The Reel World

“Of course I have issues; that’s my father.” 

When I walked out of the theater in 2014 after seeing Guardians of the Galaxy I knew I had just seen something special, and knowing a sequel was already guaranteed had me excited to see what was next for this band of misfits.  Since the release in 2014 the film hasn’t just become my favorite Marvel film; it is one of my favorite films, period.  So as photos and trailers began to trickle out, I began to wonder if Guardians of the Galaxy Vol. 2 could actually hold up to the first.  For many the first film was a surprise hit that no one saw coming, something so toe-tapping fun between the soundtrack and action scenes, but most importantly it was the chemistry of the Guardians that had won over the audiences.

One of the hardest things to pull off in a movie is the minimalist "ship in a bottle" trick. Television shows do it often to try to save money on their seasons. Most of the time it doesn’t work. There are notable exceptions. The same is true for a movie. You have to limit your running time. You have to quickly set up a small group of characters, and you can't waste any time getting to the point. Ben Wheatley hits all of the right buttons in Free Fire, and he's promising to take you on a hell of a ride without ever changing locations. It looks so simple. You figure anybody can do it...and they can. But few can do it well. The entire action in the 85-minute film could have easily been a throwaway scene in another feature film. A lesser director could have done it in almost no time at all before moving on to set up their next shot. But then you'd have something... well... lesser, wouldn't you?

The plot couldn't be any simpler. It's set in the 1970's. We aren't told this, but the styles kind of give it away. Oh, and the John Denver 8-track tape likely really gives it away. We join a group of criminals at an abandoned warehouse in the dead of the night. Introductions are made, and they proceed to close an arms deal. Things get complicated when it comes out that one of the buyers sexually assaulted the cousin of one of the sellers the night before at a bar while he was high and drunk. He got beaten, and they never expected to see each other again. Now here they are. In the blink of an eye the tense deal breaks down, and the shooting starts. It pretty much turns into the titular free fire when a third group shows up with sniper rifles. Before long everyone is shooting at everyone. It's easy to lose count of who shoots who. The cast is crawling through the debris and trying to either get the money and get out or reach a phone that starts ringing so they can call for reinforcements. But here you fight for every inch, and it's amazing how many times a person can get shot without actually dying. There is some dying; it just takes a lot of bullets.

The best way to describe this film is epic; they really don’t make films like this anymore, and leave it to Amazon Studios to present us with such an ambitious film.  At one time Brad Pitt was set to star in the film, and then the lead role was offered up to Benedict Cumberbatch. Due to his conflicting schedule with Doctor Strange, he too had to drop out. Eventually Charlie Hunnam (Crimson Peak, Sons of Anarchy) was given the role, and to be honest, I don’t think there is another actor who is more suited for the role. Percy Fawcett (Hunnam) was a loyal soldier in the British army who seemed to never get the recognition that he deserved, and frankly this is something I feel Hunnam can relate to. He’s been in some great roles over the years, but somehow he’s a guy who’s been overlooked and hasn’t quite gotten the spotlight that he deserves.  Now he is poised to explore the wilds of the South American jungle in the new film from James Gray. Does the famous explorer find his lost city?  Climb aboard, and I’ll tell you all about it. I hope you’ve had all your shots and brought some bug repellent.

In 1906 Fawcett made his first journey into the Amazonian jungle with his partner Henry Costin (Robert Pattinson) for a mission that would have them mapping the borders of the country.  It’s at a time where there is a dispute over who controls the rubber that is being found in the jungle, and Fawcett has been hired by a neutral party to settle the border lines.  To continue their journey through the jungle it requires the men, along with some guides, to journey to the end of a river, a task that is believed to be impossible due to the natives and other natural threats that prowl about in the jungle.

Family is everything to Dominic Toretto. He has said as much in Furious 7, “I don’t have friends, I have family.” Over the course of seven films, we have seen him undertake impossible task including driving a car off a plane or through a building in order to rescue or avenge a member of said family. So what would make him make him betray that very family? In The Fate of the Furious, the team will face the biggest challenge they have ever faced when they find themselves working against their very leader. The long-running film franchise continues to up the ante with the action, producing its most action-packed film to date. Every time I think that there is no way the series can top itself, they add a tank or drive off a plane. This time, they got a submarine, y’all.

When we pick up with the team, Dominic and Letty are enjoying their honeymoon in Havana, Cuba. Their bliss is cut short, when Luke Hobbs (Dwayne Johnson) has to call on Dom and his team to help him recover a stolen WMD. The heist is a success, and the team is on their way back to the rendezvous when Dom throws a curveball, stealing the weapon and disappearing. This betrayal hits everyone hard, especially Letty, who finds it impossible to believe. Adding to the shock is the return of Mr. Nobody (Kurt Russell) with a junior associate (Scott Eastwood) in tow, or Lil’ Nobody as Roman and Tej like to call him. Nobody informs the team that Dom stole the weapon at the request of Cipher (Charlize Theron) and that the two are working together.

"What have you been up to in your little zoo?"

It appears that we have been due for one of those untold stories amid the many tales of courage and bravery both fact and fiction, real and imagined, that have been told of the World War II era. There have been plenty of the battlefield hero films that include last year's exceptional Hacksaw Ridge from Mel Gibson. Then there are the quiet and unlikely heroes. These are people who did incredible things that were often unknown during the war and often even after it was all over. Schindler's List has become the gold standard for these kinds of emotional war movies. The Zookeeper's Wife is set in the mold of that kind of a film, telling essentially that very kind of tale. Here the action begins with the invasion of Poland, which was the spark that ignited a local territorial conflict into a global event. It is here at the moment of that spark we find Antonina Zabinski, played by Jessica Chastain, who used her small local zoo to save nearly 300 Jews from the Nazi extermination machine failing with only two souls during the entire war. This is that untold story which most of you will discover for the first time.

"In space no one can hear you scream"

Yes, Life is very much a knockoff on the basic premise of 1979's Alien. That's not so much of a problem for me. It's become increasingly true that there are few truly original ideas remaining, at least in Hollywood. And while it's trendy to complain that this is the unique state of affairs of our time, that isn't really true either. Alien itself was pretty much a knockoff of the 1958 classic It The Terror From Beyond Space, where a vicious life-form is a stowaway on a ship sent to rescue the lone survivor of a Martian expedition. In all three films we are treated to a claustrophobic rendition of Agatha Christi's Ten Little Indians as an alien creature picks off the confined astronauts one at a time. No, a film doesn't need to be terribly original in order to be entertaining. And Life certainly has its entertaining moments. More technologically advanced than its predecessors, the film is quite visually stunning. Unfortunately, it devolves pretty much into a slasher film in space. Instead of hapless and stoned teenagers making the kind of stupid mistakes that play into the hands of a maniacal killer, we have men and women who are supposed to represent the best and brightest planet Earth has to offer... making the kind of stupid mistakes that play into the appendages of a maniacal alien creature.

“First, there is an opportunity.  Then…there’s a betrayal.”

It’s been 20 years since the release of Trainspotting, and it’s fair to say a lot has changed in the past two decades.  I remember going out to the United Artists Mission Bell Cinemas to see Trainspotting the weekend it came out.  I was with my best friend at the time, and neither of us was old enough to buy tickets for the film, so we ended up having to sneak into the film.  We’d seen the trailers, and in a time before the internet, there just wasn’t much we could find out about it aside from reading articles in the entertainment magazines.  To this day, I remember walking out of the auditorium simply floored by the film.  Everything from the soundtrack to the visuals just hit me, and this was one of the first times I realized what creative influence a director has on the look and feel of a film.  I came out as a fan of Danny Boyle and the insane kinetic energy he puts into the look of his films.  Over the years Danny Boyle has stepped out of the independent film spotlight and become a big-league director with several other award-inning films i.e.: Slumdog Millionaire, 127 Hours, and Steve Jobs.

Daniel Clowes  is one of a handful of writers in the industry that when I see his name attached to a project I can’t help but be curious to see what he’s up to.  In 2001 he wrote Ghost World, which was based on the comic he created. It was an independent film smash, and I’d consider it a cult sensation.  Then he had Art School Confidential that had the same humor and a great cast, but it just didn’t seem to connect as well with audiences.  I love the odd little characters Clowes manages to bring to life, despite many being so over-the-top, he manages to somehow keep them grounded in reality.  So when the offer came along to review Wilson, the new film he’s written based off his graphic novel, it was an offer I couldn’t pass up.

Wilson (Woody Harrelson) is one of those guys who at some point we’ve all come across, the one who just manages to offend you by his very presence, and when he opens his mouth he manages to say the least appropriate thing.  He’s been divorced for 17 years, and his most loyal companion is his dog.  Wilson is definitely a frustrating guy who you can understand how no one could really want to be around, though when his father dies, as a member of the audience we still manage to feel some empathy with the guy.  Out of fear of dying alone, Wilson reaches out to attempt to find his ex-wife.

“Did you just slap me?”

“Yeah….weird, right?”

“Who could ever learn to love a beast?”

Although it’s not quite a tale as old as time, people around the world have been enchanted by the story of “Beauty and the Beast” for centuries. The French fairytale was first published in 1740 and has subsequently spawned everything from a classic 1946 big-screen romance to Ron Perlman. Still, the most popular iteration of this story is Disney’s beloved 1991 animated musical, which helped solidify the Mouse House’s cartoon revival and serves as the most direct inspiration for this dazzling live-action adaptation. Then again, the fact that this new version is essentially a pretty close copy of a copy takes some of the bloom off this particular rose.