Month: June 2021

Today’s quick review: Human Lost. Years in the future, humanity has attained immortality through its link to the SHELL system. But a dark fate awaits those who detach from the system: transformation into destructive mutants known as Lost. Yozo Oba (Austin Tindle), a troubled painter, awakens to his destiny when he transforms into a Lost while keeping his humanity. Now Yozo must decide whether to protect the SHELL system or burn it to the ground.

Human Lost is a Japanese CGI-animated sci-fi action movie. Human Lost is set in a future Japan where the longevity of an elite few renders the rest of the population functionally immortal, at the cost of living and toiling in a polluted world. Masao Horiki (Rob McCollum), an outsider with ties to the Lost, threatens to destroy the system entirely, even as Yoshiko Hiiragi (Macy Anne Johnson) seeks to save it, with Yozo caught painfully in the middle.

Human Lost invests heavily in its world and story. The movie weaves in exposition with its action until the setting is detailed enough to support the story it’s trying to tell. The movie examines the nature of society and mortality in a world where death isn’t permanent, falling short of deep insight but certainly scratching the sci-fi itch. The plot is complex and builds on itself nicely, although its logic begins to fall apart near the end.

Human Lost delivers on spectacle as well. The visuals are a step up from Polygon Pictures’ previous work, offsetting their stiff CGI animation with dynamic camerawork, interesting character designs, and a much improved use of color. The action is another big draw, with elaborate fights involving the monstrous Lost and a suitable degree of violence. The action scales up surprisingly towards the end, though, like the plot, it loses some cohesion.

Human Lost will appeal to fans who want their sci-fi to have a balance of spectacle and speculation. Neither side of the film works well enough to carry it alone, but together they’re enough to give sci-fi fans plenty to chew on. Sticklers for writing that’s meaningful, coherent, or original writing may want to steer clear, though. Human Lost has a lot to offer, but it lacks the focus, payoff, and depth of more visionary films.

For far-flung sci-fi in a similar vein from the same studio, try Blame!. For a more thematic sci-fi classic set in a similar world, try Akira or Ghost in the Shell. For an action-oriented CGI-animated science fiction movie from Japan, try Appleseed, Appleseed Ex Machina, or Vexille. For one with more detailed animation and a more horrific tone, try Gantz: O. For more speculation about a controlled future, try Logan’s Run or Minority Report.

5.6 out of 10 on IMDB. I give it a 7.0 to 7.5 for a rich sci-fi world, vivid visuals, and a healthy dose of action, tempered by a few imperfections.

Today’s quick review: Waterworld. Years in the future, the melting polar ice caps have flooded the Earth and forced humanity’s few survivors to adapt to life on the planet’s endless oceans. A nameless mariner (Kevin Costner) gains a pair of unwelcome passengers when he saves Enola (Tina Majorino) and her guardian Helen (Jeanne Tripplehorn) from Deacon (Dennis Hopper), a ruthless pirate who believes that Enola holds the key to finding dry land.

Waterworld is a sci-fi adventure set on a flooded, post-apocalyptic Earth. The story follows a drifter with a boat and a pair of gills as he becomes embroiled in the search for dry land, long thought a myth. Waterworld features a creative setting, an adventurous tone, a serviceable plot, and decent dynamics between its characters. However, its uneven execution keeps it from being as thrilling, endearing, or memorable as it tries to be.

Waterworld gets the basics right. The setting is unique among post-apocalyptic fiction and gives the movie a solid foundation to build on. The premise and the details of the setting are far-fetched, but they also pave the way for some clever touches. The plot can be predictable in places, but the broad strokes fit the adventure genre well. The evolving relationship between the mariner, Helen, and Enola is also handled with reasonable skill.

Waterworld does have its rough spots, though. The gritty nature of the setting fits oddly with the film’s swashbuckling action and comical villains. In particular, Dennis Hopper turns in an energetic but distracting performance as Deacon, a pirate leader who operates out of a rusted oil tanker. The plot is prone to odd digressions and inconsistent logic. Finally, the lead trio can be somewhat grating as they butt heads with one another.

Taken with a grain of salt, Waterworld makes for a decent adventure with some unique qualities but mixed execution overall. Those willing to take its quirks in stride should give it a shot, as it has enough in the way of simple fun to be an entertaining watch. But those looking for a polished watch, a thoughtful story, or gripping action will want to steer clear. Waterworld is outclassed by other adventures, but not entirely without value.

For a sci-fi movie with a similar tone and more pronounced flaws, try Battlefield Earth. For a movie that makes similar use of Dennis Hopper and has a goofier tone, try Super Mario Bros. For a more serious take on a dystopian plotline, try The Book of Eli or Children of Men. For a swashbuckling adventure with similarly mixed execution, try Cutthroat Island. For a better balance of action, setting, and adventure, try Pirates of the Caribbean.

6.2 out of 10 on IMDB. I give it a 6.0 for a decent premise held back by a few questionable choices.

Today’s quick review: Zombieland: Double Tap. After years of survival in the zombie-infested ruins of America, Columbus (Jesse Eisenberg) has decided to put down roots. Along with Tallahassee (Woody Harrelson), Wichita (Emma Stone), and Little Rock (Abigail Breslin), he sets about turning the White House into a permanent home. But when Little Rock runs off with a boy her age, the others must embark on a cross-country roadtrip to find her.

Zombieland: Double Tap is a zombie action comedy with colorful characters and a light tone. The sequel picks up years after the events of Zombieland, when Columbus and his friends have mastered the zombie apocalypse and are looking to settle down. Double Tap holds much of the same appeal as the original, with an excellent cast, sharp writing, and a unique sense of humor. The one thing it’s missing, however, is the first film’s heart.

Double Tap runs on the same mixture of character-driven banter, cultural references, and zombie slapstick as the first film. The four returning cast members have great chemistry together, making even the film’s basic interactions a treat. They’re joined by a handful of newcomers who fit right in. The humor skews even more self-aware than in the original, but the writing is still sharp, the setting is still fun, and nearly all of the jokes land.

The catch is that Double Tap is even less grounded than its predecessor. Where the original Zombieland dealt with the collapse of civilization and its effect on the survivors, Double Tap treats its world as a playground. It emphasizes comedy and personal relationships almost to the exclusion of survival and deeper forms of drama. This leads to a lighter watch with plenty of opportunities for comedy, but with less nuance and emotional payoff.

Zombieland: Double Tap is a well-executed and thoroughly entertaining comedy that will appeal to a broad audience. The sequel is missing the subtler qualities of the first one, including its rich character arcs and sense of balance. But what it lacks in subtlety, it makes up for in raw comedy, making it a worthy successor to an excellent film. For more in the same vein, try the original Zombieland or Shaun of the Dead.

7.3 out of 10 on IMDB. I give it a 7.0 to 7.5 for great characters, fun comedy, and a dash of action.

Today’s quick review: Gemini Man. Henry Brogan (Will Smith), the Defense Intelligence Agency’s best assassin, wants nothing more than to retire. But when he learns that his last kill was based on a lie, Henry becomes the target of a DIA cover-up led by Clay Verris (Clive Owen). Fleeing the DIA’s killers with Danny (Mary Elizabeth Winstead), an agent sent to spy on him, Henry must face off against Clay’s trump card: a young clone of Henry himself.

Gemini Man is a sci-fi action thriller about an assassin forced to confront a younger version of himself. Gemini Man takes a typical action premise—an elite soldier on the run from his employer—and gives it a sci-fi twist. Kinetic action, a full plot by action standards, and a balanced set of leads make Gemini Man a solid entry into the genre. However, slight flaws in its execution keep it from taking full advantage of its promising premise.

Gemini Man delivers on the main draw of the film: its action. Henry is meant to be the best in the business, and he doesn’t disappoint, using a mix of marksmanship and up-close combat to take down his enemies. His clone has a further edge in terms of strength and speed, leading to fast-paced action scenes that show a fair amount of creativity. Gemini Man can’t match the best the genre has to offer, but it does hold its own in terms of action.

Still, Gemini Man is missing polish in a few key places. The script gets the basics right but wavers when it’s trying to drive a dramatic point home. The characters are serviceable but not brilliant, interacting well but never quite achieving chemistry. The visual effects hold up most of the time, but the environments, fight physics, and facial capture for Henry’s clone all have sporadic issues that will bother visual perfectionists.

Overall, Gemini Man is a fine pick for those interested in a popcorn action flick with a touch of sci-fi. It’s not as thoughtful, funny, or stylized as some of its competition, but it manages to deliver a good mix of stunts, story, and speculation without any glaring mistakes. Fans of the genre will enjoy it; those hoping for something truly impressive will want to steer clear.

For a sci-fi thriller that pits a man against his double, try Looper. For a sci-fi thriller with a more elaborate plot, try Minority Report. For one with a lighter tone and a heavier dose of sci-fi, try Paycheck. For an action thriller about a retired assassin with sharper stunts, try John Wick.

5.7 out of 10 on IMDB. I give it a 6.5 for satisfying action with a few rough edges.

Today’s quick review: Doomsday. In 2008, an outbreak of the Reaper virus devastates Scotland and turns it into an enormous quarantine zone, walled off from the rest of the United Kingdom. In 2035, following a fresh outbreak of the virus in London, Major Eden Sinclair (Rhona Mitra) is tasked with entering the quarantine zone to locate a cure. Her only lead is Dr. Kane (Malcolm McDowell), a government scientist who disappeared years ago.

Doomsday is a sci-fi action movie set in a dystopian Scotland ravaged by plague and isolated from the rest of the world. The movie pits Major Sinclair and a team of soldiers against a country full of cannibals in search of a cure that may not even exist. Doomsday features a promising setup, a capable lead in Rhona Mitra, and plenty of violent action. However, its inconsistent tone and uninspired stunts keep it from reaching its full potential.

Doomsday has the makings of an entertaining action movie. Rhona Mitra has the stage presence of an action heroine and does well in her fights. The oppressive government of post-Reaper virus Britain serves to drive the plot and set up twists later in the film. The walled-off ruins of Scotland are a gory playground for the film’s action scenes, with Sol (Craig Conway) and his band of crazed cannibals determined to hunt down Sinclair and her team.

But Doomsday has a better setup than it knows what to do with. Eden Sinclair is never given the chance to shine, with a plot that bounces her from incident to incident without the chance to show much resourcefulness or cunning. The stunts are serviceable and don’t skimp on the gore, but they’re let down by choppy camerawork and a lack of memorable set pieces. The tone itself seesaws between gritty and goofy, undermining the film’s tension.

The end result is a decent sci-fi action movie that doesn’t make full use of the tools at its disposal. Action fans looking for a simple, violent watch should consider giving Doomsday a shot, as it has just enough in the way of action and creativity to entertain. But those hoping for a gripping plot, unique stunt work, or the full realization of an interesting setting should keep looking.

For a female-led dark sci-fi movie with better action, try Resident Evil or Underworld. For a sci-fi action movie a similar premise and an 80s vibe, try Escape from New York. For a zombie movie with a more personal tone that’s also set in a ruined Britain, try 28 Days Later. For one with a lonely atmosphere and more action,t ry I Am Legend.

6.0 out of 10 on IMDB. I give it a 6.0 to 6.5 for decent action marred by issues with its tone and plot.

Today’s quick review: Employee of the Month. David Walsh (Matt Dillon) has hit rock bottom. One day ago, he had a well-paying job at a bank, a nice car, and a fiance who lived him (Christina Applegate). Now he’s out of work, single, and has only Jack (Steve Zahn), his eccentric best friend, to share his woes with. After a night of drinking, David decides to fix things the only way he can: by giving his ex-coworkers a piece of his mind.

Employee of the Month is a black comedy with aspects of a crime drama. The movie is a guided tour of David Walsh’s life, from his engagement and his career at the bank to the events that tear them apart. Punchy direction, Jack’s antics, and David’s personality make Employee of the Month a dynamic watch that toys with interesting ideas. However, its execution falls short in a few places, resulting in an eclectic story that buries the lede.

Employee of the Month is at its best when David and Jack find the right topics to riff on. David is the responsible one, a man with actual prospects and a relationship he’s trying to salvage. Jack is a cynic, a loudmouth, and a slacker who urges David to indulge himself. The film has a hard time finding the right balance between the more mundane parts of David’s life and the absurd parts of Jack’s, but the times it does are darkly entertaining.

Employee of the Month has other interesting ideas to work with, but it tacks them on at the end. Too much of the film is spent on setup that never really pays off, while the parts of the film that make it distinctive all take place within the last few minutes. This gives the film a meandering beginning and a rushed ending, with drama and comedy that never quite hit their stride and writing that isn’t strong enough to pick up the slack.

The result is an eclectic watch that’s one part revenge comedy, one part low-grade personal drama, and one part crime flick. Viewers who are interested in these ingredients should give Employee of the Month a shot, since its characters, writing, and ideas are enough to give it some appeal. Those who are hoping for a more polished, cohesive watch may want to skip it. The same goes for those who dislike raunchy or morbid humor.

For a funnier tale of workplace discontentment, try Office Space. For a crime comedy with a similar setup and a more elaborate plot, try Lucky Number Slevin or The Whole Nine Yards. For a more violent and eclectic black comedy, try Seven Psychopaths. For a black comedy set at a bank with a heavier crime angle, try Flypaper.

6.2 out of 10 on IMDB. I give it a 6.5 for decent humor and clever ideas that never reach their full potential.

Today’s quick review: Falling Down. On a stressful day in Los Angeles, William Foster (Michael Douglas), a white collar worker with a short temper, abandons his car in a traffic jam and sets out across the city on foot. His simple act of defiance escalates into a series of violent incidents as he takes out his frustrations on those around him. But his actions soon get noticed by Prendergast (Robert Duvall), a friendly cop on the eve of retirement.

Falling Down is a crime drama and black comedy about a straight-edged man who decides he’s had enough. Michael Douglas stars as William Foster, a man who just wants to make it through Los Angeles’ assorted hazards to his daughter’s birthday party. Falling Down uses its main character to take broad shots at the irritations of modern society. The film’s snatches of humor make it entertaining, but it’s missing the finesse it needs to bring its premise home.

Falling Down serves up a peculiar sort of catharsis. William’s low-grade rampage pits him against the mundane injustices of modern living, from traffic and overcrowding to gangsters and inflation. His decision to stand up for himself serves as a shallow but enjoyable power fantasy, peppered with absurd moments and tinged with tragedy as William takes things too far. Falling Down is far from subtle, but it does a decent job of bringing its ideas to life.

Still, Falling Down can’t seem to make up its mind whether William is in the right. Sometimes the story paints him as a hero, the last decent man in a world gone mad. But William’s violent overreactions, loose choice of targets, and abusive behavior towards his ex-wife Beth (Barbara Hershey) all cast him in a negative light. The contradiction isn’t entirely compelling, and it makes the movie hard to categorize simply as a drama or a romp.

Falling Down is an oddity that won’t appeal to everyone, including some viewers who might like it on paper. Its social commentary is blunt in places and ambiguous in others, while its forays into drama keep it from serving as pure escapism. Still, its unique premise and two skilled leads make it worth a shot for those who are curious. Falling Down is a scattershot film, but one that mostly hits the mark.

For a quieter rebellion against modern society, try The Weather Man. For a more comedic reaction to the pressures of white collar work, try Office Space. For a more dedicated tale of vigilante justice, try The Boondock Saints.

7.6 out of 10 on IMDB. I give it a 7.0 for solid execution of a novel premise.

Today’s quick review: American Psycho. By day, Patrick Bateman (Christian Bale) is the consummate young professional: a wealthy perfectionist who works on Wall Street and cultivates impeccable taste in culture, food, and fashion. By night, Patrick indulges in his violent urges, brutally murdering the people who irritate them and dismembering their corpses. But as Patrick’s compulsion grows more powerful, he comes closer and closer to getting caught.

American Psycho is a dark satire with elements of horror. The movie contrasts Patrick Bateman’s crisp exterior with the sadistic side he keeps hidden. In the process, American Psycho shines a harsh light on America’s young elite, illustrating the hollowness and hypocrisy of chasing wealth and status. The combination of a unique premise and a skillful lead actor makes American Psycho a fascinating watch for those who can stomach its violence.

At its core, American Psycho is the portrait of a deranged man. Christian Bale delivers a sinister performance as Patrick Bateman, whose superficial charm hides an interior that’s devoid of substance or compassion. The surreal contrast between his petty status-seeking and his over-the-top violence sets the tone of the movie. Bale’s ability to switch between the two sides of the character at the drop of a hat ends up being a major draw.

However, American Psycho has have a high barrier to entry. Its graphic sex and violence, coupled with the soulless nature of its premise, will turn off a number of viewers from the very beginning. The film flirts with horror more than it actually indulges, with no major scares and an emphasis on splatter over up-close violence, but it can still be off-putting. It also focuses more on character and cultural commentary than an event-driven plot.

American Psycho is a perverse and well-crafted film that will appeal to fans of dark dramas, incisive satire, and pitch-black humor. The movie has a strong flavor that will absolutely not work for everyone, but the right viewer will find it to be clever, inventive, and oddly playful. Sensitive viewers or those who prefer films that are more plot-heavy should give it a pass.

For a drama with more explicit horror that toys with the same contrasts, try The Devil’s Advocate. For a gripping psychological thriller with an even darker tone starring Christian Bale, try The Machinist. For a black comedy about the pursuit of status in Hollywood, try Swimming with Sharks. For a lighter jab at the excesses of America’s financial elite, try The Wolf of Wall Street.

7.6 out of 10 on IMDB. I give it a 7.0 to 7.5 for distinctive premise and a compelling lead performance.

“You talking to me?” —Travis

Today’s quick review: Taxi Driver. Unable to sleep at night, Travis Bickle (Robert De Niro) takes a job as a taxi driver in New York, working long hours in the hope of filling the void in his life. Things begin to look up when he meets Betsy (Cybill Shepherd), a volunteer at Charles Palatine’s (Leonard Harris) presidential campaign. But trouble with their relationship and the pressures of city living soon send Travis down a dark, lonely path.

Taxi Driver is a crime drama from director Martin Scorsese. Robert De Niro stars as Travis Bickle, a loner with an intense personality and an unusual perspective on society. The movie follows Travis as he searches for a purpose in life, wrestles with infatuation, and longs for a way to clean up the streets of New York. Skillful acting and cinematography make Taxi Driver a solid pick for fans of drama, though its themes won’t appeal to everyone.

Taxi Driver has a knack for atmosphere and character work. The portrait it paints of New York shows the city’s grimy underbelly without coming across as too biased or forced. Travis makes for a nuanced protagonist, with complex motivations and a personality that separates him from those around him. The scenes are shot well and give the viewer plenty to think about. The ending is more mature than its setup implies, adding yet another layer to the story.

The tradeoff is that Taxi Driver has a loose plot. The story meanders alongside Travis, moving from thread to thread without a clear objective in mind. While distinct trends emerge that eventually carry the film to its finale, Taxi Driver lacks the tight scripting that some viewers may prefer. It also relies heavily on its themes of isolation and disaffection for appeal. Viewers who don’t find them compelling will get significantly less from the film.

Taxi Driver is a fine choice for fans of thoughtful crime dramas and artful cinema in general. Its high degree of craftsmanship and interesting themes are enough to carry the film for the right viewer. However, the wrong one will find that it has little to offer. Those who don’t mind an open-ended, thematic story should give it a shot. Those who prefer flashy presentation, a tightly scripted plot, or likable main characters should give it a pass.

For another crime drama with Martin Scorsese and Robert De Niro, try Mean Streets. For a punchier conflict between one man and the society around him, try Fight Club. For a character drama with a similar setup with a greater emphasis on mental illness, try Joker.

8.3 out of 10 on IMDB. I give it a 7.5 for solid execution of a hit-or-miss vision.

Today’s quick review: Joker. Arthur Fleck (Joaquin Phoenix) leads a joyless life. His mental issues distance him from the people around him, he’s forced to work a dead-end job as a clown to support his mother Penny (Frances Conroy), and his one dream in life, becoming a stand-up comedian, seems forever out of reach. But all that changes when a burst of violence gives Arthur a new purpose in life and makes him an inadvertent hero to the people of Gotham.

Joker is a crime drama based on the DC Comics character. Joaquin Phoenix stars as Arthur Fleck, a downtrodden man pushed to his limits by his depressing life, his mental illness, and the cruelty of the people around him. Joker is the character portrait of a troubled man, reimagining the DC supervillain as the victim of an uncaring society. Impassioned acting and an interesting premise make Joker a solid watch, but its drama is hit-or-miss.

Joker paints a very different picture of its title character than other adaptations. The larger-than-life villain is nowhere to be seen, replaced by a poor man with more than his fair share of trouble. Joker’s formula is simple in concept: grind Arthur into the dirt and watch him fracture. The film manages some creative variations of this premise, and Joaquin Phoenix goes the extra mile in depicting the sympathetic and deranged sides of the character.

However, Joker sacrifices a lot to make its character arc work. The world it portrays is unremittingly bleak, with only rare spots of black comedy to lighten the tone. Arthur cuts an ambivalent figure, two parts victim to one part monster, with an oddly passive role in the plot. The movie’s themes of mental illness and social conflict are potent in theory, but they only work in practice to the extent that the viewer is able to commiserate with Arthur.

Joker is a well-crafted movie that won’t appeal to everyone. The care that goes into its acting, writing, and direction gives it considerable upshot potential for fans of gritty dramas with heavy themes. But the combination of unsavory subject matter, a specific thematic axe to grind, and a character who has little to do with his origins in the superhero genre makes Joker a movie that can just as easily fall flat. Approach with caution.

For a more villainous take on the character, try The Dark Knight. For a thriller with a psychological angle, try Split. For a more visceral descent into madness, try Requiem for a Dream. For a jazzier, more stylized battle with mental illness, try Birdman. For a more elaborate tale of rebellion against society, try Fight Club.

8.9 out of 10 on IMDB. I give it a 7.5 for impressive acting and a novel take on a familiar character.