The Reel World

“Just imagine...a soldier the size of an insect.”

The Marvel Cinematic Universe is now seven years into an unprecedented run of success. It's a consistent, well-oiled machine that has engendered enough goodwill to allow the company to take chances on properties that were previously considered deep cuts. (Before last summer, most people's reactions to Guardians of the Galaxy likely would've been, “Who?!”) Then again, if you believe in the idea of a “Marvel machine,” it could just as easily conjure something heavy or mechanical. As a result, the thing I enjoyed most about Ant-Man is that it felt refreshingly (and appropriately)...small.

Big blockbusters rule the summer. Sequels and reboots and remakes are demanded by a public that wants sure things. There are no sure things any more, but the big Hollywood studios try to form committees that take as much chance out of the equation as possible. But even in the middle of a summer ruled by big blockbuster, there is a school of thought that counter programming can work. You have to give the makers of Self/Less credit for releasing a non-sequel and one with such an odd title. Self/Less stars Ryan Reynolds and Ben Kingsley, which is an odd but interesting pairing. But it is an awkward pairing, and they don't share any words in the film, because they share a body. Reynolds has done this kind of thing before in the movie The Change-up with Jason Bateman. In Self/Less, Kingsley plays a billionaire who is dying. He coughs up $250,000,000 to get a new body in a process called shredding. If you have $250,000,000, you can get just about anything.

Kingsley plays New York Real Estate developer Damien Hale, who has one of the gaudiest and glitziest apartments imaginable (in the Trump Towers). He also sports a New York accent that reminded me of Dustin Hoffman. When he coughs up blood one too many times, he coughs up the money to a super-secret medical genius Albright (Matthew Goode), who provides the cutting-edge miracle cure. Damien is shuttled from New York to New Orleans where he will be killed and then reborn. He has a public death and is then smuggled to a remote warehouse where the clandestine facility is located. It gives off the vibe of being a highly illegal operation, which it is, but that's only half of it. Albright claims the replacement bodies are grown in the lab, but he's lying. These are not new bodies, but slightly used.

“A straight line…you just go, and you never…look…back.”

Well, I hope you’re ready to have everything you know about the Terminator franchise turned on its head. As a franchise known for his alternative timelines where the things we come to know are often turned around, my previous statement may sound like the usual bread and butter to you. However, I must say that I feel like the latest incarnation of the franchise, Terminator Genisys, has really outdone itself this time. As far as reboots go, this may be one of the best that I have seen in quite some time as we are introduced to a completely new cast (well, almost completely new cast) portraying characters already near and dear to our hearts.  Terminator Genisys was an action-packed experience sure to leave the audience entertained.

Me, Earl and the Dying Girl is not the perfect movie by any means, but it is pretty darn good. Sometime it is too clever for its own good, and sometimes its cleverness is what makes it good. It is a movie about a precocious high school teenager much in the tradition of Ferris Bueller's Day Off. It has an offbeat and anarchic take on the high school experience, because the titular Me is giving his point of view. As with many narrators in the tradition of literature, his opinions can be unreliable. Me shall be known from now on as Greg (played by Thomas Mann) (no relation to the famous German novelist) (which I mention because German film maker Werner Herzog is all over this film). One of the things that Greg says that can't be relied on is when he talks about the dying girl who shall be known as Rachel (Olivia Cooke). In fact, Greg tends to say lots of things that he doesn't really believe. He has accepted the role of the beaten-down loser who has figured out a way of being relatively invisible and getting along with everyone. Rachel just might screw up that master plan.

Greg's mom (Connie Britton) and Rachel's mom (Molly Shannon) think it's a great idea if Greg spends time with Rachel (since she's dying after all). Greg thinks it sucks but goes along with it anyway because he's a fairly wishy-washy guy. Rachel is suspicious right off the bat and Greg basically begs her to do this or his mom will make his life miserable. She grudgingly goes along. They become friends despite all this.

“Are you a believer in order?”

The natural order of things during the summer movie season is to be pummeled by one would-be blockbuster after another, each aiming to be louder and more extravagant than the last. So debuting A Little Chaos — a 2014 British period drama about a seemingly esoteric chapter of French faux-history — amidst all this noise is a curious decision. While the film certainly nails the “extravagant” part and largely adheres to costume drama conventions, there's just enough here to make it a thoroughly pleasing alternative to the typical multiplex fare.

The original Ted movie gave us the answer to what would happen if a beloved toy came to life. I know what you are thinking; Toy Story provided us with the same answer, except Ted went a step further and revealed what happens when the little boy and the beloved toy grow up. Ted was a hard-drinking and drug-taking movie that was beloved by many. When it came to that movie I was thoroughly satisfied, and I did not believe that it could be improved upon, so when I heard the announcement of the sequel, I had reservations. In my opinion, the sequel was clear money grab that was going to ruin all that the original accomplished. I told you that to tell you this: I stand corrected. As it turns out, there was more story to tell, and I am glad that I got to experience it.

The story picks up some years later, Ted is set to marry his girlfriend Tammy-Lynn (yes, it is the original girl from the first one, so it earns points for bringing back most of the original cast) while his best friend John (Mark Wahlberg) is recovering from his recent divorce from Laurie. Fast forward a year later. For Ted and Tammy-Lynn the honeymoon is over, and the day-to-day work of marriage has the two at each other’s throats. Looking for a way to solve their marital problems, Ted decides the two need to have a child (yeah, because that solves everything). After hilarious hijinks involving finding a sperm donor, the two opt for adoption, only to discover that their application was denied because in the eyes of the law Ted is not a real person.

I should say right up front, it seems like everyone loves this film but me. That is pretty much true of all Pixar films. They seem to be above reproach, regret and retribution. I love some Pixar films very much, but many I find to be overpraised. In the case of the new film Inside Out, it is not so much bad as disturbing. It is well made but suffers from two problems. It is not overwhelmingly profound while being somewhat bewildering. Some people might say it is a film for kids, so I should give it a pass, but I disagree. It raises many interesting questions, but it not only doesn't answer them but gives deliberately wrong answers. I need to take an extreme viewpoint here, because I honestly believe most critics are not doing their jobs. This film tries to tackle a fairly complicated subject for a kid's film and then blasts us all with a flurry of confusing concepts and an excessively frightening tidal wave of misinformation. Some bloggers are mentioning that the film bears some resemblance to the 90's sitcom Herman's Head. One could even say it might have gotten some inspiration from Woody Allen's Everything You Wanted To Know About Sex, But Were Afraid To Ask.

Inside Out is a look inside the brain of an 11-year-old girl called Reily. Her brain's central control is run by five animated characters, Joy (Amy Poehler), Sadness (Phyllis Smith), Fear (Bill Hader), Anger (Lewis Black) and Disgust (Mindy Kaling). That is a simplistic view of the brain, but the film gets way more complicated than that. It also gets confusing and mystifying.

"We need more teeth."

That's the problem with sequels, isn't it? There's always the belief that you have to go bigger and stronger than you did before. It's an ideal that is also reflected quite literally in the story of Jurassic World. You know what kills worse than dinosaurs? Expectations. It is those expectations that will turn what is a pretty solid action movie into a disappointment for so many. No doubt, Jurassic World is a fun and entertaining movie. But it's not Jurassic Park, and the truth is it never could be. If you go to this movie hoping to recapture what you felt the first time you heard the words "Welcome to Jurassic Park", it's never going to happen here. Thank God that you will always have the original. It's even out there in an impressive 3D conversion. You can watch it whenever you want. You have to approach Jurassic World as something almost totally different. If you can, there is fun to be had.

I don't enjoy writing negative reviews. It's a struggle when the film experience was joyless and then to have to go back and relive that. I also don't enjoy reading reviews by other critics that get everything completely wrong. It's even worse when almost all the critics get it wrong. Even worse than that is when I see critics dumping on a film that's actually good, but that's a story for a different day. How can I say Spy is so bad? Because I had to sit through the movie. I can get some enjoyment out of even the worst movies, and that's true here, but I would not recommend it to unsuspecting viewers. I do imagine a lot of people will enjoy the movie despite themselves if they are paying for babysitters, etc. Again, I do think every movie has some entertainment value. I will try to find it in the new movie Spy. The first good thing I can say is that Spy is a chick flick that lets chicks save the day. They don't look great doing it, but they save the day. That's one of the problems. Almost no one looks good in this film.

The film has a great cast. Melissa McCarthy is the big star, but she shares billing with Jason Statham, Jude Law, and Rose Byrne. You can also throw in sturdy supporting players like Allison Janney and Bobby Cannavale. There are plenty more, but those are the names. I will say that the person who comes off the best is Rose Byrne. She plays a super-bitch super-villain who you truly believe doesn't like anyone. She dispatches people with the unpleasant venom of someone who doesn't like the service she is receiving at a restaurant. Jason Statham has the thankless job of making fun of himself. He seems game, but he doesn't really pull it off. He gets some of the funniest material but almost flubs most of his lines with his mush-mouth delivery. Jude Law gets the part of the perfect James Bond-type spy, but you get the hint of embarrassment in his facial mannerisms like he's trying too hard to spoof the trope.

“If you call out to one of the dead, all of them can hear you.”

This lesson is very familiar to anyone who has seen either of the first two Insidious films, a pair of old-fashioned (no sex, no gore), highly-profitable chillers. Of course, a potential problem for this third installment was that the characters in these movies really should have learned that lesson by now too. The makers of Insidious: Chapter 3 smartly sidestep that issue by turning back the clock on the franchise. I just wish the rest of the film had more of that ingenuity and fewer blatant, unearned jump scares.