Posted in: Disc Reviews by John Delia on February 1st, 2020
During the 1950’s, being a private investigator wasn’t always a safe and sure way to make a living. But it was a popular way to make some cash for returning soldiers or ex-police officers. During these times things were beginning to modernize, and the world was becoming more dependent on advancement in the skyline. With these changes, corruption and deceit became more evident, and private investigators became more popular. When Frank Minna’s (Bruce Willis) agency gets a chance to make some real money, things begin to get ugly fast. In his crew there is Lionel Essrog (Edward Norton), an orphan with Tourette's syndrome that Frank took under his wing when Lionel was 13; they have been friends ever since. Then there is Tony Vermonte (Bobby Cannavale), Gilbert Coney (Ethan Suplee), and Danny Fantl (Dallas Roberts). Frank has known these guys for many years and trusts them with helping to investigate the cases for his company.
When a job goes awry, the team has to discover what went wrong and how far this assignment will actually take them. Lionel takes the initiative and starts on this case that will bring him among the very powerful and the group these power-hungry men want to take down. Following the breadcrumbs brings Lionel in many directions, but it all somehow centers on Laura.
Posted in: No Huddle Reviews by Michael Durr on January 20th, 2020
As a man, I have watched my fair share of Desperate Housewives, Mistresses, Sex and the City, and even reality shows like Real Housewives of "Insert Name Here" county or city. I'm not sure any of it was by choice. Well, Mistresses did have Alyssa Milano, so there is that. I have learned, however, that while it might be undesirable to watch these types of shows, typically, it can be a good thing to do with your better half. It can broaden the lines of communication, and if nothing else you can sit there with your loved one and collectively wonder how high your tolerance for pain is. Enter Big Little Lies Season Two.
At the end of the first season, we learned that Perry Wright (played by Alexander Skarsgard) was murdered. Technically, it was Bonnie Carlson (played by Zoe Kravitz) who issued the final push which sent him down the stairs to his demise. However, there were four others involved in the altercation including Madeline McKenzie (played by Reese Witherspoon), Renata Klein (played by Laura Dern), Jane Chapman (played by Shailene Woodley), and Perry's wife Celeste (played by Nicole Kidman). While it was justified due to the repeated abuse of Celeste and rape of Jane, the fact remained that it was murder. The five women collectively decided to say that Perry slipped and that the murder was accidental with nobody at fault. But as we know, secrets are sometimes hard to keep.
Posted in: Disc Reviews by Jeremy Butler on January 20th, 2020
When we last saw the Mistress of Evil (which also happens to be the title for the sequel) she was more of a hero rather than a villain. However, the sequel sees her return to her previous status as the feared fairy that ruled the Moors. How quickly people forget her contributions. Though not traditionally scary, the film features plenty of magic and carnage courtesy of Jolie. Additionally, the film features the return of Elle Fanning, Sam Riley, and Harris Dickson as Aurora, Diaval, and Prince Philip. With the addition of Chiwetel Ejofor and Ed Skrein, as well as Michelle Pfeiffer as Queen Ingrith, Philip’s mother, who gives Maleficent a run for her money for the title of Mistress of Evil. In the five years that have passed since then the original film, Aurora has continued to reign as Queen of the Moors and is beloved by her subjects, and especially by Prince Phillip, who works up the courage to propose marriage. Aurora accepts, but then comes the hard part: telling their parents. For Phillip the difficulty comes from her mother, who feels that their people have a right to pillage the Moors and worries about losing her son to Aurora, who rules the land she would like to acquire. For Aurora, the difficulty is much more challenging, as she has the unfortunate task of telling her godmother, the protector of the Moors, Maleficent. Though initially opposed to the idea, Maleficent grants her permission. However, this is only the beginning of their troubles.
At a formal dinner to celebrate the union, heated words lead to a declaration of war between the two kingdoms, as well as a curse. As a result, a rift is formed between Maleficent and Aurora, who sides with her new family. Adding to the situation, Maleficent suddenly learns that she is not alone in this world, as she discovers more like her and her origins.
Posted in: Disc Reviews by Brent Lorentson on January 20th, 2020
Back in the 80’s and 90’s it was a glorious time for crazy, over-the-top action films. The names that most notably come to mind when I think of this time in action cinema are Don Simpson and Jerry Bruckheimer. They were the guys who knew how to make a popcorn action film: Beverly Hills Cop, Days of Thunder, Bad Boys, and many more. While Line of Duty isn’t quite in the same league of these films, it definitely has its roots in these films, and for a VOD action film, well, this film is all kinds of absurd fun. Director Steven C. Miller has had some duds over the span of his career, though I did enjoy his take on Silent Night, but Line of Duty shows that the man is capable of helming a white-knuckle action film if given a proper budget and script to work with. When it comes to Aaron Eckhart, I’m kind of surprised we don’t see him as the lead in more tent pole action films. Sure, many of us know him for his turn as Harvey Dent in The Dark Knight, but he’s a guy with so much untapped talent. It was nice to see it on display in this film. Frank Penny (Eckhart) is a disgraced cop who is responsible for getting a kid killed and is now stuck working as a beat cop. It doesn’t take long for the film to ramp up as Frank is caught up in a foot chase with a suspect involved with the kidnapping of the chief of police’s daughter. There is a lot of running in this opening act, and things go bad to worse for Penny when he’s put in a situation where he kills the only lead to finding the kidnapped daughter.
Miller does a good job at sucking us into Penny’s world and sympathizing with him, but the film unfortunately takes a miserable turn with the introduction of millennial, social media reporter Ava (Courtney Eaton). Maybe I’m showing my age, but geez, was I annoyed by the introduction of this character. Even worse is the character Clover who runs the site Ava reports for. I know it’s only January, but I’m quite certain the character Clover will be the worst character of the year, from her actions and dialog in the film, she’s basically the millennial character everyone rolls their eyes in annoyance over.
Posted in: Disc Reviews by Brent Lorentson on January 15th, 2020
This is yet another war film that is “based on true events”. Considering how long troops have been over in Afghanistan, it’s no surprise how many films seem to be coming out about the subject. I’ll admit going into this film I didn’t exactly have high hopes, but I’m pleased to say not only did the film not disappoint; I found myself actually enjoying it. Granted this is no 1917, but it’s definitely better than the dumpster fire film that I reviewed about a month ago called D-Day. The Kill Team follows new recruit Andrew Briggman (Nat Wolff), who is wide-eyed and ready to see combat, but once he is confronted with the very human side of the war that the troops are facing, well, his conscience begins to weigh him down, and things only get more complicated for him as his time in Afghanistan stretches on. From the start, the film seems to have a very idealistic view on how the soldiers can and should act, and it’s this “moral compass” that gets in the way of telling the story. When it comes to war films that delve into the cruelty that occurs, you can’t let morals dictate the story. It’s the equivalent of doing a western where the bad guy wears the black hat and the good guy wears white. Sure, you’re spelling it out for your audience, but when depicting real life, it’s never quite that easy to tell wrong from right.
The film wastes no time in getting us into the story, as we see Briggman on his last day being a civilian to him being in Afghanistan. He seems disappointed that instead of seeing combat he’s stuck with his team travelling to villages attempting to build relationships with them, but things quickly go sideways after an explosive takes out his Staff Sergeant. It doesn’t take long before a replacement comes in, and it’s Staff Sergeant Deeks (Alexander Skarsgard) who comes in to make some changes to the unit. He’s not about being friendly with villagers; instead, he’s ready to hunt down some bad guys responsible for making bombs that have killed numerous soldiers over the year. Here’s the thing: I was onboard for this being about a military unit simply out for blood killing potential terrorists. If you’re going to do a film about morally corrupt soldiers, I figure you just go all in and make them a ragtag team of anti-heroes. Well, writer and director Dan Krauss had other plans, and instead focuses on the inner termoil Briggman is going through about his unit murdering “innocent” people. Because Krauss previously directed a documentary about soldiers that were involved with the same situation, he uses his insight to deliver a very grounded take on the subject matter.
Posted in: Disc Reviews by Brent Lorentson on January 9th, 2020
“Art is dangerous.” It’s a quote that has been passed around over the decades, and it’s something I tend to agree with. Over the weeks building up to the release of the film, there seems to be a manufactured panic about what could happen when Joker releases onto the big screen. In Aurora, Colorado they’ve elected to not show the film as a way to not trigger local residents that were involved in the 2012 shooting. This I can understand considering the shooter did indeed dress as the Joker when he committed his act of violence. As for other parts of the US, the local police and military have been placed on high alert, all because people are worried about the gun violence and how it may motivate deranged fans to go on shooting sprees. This obviously is not what the studios or filmmakers ever intended, but it is unfortunately a sign of the times that we are living in. No one should have to fear going to the movies. The theater for many is the place for audiences to escape for two hours and forget the troubles and the horrors of the real world, and my hope is audiences will be able to do so without violent incidents.
To be fair, Joker isn’t the first film to have the spotlight thrust upon it due to its violence, nor will it be the last. A part of me even wonders if the controversy was even manufactured to create more buzz for the film. After all, scaring audiences has always been a powerful tool in marketing, when you look back at the films of William Castle and Roger Corman. For some of their films audiences would have to sign waivers to ensure the studio wouldn’t be at fault if anything were to happen to audience members while watching the film, while having ambulances parked outside the movie house. Is it a stretch to believe the studios would do this? Maybe. But is it possible, considering how the box office is underperforming, that people will attempt to create buzz for the film? And then there are the political motivations, attempting to use a film in the fight for control. So many possibilities, so much controversy, and still as I write this, the film hasn’t even been released to the masses for them to judge for themselves.
Posted in: Disc Reviews by Brent Lorentson on January 8th, 2020
When it comes to B action films, there is a threshold for what your expectations should be for the film. In the grindhouse era there were some pretty good quality action films, but as the sub-genre stretched into the 80’s and 90’s, the quality just got worse, though they’d always find some star whose celebrity was on the verge of fading. Dolph Lundgren has managed to hang in there and continue to get roles even though it’s been more than a couple decades since he last had the top billing for a Hollywood blockbuster. Personally I’ve always liked the guy; he can still be a charming badass or also play the heavy when need be for a film. Sure, he’s aged, but I can still believe he’d have no trouble kicking some onscreen ass. The one thing that the filmmakers of Acceleration got right was to cast Lundgren in their film where we get to see him play the good guy as well as the bad guy. As for the rest of the film, well, they had a good idea and a nice lineup of B-movie action stars as well as former UFC fighters, but the result falls well short of its potential.
One of the biggest mistakes this film makes is having an opening that makes little to no sense to the viewer as we are seeing Vladik (Lundgren) and Rhona (Natalie Burn) gearing up to kick some ass. The film then backpedals eight hours to where Rhona is having to go on these five mini-missions while Vladik is watches her from the privacy of a room filled with monitors; to watch Rhona, he has a camera in her car. Basically this film has no concept of three-act structure and has decided viewers don’t need to have characters set up or plot set up; they just throw us into the action. It takes a while till we learn Rhona’s son has been kidnapped, and the only way to get him back alive is to complete these five tasks in the span of eight hours. Then there is the side plot of Kane (Sean Patrick Flanery), who is the big crime boss who is trying to figure out who has stolen from him. The threads connecting all this together are thin, and despite how hard they try to make Kane seem like a menacing threat, it’s just hard to take him seriously because of his actions. An example of his menacing actions … sexual innuendo involving pie at a café where he randomly runs into Rhona … then there is a terrible scene that seems to want to recreate the tension of the Russian roulette game in The Deer Hunter. I don’t blame Flanery for this, because his performance is one of the things that saves this character, but it’s the situations the character is put into where I could never believe he was a successful crime boss.
Posted in: Disc Reviews by Michael Durr on January 7th, 2020
I think most people have had the fantasy of what a film of their life would look like through the camera lens. The high points, the low moments, and everything in between. Perhaps it would be boring (probably most of us), or just perhaps it would be brimming with excitement. Whatever the situation, we just hope that somebody else would find it interesting or at least star our favorite actor or actress. Today, we bring to you a review of an anime that tells the story of Chiyoko Fujiwara, an experienced actress, through one filmmaker Genya Tachibana's passion and the lens of his cameraman, Kyoji Ida.
We are in space where a female astronaut says her goodbyes as her crew pleads with her not to go. The countdown starts. The screen shifts back to Genya Tachibana, who is watching this presentation, which we now realize is a film staring the great Chiyoko Fujiwara. An earthquake shakes the film room where Genya is watching. It stops after a minute, and Kyoji Ida comes in and tells him that they need to go. The filmmaker gets up and starts to follow. He stops and then decides to rewind the tape he was watching. As he leaves, we watch the monitor display various moments of Chiyoko's film career. Cue credits and emotional music.
Posted in: Disc Reviews by Jeremy Butler on December 29th, 2019
It’s been a while since a film has come along that has frustrated me as much as Adopt a Highway has. The film opens up with numerous sound bites that are discussing the “three strike law” from the Clinton era. This is pretty much used to set up a bit of a back story for Russ Millings (Ethan Hawke), a “victim” of this third-strike law that resulted in him serving 21 years for possession of an ounce of weed. With this kind of opening, I’d be expecting this to be a film that would delve into the unfairness of this law and how it affected many individuals, but instead, this film had other plans. The film takes on the journey Russ takes from his last day in prison to being thrust out into the free world again, but over the course of two decades, the world is nothing like it was before. Russ is in a unique situation where he went into prison in the late 90’s, and upon his release he’s now in the digital age. Basically he’s never had an email, nor has he had the chance to discover internet porn or YouTube. There is so much potential with this character, but at the same time, while watching this, I couldn’t get past his numerous bad decisions.
The first of his many bad decisions comes when he finds a baby in the dumpster behind the fast food restaurant where he works. With the baby there is a note that reveals the babies name is Ella. Conflicted about what to do, Russ decides to take the baby to his motel room, wanting to take care of it. If he found a dog or a cat, then I can understand him wanting to take care of it, but seriously, this guy thinks he can take care of a baby? At first it’s adorable seeing him make bad decisions with taking care of the baby, but very quickly we see how fragile this baby’s life is in his hands. Just as the film seems to have its footing and we think it’s going to be about Russ and his adventures with the baby, the film takes a sideways turn. This plot change could have worked if only the following story were just as interesting, but instead it’s a bit dull by comparison, and before you know it this film is already wrapping up, and you’re wondering, “That’s it?”
Posted in: Disc Reviews by Jeremy Butler on December 21st, 2019
"The near future. A time of both hope and conflict. Humanity looks to the stars for intelligent life and the promise of progress. To the stars..."
You know a movie’s bad when Brad Pitt isn’t enough to save it. However, where Ad Astra falls down is in execution of story rather than a failure on the part of Mr. Pitt. The premise was interesting: a son follows in the footsteps of his hero astronaut father to learn that his father, who was previously believed to be dead, may be responsible for catastrophic events plaguing the Earth. There is depth to the story, and the idea of human beings colonizing other planets was shown in a truly interesting and realistic manner, but instead of this being the forefront of the film, the story focuses primarily on a emotional journey that never pans out. The film also features a cast of superstars whose performances were little more than cameos. A waste of talent, if you ask me. I mean, why put together a cast that includes Tommy Lee Jones, Donald Sutherland, Liv Tyler, and Ruth Negga, just to have their contributions be the length of a commercial. Yes, I know that was an exaggeration, but it just seems wasteful.
