Month: August 2020

Today’s quick review: Alita: Battle Angel. Alita (Rosa Salazar), an advanced cyborg, gets a new lease on life when Dr. Dyson Ido (Christoph Waltz) salvages her from a scrapheap beneath the floating city of Zalem. Repairing her body, Ido takes her to lilve with him in Iron City, a poor but bustling city built in the shadow of Zalem. As Alita adjusts to her new life, she begins to search for answers about her old one and why she was created.

Alita: Battle Angel is a sci-fi action adventure based on the manga by Yukito Kishiro. Alita: Battle Angel tells the story of an amnesiac cyborg with the body of a teenage girl and the kind-hearted roboticist who takes her in. The movie features likable characters, a rich world, and inventive, fast-paced action. Slight issues with its story structure keep it from achieving everything it tries to, but the movie remains a strong pick for fans of the genre.

Alita: Battle Angel’s chief appeal is its action. Iron City is home to countless cyborgs designed for battle, from the fearsome bounty hunters known as Hunter-Warriors to the powerful competitors in the brutal sport of Motorball. These foes are the perfect match for Alita, whose small frame belies the incredible combat prowess of her past life. With this promising setup, the film delivers action that’s slick, exciting, and suitably creative.

The film’s raw spectacle is backed by a setting that’s surprisingly immersive. Iron City is a fascinating tangle of ruin and industry built on the discarded scraps of Zalem. The population runs the gamut from honest workers to hardened criminals, and the variety helps flesh out the innocent yet resolute character of Alita. No single aspect of the setting is brilliant or unique, but the world as a whole shows care, cohesion, and sound judgment.

Alita: Battle Angel does have slight issues when it comes to its story. The basics of the plot are fine: Alita must figure out a way to get to Zalem to search for answers about her past. The subplots regarding Dyson Ido and his past, Alita’s love interest Hugo (Keean Johnson), and the sport of Motorball all serve their purpose. But the story has a peculiar structure to it, a mishmash of plot threads leading to an ending that leaves key questions unanswered.

Those looking for a fun, imaginative slice of action should look no further than Alita: Battle Angel. It delivers all the action it promises and more, while its rich world and interesting story make it an appealing pick for sci-fi fans. Some viewers may not like its loose story structure and open ending, but those willing to roll with the punches will find it to be an enjoyable popcorn watch. Steer clear if you were hoping for an understated sci-fi drama.

For a more child-friendly adventure with a similar setting, try Astro Boy or Osamu Tezuka’s version of Metropolis. For another live-action adaptation of a science fiction manga with a similar focus on world-building and action, try Ghost in the Shell. For a pop culture-fueled sci-fi action movie with similar use of CGI, try Ready Player One.

7.6 out of 10 on IMDB. I give it a 7.5 for energetic action and a rich, engaging world.

Today’s quick review: Captain Marvel. As an elite Kree warrior, Vers (Brie Larson) fights to protect the planet Hala from the Kree’s most hated enemy: shapeshifting aliens known as Skrulls. When Talos (Ben Mendelsohn), a Skrull general, ambushes Vers and strands her on Earth, she must team up with Nick Fury (Samuel L. Jackson), a young S.H.I.E.L.D. agent, to root out Talos’ cell of Skrull infiltrators and discover the truth about her past.

Captain Marvel is a superhero action adventure based on the Marvel comics. The movie tells the story of an alien warrior with no memory of her past, save for a few scant clues that point her to Earth. Captain Marvel continues the Marvel tradition of fast pacing, light humor, and sleek sci-fi action. But its shaky story and flat characters, as well as some subtler flaws, make it one of the weaker additions to the Marvel Cinematic Universe.

Captain Marvel has a grab bag of interesting ideas that give it the makings of a fun sci-fi romp. The shapeshifting abilities of the Skrulls lead to some nice guessing games as Vers and Fury try to ferret out the imposters. Vers’ powers lend themselves to bombastic, large-scale action. The film’s setting in the 90s gives it a steady source of humor and allows it to revisit characters from Marvel’s past, including a younger, less jaded Nick Fury.

Unfortunately, Captain Marvel herself is something of a mixed bag. Vers has the potential to be a nuanced, conflicted hero, with an impulsive personality that lands her in trouble and a determined streak that pulls her back out. But in practice she comes across as detached from her surroundings, capable of a few quips but not of any real emotional depth. Her character doesn’t click as readily as Marvel’s other heroes; whether it’s enough will depend on taste.

Captain Marvel’s other major weakness is its failure to build tension. The premise, the skeleton of the plot, and Vers’ character arc all look good on paper, but they lack drama when they actually appear onscreen. The cause is a subtle one: the film tends to introduce concepts as soon as they’re needed and no earlier. Without this sense of anticipation, Captain Marvel has a hard time building up momentum, and its key conflicts fall flat.

Captain Marvel is a popcorn sci-fi action movie that works well enough in a vacuum but falls short of the high bar set by the rest of the Marvel Cinematic Universe. The movie gets the basics of the superhero genre right, but it lacks the tension, the style, and the heart of Marvel’s other offerings. Casual fans of the genre will enjoy themselves, at least the ones who find something to like in Vers, but purists should approach with caution.

For another movie about a superhero introduced to a strange, new human world, try Thor or Wonder Woman. For a space opera with more comedy and flair, try Guardians of the Galaxy. For a sci-fi superhero movie that tries out similar concepts with less success, check out Green Lantern.

6.9 out of 10 on IMDB. I give it a 7.0 for decent action and a dash of humor held back by a hit-or-miss protagonist and a story that fails to achieve what it sets out to do.

Today’s quick review: Lockout. When ex-CIA operative Snow (Guy Pearce) is arrested for a crime he didn’t commit, Harry Shaw (Lennie James) offers him a way to out: a dangerous rescue mission that requires Snow’s set of skills. Snow must sneak aboard M.S. One, an orbiting maximum security prison, and rescue Emilie Warnock (Maggie Grace), the President’s daughter, from a gang of escaped prisoners who have taken her hostage.

Lockout is a sci-fi action movie that pits one operative against a space prison full of violent inmates. Lockout is a bread-and-butter action movie with the added wrinkle of taking place in the near future. The movie gets a fair amount of mileage out of its action-oriented premise and talented lead. However, mediocre writing, flaky characters, and a limited special effects budget cause it to fall well short of its potential.

Guy Pearce is easily Lockout’s strongest feature. Pearce has enough swagger, sarcasm, and tenacity to make Snow a solid action hero. Nearly all of the film’s best moments involve Snow adapting to the situation around him, tackling a threat head-on, or trading barbs with Emilie. Snow is not a deep or memorable character, but he’s a cut above the others in the film, and he lends the film most of its panache.

Lockout is on shakier ground when it comes to its story and overall execution. The premise is perfect action fodder: a one-man mission in a dangerous environment that pairs the altruistic but pampered daughter of a politician with a rough-and-tumble soldier. But the follow-through is merely adequate, with a plot that has the right beats but skimps on content, narrowly defined characters, and decent physical action that gets undercut by weak CGI.

Lockout also flirts with being a more conventional Fugitive- or Shooter-style thriller, but it never follows through. The beginning and end of the film deal with Snow’s arrest and the circumstances leading to it, just not in enough detail to be meaningful. There are a couple of ideas in these bookends that could have been promising if given a proper treatment, but they have almost nothing to do with Lockout’s main story and are simply jammed in abruptly.

Ultimately, Lockout is a movie with better ideas than execution. It’s a fine popcorn pick for sci-fi fans who are in the mood for a little action and aren’t feeling too picky, but those looking to be impressed by either its action or its speculation should steer clear.

For an action movie with higher production values, a similar premise, and a tighter story, try Die Hard. For a sci-fi action movie with a similar premise, try Escape from New York. For the lower-budget equivalent, check out Incoming. For a gorier sci-fi action movie with better craftsmanship, try Dredd.

6.1 out of 10 on IMDB. I give it a 6.0 to 6.5 for fun action with flawed execution.

Today’s quick review: Polar. With just two weeks left until retirement and a $8 million pension, professional assassin Duncan Vizla (Mads Mikkelsen) settles down in a small Montana town, where he establishes a quiet life for himself and befriends Camille (Vanessa Hudgens), his shy neighbor. But his new life erupts into violence when his deranged boss Mr. Blut (Matt Lucas) sends a team of assassins to kill Duncan before he can collect on his pension.

Polar is a violent action movie about an aging hitman and the trials that stand between him and a peaceful retirement. Polar features stylized presentation, gory action, and the story of a man trying to put his past behind him. However, its execution leaves something to be desired. Clownish villains, writing that’s merely adequate, and depravity that’s more off-putting than artistic combine to make Polar a mixed success at best.

Polar is at its best when Duncan gets to put his skills to use. The character’s decades of experience, coupled with Mads Mikkelsen’s stony performance, give Duncan some excellent moments throughout the film as he gets one over on his attackers. These moments are where Polar seems to hit its stride, where the adrenaline starts flowing, the twists hit their mark, and the movie shows worthwhile creativity. Duncan in action works just fine.

The problem is the scaffolding for Duncan’s action scenes. The movie spends most of its time with either Duncan in civilian life or the assassins in their search for Duncan. Neither of these threads ends up being very compelling. Duncan’s struggles to adapt to retirement are slow-paced and only occasionally amusing, while the exploits of Mr. Blut and his sadistic killers are meant to be darkly comedic but instead come across as grisly.

The result is a hit-or-miss action flick that wallows in the seamier aspects of the genre. Fans of schlocky, violent action will find what they’re looking for, but those hoping for artistic violence or feel-good escapism will be disappointed. For a more stylish action movie about a retired hitman, try John Wick. For a similarly gory budget action movie, try Everly. For stylized violence with more artistry behind it, try Sin City or Kill Bill.

6.3 out of 10 on IMDB. I give it a 6.0 to 6.5 for a solid lead and some decent action hurt by its excesses.

Today’s quick review: The Debt Collector. Too broke to keep his gym and unwilling to sell it, French (Scott Adkins), a martial arts instructor, goes to work as a debt collector for Big Tommy (Vladimir Kulich), a man with an imposing reputation. Tommy pairs him with Sue (Louis Mandylor), a washed-up veteran of the business, for his first weekend on the job. But between the beatings and the grey morality, Tommy begins to have second thoughts.

The Debt Collector is a budget action movie about a martial artist who puts his skills to work as muscle for an underworld collection agency. The Debt Collector features a fair amount of martial arts action and a decent pair of leads in Scott Adkins and Louis Mandylor. However, its bare-bones stunts, lackluster story, and inexpertly handled drama don’t leave it with much to work with. The result is a budget action flick without much meat on its bones.

The Debt Collector is at its best when French and Sue are simply doing their jobs. The variety of shady clients they have to collect from, plus the musclebound bodyguards French has to beat his way through, give the movie a nice rhythm. French and Sue have a fun dynamic, with French as the rookie struggling with the violence of the job and Sue as his easygoing mentor. Touches of comedy and a dash of moral drama give the film some potential.

The Debt Collector doesn’t have the skill or vision to make good on this potential. The middle portion of the story works welle nough, as French is learning the ropes of the job, but it is undermined by a bland opening and an unsatsifying finale. French and Sue aren’t interesting or funny enough to carry the movie by themselves. The stunts are a competent display of martial arts and street brawling, but they never go beyond the basics.

The Debt Collector is only worth a shot for budget action fans who are interested in hand-to-hand combat seasoned with a touch of buddy comedy. The movie has a better dynamic between its leads than many entries in the genre, but its mediocre execution and limited amount of spectacle leave it outclassed by both bigger-budget action movies and low-budget movies with more ambition. Most viewers would be better off looking elsewhere.

For a budget action movie with more comedy and better characters, try War on Everyone. For a weightier crime drama with a similar setup, try Training Day.

5.6 out of 10 on IMDB. I give it a 5.5 for decent leads and stuntwork, without much else to offer.

“There it is: the Eiffel Tower.” —Stan Laurel

Today’s quick review: Stan & Ollie. In 1953, aging comedy duo Stan Laurel (Steve Coogan) and Oliver Hardy (John C. Reilly) reunite for a tour of Britain to revive their flagging careers. As Laurel and Hardy start to perform again, they fall back into their old rhythm and rediscover the joy in their work. But logistical problems, Oliver’s ailing health, and the specter of their breakup sixteen years prior all threaten to undermine their comeback.

Stan & Ollie is a biographical comedy and drama based on the lives of one of Hollywood’s most successful comedy duos. Steve Coogan and John C. Reilly step into the roles of Stan Laurel, the thin, witty comedian, and Oliver Hardy, his large, friendly partner. Stan & Ollie is a modest film with an earnest story and a variety of strengths. Its impressive acting, light tone, and moving friendship combine to make it a unique and satisfying watch.

Stan & Ollie is built on the backs of its two excellent leads. Steve Coogan and John C. Reilly are utterly convincing in their roles, perfectly imitating the personalities, mannerisms, and comedy routines of the two comedians. Laurel and Hardy are consummate entertainers, quick with a joke and always willing to put aside their own troubles to please their audience. Their bright, innocent sense of humor and human foibles make them easy to like.

With its leads squared away, Stan & Ollie goes on to tell a story that’s one part introduction to the duo, one part comeback story, and one part character portrait. The plot is biographical, following Laurel and Hardy on their tour of Britain, but it’s peppered with plenty of comedy both on and off the stage. The tension between Laurel and Hardy since their breakup gives the film a steady source of drama, but one that’s never overwhelming.

The end result is a pleasant, well-balanced comedy that offers a little bit of everything. Stan & Ollie does not rise to the heights of the greatest biographies, split sides like the greatest comedies, or have the pathos of the greatest dramas. But in its own modest and charming way, it offers a peek behind the curtain at the lives of two talented and endearing men. Give it a watch when you’re in the mood for something light and heartfelt.

7.6 out of 10 on IMDB. I give it a 7.0 to 7.5 for a refreshing visit with old friends.

Today’s quick review: Miller’s Crossing. Against the advice of his right-hand man Tommy (Gabriel Byrne), mob boss Leo (Albert Finney) goes to war with Caspar (Jon Polito), his upstart rival, to protect Bernie (John Turturro), one of his men. Tensions mount between Tommy and Leo as the gang war tips in Caspar’s favor. The final straw comes when Leo learns the truth: that Verna (Marcia Gay Harden), Bernie’s sister, has been cheating on Leo with Tommy.

Miller’s Crossing is a Prohibition-era crime drama from the Coen Brothers. Miller’s Crossing follows gangster Tommy Reagan, the sharp lieutenant of a powerful mob boss, as he tries to avert a war that could be disastrous to his boss’s organization. The movie features a complex plot, deep characters, interesting conflicts, and the skillful cinematography the Coen Brothers are known for, making it a balanced, grounded, and unusually well-crafted film.

Miller’s Crossing assembles a fascinating story out of basic components. The core conflict is simple: a gang war that tests the loyalty of one of its key secondary players. But woven into this struggle are the ambitions and frailties of half a dozen characters, yielding an organic plot that is both satisfying and difficult to predict. The Coen Brothers’ quirky style is all but absent from the film; they sit back and let the story speak for itself.

Miller’s Crossing also earns points for its characters. Tommy makes for a complex protagonist, an unrepentant criminal fueled by a cocktail of pride, loyalty, and ambition. His actions, though morally questionable, are never one-dimensional. The other characters are just as rewarding to follow. Leo is a capable leader but slow to adapt, Caspar is a dangerous fool, Bernie is a snake in the grass, and Verna is a wildcard, self-serving but not heartless.

Watch Miller’s Crossing when you’re in the mood for a tight, unpredictable crime drama with plenty of moving parts. Its grey morality and limited action won’t appeal to every viewer, but its solid craftsmanship and clever storytelling make it a worthwhile watch for fans of the genre. Skip it if you prefer the Coen Brothers’ more stylized work.

For a somewhat more biographical peek at the world of organized crime, try Goodfellas or Casino. For a Prohibition-era crime drama that’s based on a true story, try The Untouchables or Public Enemies. For a darker crime movie about a loyal lieutenant, try The Outsider. For a more minimalistic Coen Brothers crime drama with a similar knack for plot, try Blood Simple.

7.8 out of 10 on IMDB. I give it a 7.5 for well-developed characters and a strong plot.

Today’s quick review: Blood Simple. Abby (Frances McDormand) leaves her husband Julian (Dan Hedaya), an unstable Texas bar owner, for Ray (John Getz), one of his employees, and ends up sparking an escalating conflict between the two men. In a fit of jealousy, Julian hires Loren (M. Emmet Walsh), a shady private detective, to kill his wife and her lover. But Loren’s ambitions put a hitch in Julian’s plans, leading to an outcome no one anticipated.

Blood Simple is a minimalistic crime drama from the Coen Brothers. Blood Simple takes a rudimentary premise and gradually builds it up into a tense puzzle where none of the characters have access to all the pieces. The movie’s slow pacing, limited cast, and emphasis on atmosphere over excitement make it a peculiar watch with a heavy up-front cost. The payoff is a uniquely twisted plot that plays its characters against each other expertly.

Blood Simple takes a while to get going. The early portion of the movie is spent introducing the characters and the tensions between them. There are no true heroes in Blood Simple, just flawed people trying to navigate a bad situation. The cinematography is dark and moody, with plenty of close shots that emphasize the main characters and their mental states. The result is an opening that’s well-crafted and artistic but also somewhat dry.

The setup flips into payoff once Julian orders the hit on Abby and Ray. From here on out, the movie is a tangled web of conflicting motives, deception, and genuine misunderstanding. Each of the four main characters sees a different story play out, and their inability to understand this fact only draws them deeper into the tangle. Even minor plot points from early on have repercussions later, resulting in a tense, complex, and rewarding endgame.

Watch Blood Simple when you’re in the mood for something dark and cerebral. Blood Simple has less flair than later Coen Brothers films, and its slow pacing and tragic tone won’t be for everyone. But viewers who are willing to invest in the movie’s setup will be treated to a plot that’s as intricate as it is unpredictable. Skip it if you’re looking for a straightforward crime drama, a fast-paced watch, or something with less moral ambiguity.

For an even more violent and unpredictable crime drama from the Coen Brothers, try No Country For Old Men. For another tense, minimalistic crime drama with sharp plot twists, try Reservoir Dogs. For one with similar atmosphere and cinematography, try Following. For a crime comedy with a similar plot, try Kill Me Three Times.

7.6 out of 10 on IMDB. I give it a 7.0 to 7.5 for a slow boil that leads to an impressive plot.

“I didn’t do anything.” —Larry

Today’s quick review: A Serious Man. Larry Gopnik (Michael Stuhlbarg), a Jewish physics professor and family man, has been having a rough time of it. His wife Judith (Sari Lennick) wants a divorce so she can marry another man (Fred Melamed), his son Danny (Aaron Wolff) is preparing for his Bar Mitzvah, and his career is at a sensitive juncture. To cope with the mounting stress of his life, Larry desperately seeks guidance from his local rabbis.

A Serious Man is a black comedy and drama from the Coen Brothers. A Serious Man follows the travails of Larry Gopnik, an unassuming man who can’t seem to catch a break. Larry’s fatal flaw is that he tries to do the right thing, a trait that those around him are quick to exploit. His good intentions only earn him more suffering, while his attempts to push back against his tormentors are hamstrung by his passive, self-effacing nature.

A Serious Man gets most of its drama and humor out of pushing Larry to his limits. The many threads of Larry’s life are all united by his suffering and his unsuccessful attempts to find solace. At its best, the movie is a wry look at the unfairness of life and the futility of playing by the rules. However, A Serious Man embraces this theme to the exclusion of all else. The story is a gradual slide from bad to worse with precious few reprieves.

How much you get out of A Serious Man will depend heavily on taste. Those who can commiserate with Larry, laugh at the ironies of his life, and embrace the absurdity of it all will feel right at home. Those looking for a plot-driven story, a straightforward comedy, or a triumphant protagonist will be disappointed. A Serious Man tries for a particular tone and achieves it, but it will hold very little appeal for the wrong viewer.

For an even bleaker Coen Brothers drama about the life of a passive, ordinary man, try The Man Who Wasn’t There. For a crime comedy with a similarly put-upon but less scrupulous protagonist, try The Informant!. For a comedy about a similarly dysfunctional family with more heart, try Little Miss Sunshine.

7.1 out of 10 on IMDB. I give it a 6.5 for an effective but off-putting vision of helplessness.

Today’s quick review: The Ballad of Buster Scruggs. In the Old West, a singing outlaw (Tim Blake Nelson) meets his match; a robber (James Franco) faces an eccentric bank teller (Stephen Root); a traveling showman (Liam Neeson) manages a crippled orator (Harry Melling); a prospector (Tom Waits) strikes gold; a young woman (Zoe Kazan) and her foolish brother (Jefferson Mays) head for Oregon; and the passengers in a stage coach discuss philosophy.

The Ballad of Buster Scruggs is a Western anthology from the Coen Brothers. The film consists of six vignettes about life in the Old West, ranging in tone from black comedy to bleak drama. Each one presents a twisted take on the Western genre and its people, including prospectors, pioneers, and a few varieties of outlaw. However, the film’s eclectic tone, bleak philosophy, and disjointed vignettes keep it from hitting its stride.

The Ballad of Buster Scruggs has a hard time balancing its tone. The anthology starts on a note of sociopathic, almost cartoonish violence with the titular segment. From there it dips into the absurd, the macabre, the mundane, and the tragic in turn. A sort of nihilism pervades the film. The base, foolish side of human nature is on full display, and the stories rarely end well for their characters. There’s no sense of normalcy to fall back on.

The deliberate, meandering style of the Coen Brothers works against them here. The anthology format means that there’s little time to draw the viewer in and even less to explore the stories’ ideas. Each story is built around a punchline, moral, or reversal. At best, the story leading up to the punchline is enough to set it up and give it impact. But more often than not, the stories are too thin to make the payoff worthwhile.

The movie does have its moments. Highlights include Tim Blake Nelson’s singing voice, the unconventional tactics of Stephen Root’s bank teller, and the dry, nuanced relationship that arises between a shy pioneer (Zoe Kazan) and the leader of her caravan (Bill Heck). There’s a wide variety of visuals on display, and the direction does a good job of guiding the viewer’s focus. But the emptiness and futility of the stories are hard to overcome.

Fans of the Coen Brothers may want to give The Ballad of Buster Scruggs a shot. The stories capture the breadth of the Brothers’ style and will appeal to those who share their taste for the bleak and the ironic. But the rich characters and sense of serendipity that normally attenuate the darker side of their work are all but missing. What’s left is a medley of ideas and situations that hold individual interest but lack the scaffolding to support them.

For a Coen Brothers comedy with a more optimistic tone, try O Brother, Where Art Thou?. For a more stirring Western, try Tombstone. For a Western that makes better use of its violence, try Django Unchained. For a deeper tale of human folly, try The Treasure of the Sierra Madre.

7.4 out of 10 on IMDB. I give it a 6.5 for a fine cast and good craftsmanship hurt by tonal issues and stories that are hard to invest in.