Author: Stan

Today’s quick review: My Man Godfrey. As part of a scavenger hunt, Irene Bullock (Carole Lombard), a flighty socialite, convinces Godfrey (William Powell), a sarcastic hobo, to join her at an upper-crust party. Delighted by his behavior there, she invites him to become her family’s new butler. But to keep his new job, Godfrey must put up with the family’s eccentricities, Irene’s amorous advances, and her sister Cornelia’s (Gail Patrick) antagonism.

My Man Godfrey is a classic comedy that matches an irresponsible, wealthy family with the one man capable of taming them. My Man Godfrey features clever dialogue, a strong main character, and a light, endearing plot. The movie takes pointed shots at the sheltered lives of the elite during the Great Depression, but its breezy tone and redeemable characters make it a comedy first and foremost.

My Man Godfrey has an able lead in William Powell. Godfrey has just the right blend of dry wit, selfless loyalty, and raw competence to hold the movie together, acting as its heart, sense of humor, and voice of reason all in one. The Bullocks are enjoyable characters as well, although they are exaggerated enough caricatures that the movie turns hectic whenever two of them are in the same room.

My Man Godfrey moves to shakier ground with its plot. The individual components of the plot, from Godfrey’s recruitment to Irene’s infatuation, all work well on their own. But they tend to move forward under their own power without the need for a central plot. As such, My Man Godfrey ends rather abruptly, tying up a storyline that feels only partially developed.

Give My Man Godfrey a watch if you are a fan of classic comedies. The movie’s sharp dialogue and moment-to-moment charm make it a worthwhile watch. Those looking for a tight, cohesive plot should look elsewhere, as should anyone who prefers more modern comedies. For a frenetic comedy from the same era, check out His Girl Friday.

8.1 out of 10 on IMDB. I give it a 7.0 for good dialogue, amusing characters, and a loose but workable plot.

Today’s quick review: The Omega Man. After germ warfare wipes out almost the entire human race, Dr. Robert Neville (Charlton Heston) is the only man left unaffected. He spends his days scavenging through a deserted city and his nights holding out against the Family, a cult of technology-fearing survivors rendered painfully photosensitive by the disease.

The Omega Man is a post-apocalyptic science fiction movie about the last normal man on Earth. The Omega Man shows off what daily life would be like for a man with a city to himself: his systematic search for supplies, his attempts to keep his spirits up, and the constant threat posed by the Family. Charlton Heston makes for an interesting protagonist, a steely survivor who still keeps his sense of humor.

The Omega Man shares the same source material as I Am Legend, a novel by Richard Matheson. Where I Am Legend is a zombie action movie with modern CGI and a bleak tone, The Omega Man is a science fiction movie in the classic vein. The actual plot varies between the two films, but they do share some of their best ideas. I Am Legend is emotionally richer, but The Omega Man manages to paint a similar picture with simpler strokes.

The Omega Man does have its quirks. The Family make for cartoonish antagonists, with Halloween-quality makeup, black robes, and sunglasses. The action sequences are generally satisfying, but unconvincing blood effects and the cultists’ flailing keep them from being gripping. The tone strikes a nice balance between optimism and despair, but the combination may seem strange to those used to modern storytelling.

Give The Omega Man a shot if you are a fan of classic science fiction. Its strong concepts and effective storytelling make it a worthwhile watch for anyone willing to embrace its idiosyncrasies. Skip it if you are looking for flashy action or high drama. For a modern take on the same premise, check out I Am Legend. For dystopian sci-fi with a similar style, check out Logan’s Run.

6.6 out of 10 on IMDB. I give it a 6.5 to 7.0 for compelling ideas and decent execution marred by a few missteps.

Today’s quick review: The Numbers Station. Following a crisis of conscience, Emerson (John Cusack), a hitman for an intelligence agency, is reassigned to quieter work guarding Katherine (Malin Akerman), a civilian cryptographer, as she transmits coded messages to agents in the field. But when their facility is attacked, Emerson and Katherine must hold out long enough for help to arrive.

The Numbers Station is a minimalistic thriller set in an isolated broadcast station. The Numbers Station features a decent plot, a suspenseful tone, and a fine pair of leads. Emerson and Katherine must use the few resources at their disposal to survive and get help. However, The Numbers Station’s limited story keeps the movie from making the most of an interesting premise.

The Numbers Station sacrifices world-building for tension. The attackers are anonymous gunmen who are never given a proper motive. Neither Katherine nor Emerson has a visible personal life. The lack of background color nicely mirrors the secrecy of the intelligence business, but it also means that the viewer has little to invest in beynod the characters’ immediate survival.

The Numbers Station does unfold well, with a few clever surprises along the way. The station makes for an interesting prison, and the two main characters occupy themselves hunting for clues about the attack. Once again, the movie’s restricted scope bites it. The plot twists are interesting, but without a richer world or a longer story to play into, they can only do so much.

Watch The Numbers Station if you are a John Cusack fan looking for a short, reasonably competent thriller. The Numbers Station lacks the substance to compete with the better entries in its genre, but it does enough right to be an enjoyable watch. Skip it if you are looking for a deep plot or flashy action. For a fuller execution of a similar premise, check out Safe House.

5.6 out of 10 on IMDB. I give it a 6.0 to 6.5 for decent execution that comes up a little short.

Today’s quick review: Intermission. John (Cilian Murphy), an underachieving supermarket clerk, grows jealous of his ex-girlfriend Deirdre (Kelly MacDonald) when she begins dating an older man. At the suggestion of Lehiff (Colin Farrell), a petty thief, John hatches a plan to embarrass Deirdre’s new boyfriend and get rich, all in one fell swoop. Meanwhile, Jerry (Colm Meaney), a self-important cop, seeks fame on a local television program.

Intermission is an unconventional crime movie with an ensemble cast and a decentralized storytelling style. Intermission follows a number of odd characters as their lives cross paths with one another. The movie has an understated but effective sense of humor in the Irish tradition, and it does a good job of placing its characters where they need to be. However, its mundane subject matter, complex plot, and slow build-up make it a mixed success.

Intermission has an expansive story with a handful of main threads. The movie jumps back and forth between a large cast of characters who are connected by friendship, acquaintance, and circumstance. Their various troubles form the moment-to-moment substance of the movie, while a larger storyline begins to emerge as the movie goes on. Clever segues help orient the viewer during the movie’s meandering beginning.

Intermission is a modestly entertaining and occasionally charming film. Its characters are well-acted, fairly likable, and believably human, and the movie does an excellent job of tripping them up just when they are getting ahead. The humor has a wry tinge to it that offsets its characters’ various failures. The plot’s actual substance is somewhat sparse, but it builds up to a satisfying finale that neatly ties up its many threads.

Watch Intermission when you are in the mood for a creative look at life and its foibles. Intermission does not have the impact that a more focused crime story or a more ridiculous comedy would have, but its unusual storytelling style, touches of humor, and good wrap-up make it a worthwhile watch. For a chaotic crime comedy with more punch, check out Lock, Stock, and Two Smoking Barrels. For a black comedy with a similar sense of humor, check out In Bruges.

6.9 out of 10 on IMDB. I give it a 7.0 for decent writing and a sprawling plot.

Today’s quick review: Birdman. Riggan Thomson (Michael Keaton) is a washed-up actor known for his work on the wildly successful superhero movie franchise Birdman. To revive his career and win back his dignity, Riggan begins production on a Broadway stage drama. But in addition to a temperamental cast, a skeptical public, and his failing personal relationships, Riggan must deal with his own inner demons, among them the prideful voice of Birdman in his head.

Birdman is a stylized drama with innovative cinematography and a touch of magical realism. Birdman boasts a solid script, stylish presentation, strong performances, and a host of subtler flourishes, including a jazz drum soundtrack and moments of fantasy that pair nicely with the film’s grounded setting. The story follows Riggan through the turbulent last days of rehearsal before his play opens.

Birdman’s most distinctive feature is its cinematography. Nearly the entire movie is presented as one, continuous camera shot. The camera follows the characters around as they move from location to location in and around Riggan’s theater. The few noticeable cuts are either well-hidden or elegantly dressed up. Birdman’s skillful use of its camera makes it a uniquely engrossing watch.

Beyond its novel camerawork, Birdman is a remarkably well-crafted film. The script weaves together clever themes, disparate subplots, and a variety of emotional beats to form a colorful and surprisingly coherent tapestry. The details of the story are chosen carefully to enhance the whole. Through it all, Michael Keaton shows a remarkable range, at times a capable actor fulfilling his dream, at times a failure on the verge of collapse.

Birdman’s story is backed by a talented cast. Edward Norton plays Mike Shiner, a brilliant but uncontrollable stage actor who joins Riggan’s cast at the last minute. Emma Stone plays Riggan’s daughter Sam, a recovering drug addict working as an assistant for her father. Zach Galifianakis plays Riggan’s best friend and producer Jake, the one man keeping the show together. The characters are multifaceted, unpredictable, and almost always interesting.

Birdman does have its foibles. The movie’s blend of quirky interactions and realistic drama won’t work for everybody. Its snappy presentation masks weighty themes of depression, aging, and the struggle for relevance. The film’s cultural commentary also dates it, tying it closely to the rise of the superhero genre. Still, Birdman’s baggage is minor compared to its strengths, and even skeptical viewers can easily get lost in its story.

Fans of the artistic side of cinema need to give Birdman a shot. Its vivid vision and polished execution make it an impressive feat of filmmaking and a fascinating watch. Those who prefer flashy action, unadulterated comedy, or straightforward storytelling should approach with caution. Birdman has enough quality to sway wary viewers, but its tone and subject matter give it a very particular kind of appeal.

7.8 out of 10 on IMDB. I give it a 7.5 to 8.0 for interesting writing, a great cast, and strong cinematography.

Today’s quick review: Gambit. To get revenge on his abusive boss (Alan Rickman), art curator Harry Deane (Colin Firth) hatches a plan to sell him a forged Monet for 12 million pounds. Harry recruits PJ Puznowski (Cameron Diaz), a blue collar woman from Texas, to pose as the long-lost painting’s owner. But the plan that seems so simple in Harry’s mind proves to be difficult to accomplish.

Gambit is a crime comedy written by the Coen Brothers. Gambit offers a caper plot, fine comedic performances, and a consistently light tone. The movie follows Harry’s increasingly desperate attempts to stick to the plan in spite of a series of unforeseen obstacles. However, Gambit lacks the substance needed to be more than a popcorn watch.

Gambit is limited in what it tries to achieve. The movie barely reaches an hour and a half, and it is missing the elaborate plot work the Coen Brothers are known for. The jokes are more amusing than funny, the characters are good but not great, and the con itself is fairly simple. But within these constraints, Gambit manages to be an enjoyable diversion for the right kind of viewer.

Give Gambit a shot when you are in the mood for a light crime comedy. Those who are looking for uproarious humor or an intricate plot will be disappointed; those looking for a bit of harmless entertainment will have a good time. For a whodunit of similar merits, check out Flypaper. For another light heist film, check out Going in Style. For a quirkier Coen Brothers comedy, check out O Brother, Where Art Thou?.

5.7 out of 10 on IMDB. I give it a 6.5 for charming characters and light comedy.

Today’s quick review: Kingsman: The Golden Circle. After a devastating attack on Kingsman, Eggsy (Taron Egerton) and Merlin (Mark Strong) seek the help of Statesman, their American sister organization. Aided by Agent Whiskey (Pedro Pascal), the spies race to discover the location of Poppy Adams (Julianne Moore), an eccentric drug kingpin who has infected the world’s drug users with a deadly virus.

Kingsman: The Golden Circle is a spy action comedy directed by Matthew Vaughn. The Golden Circle continues the Kingsman tradition of inventive violence, spy-genre style, and tongue-in-cheek humor. The gentlemanly Kingsman agents are joined by their rowdier, cowboy-themed American cousins. The impressive cast includes Colin Firth, Channing Tatum, Halle Berry, and Jeff Bridges.

Like its predecessor, The Golden Circle’s main draw is its action. The action scenes are expertly choreographed, fast-paced, and often brutal. Unlike the spy movies it draws inspiration from, The Golden Circle does not shy away from violence. Coupled with occasional coarseness, this gives the movie a particular tone that may not appeal to all viewers. Sensitive viewers may want to steer clear.

For the most part, The Golden Circle maintains the quality of the first film. The action is as sharp as ever, Statesman is a fun and welcome addition to the canon, and the movie has the same mischievous twinkle in its eye. But The Golden Circle is missing the careful world-building of the original. The destruction of Kingsman and rapid introduction to Statesman lack the emotional depth of Eggsy’s training and first mission.

The Golden Circle also dips more heavily into science fiction than its predecessor. Poppy Adams has outfitted her drug operation with cybernetic limbs, robotic guard dogs, and drones, while Statesman introduces new gadgets like electric lassos, microscopic trackers, and advanced first aid technology. Nearly every addition to the universe is an enjoyable one, but they are a step beyond the already implausible spy gadgets of the first film.

Watch Kingsman: The Golden Circle if you are in the mood for a high-quality action movie that is unabashedly fun. Its more mature content is not for everyone and its virtues will mainly appeal to action fans, but The Golden Circle is a strong choice for anyone interested by it. Newcomers to the series should start with Kingsman: The Secret Service for a proper, chronological introduction to the universe.

7.2 out of 10 on IMDB. I give it a 7.5 for fun, stylish action.

Today’s quick review: I.T. Mike Regan (Pierce Brosnan), an avionics CEO on the verge of taking his company public, has his life turned upside down when Ed Porter (James Frecheville), an IT specialist for his company, takes an unhealthy interest in Mike and his family. Ed uses his technical prowess to torment the Regans, driving Mike to desperate measures to stop him.

I.T. is a suspense movie that pits a desperate businessman against a tech-savvy stalker. The movie taps into fears about privacy, the ubiquity of technology, and what happens when that power falls into the wrong hands. However, the movie’s unlikable characters and poor plot mechanics keep it from making anything of these themes. I.T.’s highlights are a decent performance from Pierce Brosnan and a disturbing tone, with little substance to back them up.

I.T.’s core problem is its lack of interaction. Ed has the ability to spy on the Regans, forge medical records, and control their home remotely. Mike can do nothing to stop him. The movie gets some mileage out of Ed’s unsettling behavior and Mike’s impotent threats, but I.T. simply does not have the back-and-forth it needs to hook the viewer’s interest.

I.T. shows enough competence that the right viewer might get something out of it, but most people would be better off looking for a proper suspense movie or thriller. Give it a shot only if you are intrigued by stalking or social awkwardness and have lax standards when it comes to plot. For a suspenseful crime drama about stalking gone wrong, check out Following.

5.4 out of 10 on IMDB. I give it a 5.5 for a decent premise and uncompelling drama.

Today’s quick review: Hansel & Gretel: Witch Hunters. Years after their childhood encounter with a witch, twins Hansel (Jeremy Renner) and Gretel (Gemma Arterton) have become famed witch hunters. While investigating a rash of kidnappings in a small town, Hansel and Gretel uncover a massive gathering of witches preparing for a ritual that could make them invincible.

Hansel & Gretel: Witch Hunters is a fantasy action horror movie loosely based on the classic fairy tale. Hansel & Gretel: Witch Hunters recasts the twins as action heroes armed with an array of high-tech gadgets and weaponry. The movie delivers gory action and high-flying stunts with a tongue-in-cheek modern attitude. The plot, dialogue, and characters can all be summed up the same way: simple but entertaining.

Hansel & Gretel has a sense of ridiculousness that will endear it to certain action fans. Between the improbable gadgets, the overblown witch makeup, and the historical inaccuracy, Hansel & Gretel sacrifices almost all of its dramatic credibility in favor of schlocky fun. The tradeoff is a welcome one for fans of gory kills and over-the-top action, but anyone looking for a serious movie will be badly disappointed.

The movie’s action is surprisingly entertaining. The witches are fast-moving, spell-hurling, and superhumanly strong monsters. The twins work well as a team, trading off attacks to keep their quarry from escaping. The fights are fast-paced and destructive, with a nice sense of overkill. The icing on the cake is the movie’s pro wrestling influences, from Hansel and Gretel functioning as a tag team to Hansel suplexing a witch.

Watch Hansel & Gretel: Witch Hunters if you are any sort of fan of the silly, violent side of the action genre. Stay far away if you are looking for a serious or realistic movie, or if you are sensitive to gore. For a similarly inventive action movie with gothic horror source material, check out Van Helsing. For darker, more disturbing fairy tale horror, check out The Brothers Grimm.

6.1 out of 10 on IMDB. I give it a 7.0 for fun, schlocky action.

Today’s quick review: The Call Up. Seven gamers are chosen to test a state-of-the-art augmented reality system for a mysterious company. Equipped with haptic feedback suits and AR visors, the players enter a simulation that transforms an abandoned office building into a lifelike military shooter. But as the game goes on, the players realize that they are playing for their lives.

The Call Up is a science fiction action movie that blurs the line between game and reality. The Call Up features decent visual effects, a promising premise, and a steady stream of low-grade action. However, its dull characters and lackluster writing keep it from making anything too impressive of itself. The movie manages to deliver some cheap thrills in a competent manner, but does little more.

For a short movie, The Call Up takes a long time to develop. The game is introduced right away, but the players spend more time talking about it than playing it. The movie only addresses its central mystery near the very end, and while the explanation is interesting enough, there is not much substance to it. The AR effects are fairly stylish, but the game world is a generic military shooter with almost no character of its own.

The Call Up’s characters are not too bad but are not used to their fullest. The players fill the typical roles in the death game genre, and their varying reactions to the situation around them are the movie’s bread and butter. But as real people, the characters are lacking. Total anonymity would have fit the premise just fine, but instead the movie opts for token amounts of backstory that are never properly developed.

Give The Call Up a shot if you are looking for a quick, mediocre entry into the death game genre. Though the movie gets a few things right, it is outclassed by its competitors. Most viewers would be better off looking elsewhere. For a darker, more brutal, and better-executed take on a similar concept, check out Gantz: O. For a mysterious thriller with a better plot and less violence, check out Exam.

4.8 out of 10 on IMDB. I give it a 5.5 for a decent premise marred by limited vision and poor writing.