glue that holds the movie together. She’s backed by excellent all-around craftsmanship, including literary-style narration that doesn’t overstay its welcome, a sweet cat-and-mouse romance with the shy Nino, and scenes that move at a rapid clip.

Amelie won’t appeal to everyone. It’s short on plot, the conflict is minimal, and the film relies on its main character to carry it. But Amelie’s joy and artistry make it an appealing pick for those with a critical eye and those just looking for something sweet. Fans of light romance should give it a shot. For a sci-fi film with a similar lead, try Paprika. For a similarly life-affirming Italian drama, try Cinema Paradiso; for a comedy, try Macaroni.

8.3 out of 10 on IMDB. I give it a 7.5 to 8.0 for excellent craftsmanship and a delightful tone.

Today’s quick review: Bayonetta: Bloody Fate. Five hundred years after a forbidden romance sparked a cataclysmic war between the Umber Witches and the Lumen Sages, Bayonetta (Atsuko Tanaka), a witch who lost her memory, wakes from her centuries-long slumber. To find answers to her questions, Bayonetta seeks out Balder (Norio Wakamoto), the last surviving Lumen Sage, not realizing he plans to use her to summon Jubileus the Creator and remake the world.

Bayonetta: Bloody Fate is a Japanese animated fantasy action movie based on the video game Bayonetta. Bayonetta: Bloody Fate offers a glimpse at an action-packed world where gun-toting witches battle with monstrous angels to preserve the balance between light and darkness. The movie’s plentiful action and stylish setting should be enough to satisfy most action fantasy fans, but its story and writing leave something to be desired.

Bayonetta: Bloody Fate’s most distinctive feature is its combat. Bayonetta’s weapon of choice is a quartet of pistols that she wields with both hands and both feet. Her magical abilities let her summon demons, defy gravity, and perform superhuman feats of strength. Between Bayonetta’s exotic weaponry, her magic, and the host of bizarre monsters she fights, Bloody Fate never runs out of ideas for its action sequences.

However, the film’s writing is a mixed bag. The story has a few good ideas, including Bayonetta’s amnesia and Balder’s plan to remake the world, but their execution is lacking. The plot isn’t explained clearly, the mysteries aren’t set up properly, and the supporting cast gets little attention. Viewers who are in it for the action won’t mind too much, but Bayonetta: Bloody Fate is more of a guided tour of the universe than a cohesive story.

There are other, lesser issues that will impact how much you enjoy the film. True to the source material, Bloody Fate includes salacious character designs, provocative poses, and lots of near-nudity, although no actual sex. The animation is on the detailed, rigid, and realistic end of the spectrum, as opposed to the cartoonish style of other anime. Bayonetta’s unflappable personality and grace in combat will also be hit-or-miss.

Give Bayonetta: Bloody Fate a shot if you’re a fan of the game or of action-oriented anime in general. The story is not quite polished enough for the movie to hold broad appeal, but there’s enough to make it a fine popcorn watch for action fantasy fans. For similar gun combat in a grounded, dramatic sci-fi story, try Equilibrium. For a fantasy superhero movie with similar mythology, try Ghost Rider. For similarly imaginative action, try Sucker Punch.

5.7 out of 10 on IMDB. I give it a 6.5 for solid action and an interesting world held back by a mediocre story.

Today’s quick review: Everly. Everly (Salma Hayek) has spent four years enslaved to the sadistic Japanese mob boss Taiko (Hiroyuki Watanabe). One night, Everly seizes on an opportunity to shoot her way free of Taiko’s men. But before she can escape her apartment, Taiko sends reinforcements to try to kill her. Now Everly must use every weapon at her disposal to beat Taiko’s assassins and reach her waiting mother (Laura Cepeda) and daughter (Aisha Ayamah).

Everly is a violent action movie with touches of black comedy. Everly is one part gritty drama and one part gory revenge flick. The emotional core of the movie is Everly’s struggle to escape her captors and reunite with her family. But along the way the film indulges in over-the-top violence, absurd situations, and a cavalcade of low-rent assassins. The result is a quirky, Tarantino-esque spin on the action genre that’s peppered with somber moments.

Unfortunately, Everly lacks the artistry necessary to make its delicate balance of action, drama, and comedy work. The tone seesaws abruptly between serious and absurd with no real transition period between them. The film’s pervasive gore and mature content limit its appeal to viewers with a high tolerance for the perverse, while the scattered moments of genuine drama push that threshold even higher.

For those who can stomach the violence and suffering, Everly holds a few unusual treats. The fight scenes are fast-paced and satisfying, fueled by Everly’s resourcefulness, determination, and prowess with a gun. The humor has some nice, dark irony to it that meshes well with the more outlandish aspects of Everly’s predicament. The movie also wastes no time in getting set up, dropping the viewer straight into the action with little exposition.

Watch Everly only if you’re interested in an experiment in gory action. Everly’s peculiar tone, mixed execution, and sheer violence mean that most viewers will find it lacking at best and repulsive at worst, but the curious should give it a shot. For a stylish, bloody action movie with better execution, try Kill Bill. For a violent action comedy with a lighter tone, try Smokin’ Aces. For a gory, tongue-in-cheek action movie, try Shoot ‘Em Up.

5.1 out of 10 on IMDB. I give it a 6.0 to 6.5 for satisfying action offset by the film’s odd tone and mature content.