Author: Stan

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.

“We’re Americans. We read your emails.” —Joe

Today’s quick review: Domino. While responding to a domestic disturbance, Copenhagen police officer Christian Toft (Nikolaj Coster-Waldau) makes a mistake that puts his partner Lars (Soren Malling) in the hospital. Determined to make things right, Christian goes after the attacker: a Libyan man named Ezra Tarzi (Eriq Ebouaney). In doing so, Christian becomes tangled in a terrorist plot and a CIA operation headed by Joe Martin (Guy Pearce).

Domino is a crime thriller from director Brian De Palma. The movie follows a Danish cop who stumbles onto the trail of ISIS leader Salah Al-Din (Mohammed Azaa) while pursuing the man who injured his partner. Domino plays its characters off one another, letting the conflicts between Christian, Ezra, Salah, and Joe drive its plot. However, its unsympathetic characters, mediocre craftsmanship, and lack of clear purpose make it an underwhelming watch.

Domino misplays its hand. The basic premise is interesting: one bad decision that leads to unforeseen consequences. But Domino quickly drops its more interesting elements—Christian’s guilt about Lars and Ezra’s mysterious motives—in favor of an unfocused, terrorist-oriented plot. Christian drifts sidelong into the hunt for Salah Al-Din, and the movie never settles on a concrete reason why Salah’s plot is more important than Ezra’s.

Domino also has other issues. Christian makes for a lukewarm protagonist, while Alex Boe (Carice van Houten), his new partner for the case, contributes little. The drama with Lars comes off flat, the thrills are never that tense, and any point the film might be trying to make ends up lost in the thicket of subplots. The kicker is an obtrusive orchestral soundtrack that tries too hard to set the tone and ends up being distracting instead.

None of these issues are crippling alone, but taken together, they strip the sheen off a movie that already has trouble distinguishing itself. Domino has the makings of a decent thriller, but a couple of significant plot missteps and mixed execution overall quickly stifle its momentum. Domino holds modest value for those looking for a brief jaunt into the crime genre, but there are other films that offer the same benefits and more.

For a richer look at terrorism and its surrounding issues, try The Kingdom or Traitor. For a more thrilling movie with a similar premise, try Unlocked. For a more plot-focused look at law enforcement’s response to terrorism, try Closed Circuit.

4.4 out of 10 on IMDB. I give it a 5.0 for a decent setup with flawed execution.

Today’s quick review: Ad Astra. After the disappearance of his father (Tommy Lee Jones) on a deep space mission years ago, Roy McBride (Brad Pitt) has honored his legacy by becoming one the finest astronauts in Space Command. But his resolve is put to the test when a series of destructive energy surges are traced to his father’s ship near Neptune. To stop the surges, Roy must venture into deep space and attempt to contact his missing father.

Ad Astra is a science fiction drama about an astronaut’s journey through the Solar System in search of his missing father. The movie takes place in the near future, when space travel is flourishing but the search for extraterrestrial life is ongoing. Ad Astra explores this future through the eyes of Roy McBride, a highly focused astronaut with deep psychological issues. Personal drama and the perils of space form the backbone of the film.

Ad Astra is a highly introspective film. The story is as much about Roy’s psychology as his mission, with frequent internal monologues and reflections on his mental state. Roy’s detached personality, abandonment issues, and utter devotion to his mission give the film a unique angle that meshes well with the danger and isolation of space. But his character arc has more intellectual than emotional appeal, due to a lack of subtlety in a few key places.

Unfortunately, Ad Astra doesn’t invest quite as much effort into its science fiction. The setting has the trappings of hard sci-fi, but the plot plays fast and loose with its science content. Ad Astra gives very little focus to the technical side of space travel, instead using it as a backdrop for a more personal story. The movie’s periodic attempts to inject action into the story come across as artificial, at odds with its sober setting.

The outcome is a hybrid of three strains of science fiction: personal drama, spacefaring adventure, and near-future speculation. Ad Astra fares the best with its drama, with an unusual main character in Roy McBride and a convincing performance from Brad Pitt. Its action and speculation are on shakier ground, but they bring enough to the table to make Ad Astra a solid pick for fans of the sci-fi genre, albeit one with some flaws.

For a more powerful sci-fi drama that deals with similar themes, try Interstellar. For a more grounded tale of survival ins pace, try Gravity or The Martian. For another story about a successor to failed space mission, try Sunshine. For a more artful rumination on space travel and the future of mankind, try 2001: A Space Odyssey.

7.0 out of 10 on IMDB. I give it the same for strong character work and an interesting near future setting.

Today’s quick review: Good People. Tom Wright (James Franco) and his wife Anna (Kate Hudson) are trying to start a family, but they can barely make rent. Their luck turns around when their downstairs neighbor dies, leaving behind a small fortune in stolen cash. Hiding the money from John Halden (Tom Wilkinson), the detective in charge of the case, Tom and Anna weigh the costs of using their ill-gotten gains to pay off their debts.

Good People is a crime drama about an ordinary couple who find a bag of stolen money. Their decision to hide it rather than turn it into the police sparks a chain of events that puts Tom, Anna, and those around them in danger. Good People features solid character work, an intriguing premise, and a grounded and unpredictable plot. The movie doesn’t hit quite as hard as it could have, but it makes for a worthwhile story nonetheless.

The heart of the movie is the Wrights, a loving couple with good reasons to make the choices they do. James Franco and Kate Hudson strike a delicate balance with their characters. Tom and Anna are affectionate but not saccharine, fallible but sympathetic, and surprisingly tenacious. Neither one is outstanding as far as dramatic characters go, but there’s enough nuance to them to give the film some weight and help its story find traction.

The other major part of the film is the tangled struggle for the money. What starts as a basic moral dilemma becomes urgent when Jack Witkowski (Sam Spruell), the criminal who stole the money, comes for what’s his, pursued by Khan (Omar Sy), a French drug dealer and the money’s original owner. The interactions between the factions make the film hard to predict and give the Wrights the chance to show their resourcefulness.

The result is a decent watch that never rises to the level of greatness. Good People goes reasonably far with its characters, its premise, and the chaos that follows. But the film falls short of its potential: the moral ramifications of the Wrights’ choices are examined only in passing, while the plot isn’t as cleverly coordinated as it could have been. As such, Good People has something to offer crime fans but won’t satisfy critical viewers.

For a crime drama about a family man forced to confront hardened criminals, try A History of Violence. For one about five people in a similar situation, try Money. For a more subdued drama about the influence of wealth on good people, try The Treasure of the Sierra Madre. For a black comedy starring Tom Wilkinson in a similar role, try Dead in a Week (or Your Money Back).

5.5 out of 10 on IMDB. I give it a 6.5 for decent plot and character work.