Posted in: The Reel World by Brent Lorentson on August 7th, 2021
It doesn’t seem all that long ago that Disney/Marvel decided to fire James Gunn over a couple of tweets and Warner Brothers decided to scoop up the talented director to helm a reboot of The Suicide Squad. Personally, I feel this was the best move WB has done with their DC film projects since the Christopher Nolan Batman films. I’ll come out and say it: I haven’t been a fan of the DC cinematic universe. Wonder Woman and Shazam were decent, but they simply don’t hold up to what Marvel has been able to produce. While I’m fine with attempting to tell more mature storylines and appeal to an older audience, my biggest problem with the DC films is that they just weren’t fun (Shazam is perhaps the only exception to this). I’m not part of the “Release the Snyder cut” crowd; instead I just want to see a comic book film that can be entertaining and not take itself too seriously, and that brings me back to James Gunn. I’m a fan of Gunn. I absolutely adore what he’s done with The Guardians of the Galaxy, those are both in my top 5 of the Marvel films, because I love how he handles the group of misfit heroes. I even like Gunn’s earlier work like Super and especially Slither, his cinematic story of coming out of Troma I view as one of the best underdog stories in Hollywood and how he’s become an A-list director. The moment he signed on for The Suicide Squad I was excited. In my mind I felt this was what WB/DC and movie fans in general needed. Giving Gunn the freedom to make the film he wanted to make could seem like a risk, but I think Gunn had something to prove after being released by Disney, and the result is cinematic bliss that is the injection of gory comic book mayhem that fans have been waiting for.
While this take on The Suicide Squad does have characters and actors returning in the same roles from the previous attempt at Suicide Squad by director David Ayer, do yourself a favor and just pretend that film doesn’t exist. Heck, I even reviewed the film just about five years ago to the day, and while the film does have some fun moments, it just doesn’t hold up after further viewings, though I’d still love to see a Joker and Harley Quinn date night movie, but that’s a whole other discussion.
Posted in: The Reel World by Brent Lorentson on July 30th, 2021
Going all the way back to 2003 when Disney released The Haunted Mansion and The Pirates of the Caribbean, it seemed like the natural progression would be to release a film based on the theme parks Jungle Cruise ride. With the success of the Johnny Depp-helmed films, Disney instead elected to crank out more Pirates of the Caribbean films. Sure, the original trilogy was fun, but the two that followed were forgettable messes. Now it’s 2021, and we’ve finally gotten a Jungle Cruise film helmed by one of the biggest stars in cinema, Dwayne (don’t call me The Rock) Johnson and Emily Blunt sharing top billing credit. The trailers teased a film that was in the vein of the Indiana Jones films, something I believe could be a good thing. What was somewhat expected was the added layer of a supernatural element put into the film. While I was excited about the supporting cast and even the director that came aboard to helm the film, the one thing that bothered me was how long it’s been since I’ve actually enjoyed a live-action Disney film. With the talent involved, I felt there was plenty of opportunity for the film to be a success, but I couldn’t help but worry when I remembered the awful cinematic experience that Aladdin was. I’ll be blunt; I went in optimistic with that film because I’m a long time Guy Ritchie fan, but I really hated Aladdin. So what did I think of Jungle Cruise?
I have to admit I got excited as the film started up with the logo, and I’m hearing the melody from a Metallica song. We get an introduction to The Tears of the Moon, a mythic tree with healing capabilities that is hidden within the South American jungle. Our introduction to Emily Blunt’s character kind of threw me off. Everything seemed to point to her being a strong female lead, perhaps delivering a female version of Indiana Jones, though more concerned with biology than archeology, but the result was something rather different … Throughout the introduction of Lily Houghton (Emily Blunt), all I could think of was the character Rachel Weisz played in the Mummy films, smart but adorably clumsy and always getting into trouble by mistake. Not exactly the strong female lead I was expecting. In fact I feel this movie plays much closer to the Mummy franchise than it does with anything else. Well, Lily finds an arrowhead that is believed to help lead the way to finding The Tears of the Moon. Unfortunately Lily isn’t the only one after finding the mythic tree; a German Prince Joachim (Jesse Plemons) is also looking to acquire the tree.
Posted in: Disc Reviews by Brent Lorentson on July 30th, 2021
If it feels like you’ve been waiting a while for this film, well, you wouldn’t be wrong. Originally the plan was to release the film March 20, 2020, but this would be one of the first of many films that would be shelved due to the pandemic. There was talk about possibly releasing the film on one of the numerous streaming services out there, but thankfully it was decided to hold out till the lockdowns would end and movie theaters would open up wide across the US. It’s been a long wait for this highly anticipated sequel; was it worth it? I didn’t review the first film, but while I wasn’t exactly blown away by the film the first time around, as I’ve revisited the film I have to admit the film has grown on me, and I’d say it was my second favorite horror film released in 2018 (Sorry, Hereditary continues to knock my socks off to this day.) What sort of concerned me going into this sequel is how much would this work without Lee (John Krasinski)? Thankfully the film has Krasinski returning to work behind the camera as director again, as well as aiding in the writing of the film, but most importantly they found a way to bring his character back for the sequel. Was the film worth the wait, or should they have left this as a one-off success?
The film opens up to Day 1 of the invasion. Audiences finally get to see how everything went down when the aliens first arrived. Here we get to see the Abbott family as a happy and whole family. A good portion of this revolves around Lee and how the family manages to survive the first wave of the attack. I absolutely enjoyed this part of the film, though if you’ve seen the Steven Spielberg take on War of the Worlds, well, it will seem a bit familiar, but this definitely helps set the tone for this film. With a bigger budget we get a bigger production design as well as more aliens and more on-screen kills. One of the best aspects of the Day 1 sequence is that it definitely calls back to the first film, when the family is raiding the shop for supplies. Keep your eyes peeled for several props that find their way on screen.
Posted in: No Huddle Reviews by Gino Sassani on July 28th, 2021
"Finn Wallace. He believed in people. He believed in giving opportunities to the disadvantaged. He gave. He supported. He did so much for all of us. All of you. My father was taken from us on the streets of London. And now London will deliver to us those who took him. Finn Wallace. He's still here. He's in me."
Except that Finn Wallace was a crime lord, and he ruled the other criminal gangs in London with an iron hand. He may indeed be dead, but with Gangs Of London created by Gareth Evans, that's really just the beginning of the story. It's a complex story with only 10 episodes to deliver for a first season. Just how well are those stories told? That's also a complicated question.
Posted in: No Huddle Reviews by Gino Sassani on July 28th, 2021
"In a very real sense, we are all aliens on a strange planet. We spend most of our lives reaching out and trying to communicate. If during our whole lifetime, we could reach out and really communicate with just two people. We are all indeed very fortunate."
- Gene Roddenberry
Posted in: Disc Reviews by Brent Lorentson on July 26th, 2021
Just when you thought the Saw franchise had finally claimed its final victim in Jigsaw, Lionsgate has decided to keep the gruesome franchise going with Spiral. I know it seemed like the character of Jigsaw had finally been milked (or bled) for all its worth; what more can they do with this franchise? Honestly, when I first heard about this film, I groaned. I love horror, and I love gore, but even I was feeling the franchise had gotten a bit stale. As it turns out, there does seem to be more story to be juiced from this franchise, and I’ll say it right now, this film was the game changer the franchise needed, and it helps pave the way for plenty of pain, revenge, and justice down the road. This is a film that was long overdue to the franchise, and I’ll go so far as to say it’s perhaps my favorite film of the series since the release of the first film.
Even if you’ve never seen a Saw film before, Spiral works well as a standalone film. It’s not as though the previous films were serious think pieces, but of course if you’ve seen the previous films it will only add more to the experience. That being said, Spiral does take a different approach and plays out more like a police procedural film. If you’ve ever seen the 1995 film Seven, you’ll most likely catch many of the films homages to David Fincher’s classic. Seeing the film play out more as a crime thriller definitely opens the scope of the film, but to a degree I feel it steps up the film’s pedigree, no longer being a relatively small scale “torture porn”. Now it’s as though the franchise has matured, wanting to give the audience more than just some gore on the wall. Then there is the casting of Chris Rock and Samuel L. Jackson, two names I’m pretty sure no one would have expected to see in this franchise, but most surprising is just how good Chris Rock is in this film. It’s been a while since Chris Rock has been a name that one would call a box office draw, but this is the role that is going to change that (especially when you factor in his performance in Fargo last year). We get to see a lot of range from Rock in this role, and it makes sense why he made himself Executive Producer on the film.
Posted in: Disc Reviews by Brent Lorentson on July 25th, 2021
It continues to amaze me how well Warner Brothers does with their DC products in the television universe but manage to execute so poorly with their films. Despite being a bit formulaic, the CW DC shows are still a blast to watch but it’s the more adult oriented shows Titans, Doom Patrol and Swamp Thing that have left me most impressed. Now they have released Pennyworth for the Starz Network, despite the confidence I have in the other shows I went into this one with cautious optimism. The biggest question that bothered me was do we need another series that delves into the Batman universe? Gotham recently wrapped up, there’s a Batwoman series, Joker was only 2 years ago and a new Batman film coming next year, not to forget all the other incarnations of the Dark Knight. What had me interested though is the notion of finally getting to see Alfred Pennyworth as the former SAS officer in his prime and the chance to see how he became entangled with the Wayne family. Was the series a letdown or yet another success for the DC television universe?
The series was brought to life by Bruno Heller, a writer with experience in this universe since coming off from writing for Gotham. Now if you’re thinking you enjoyed Gotham and perhaps this is a prequel you can enjoy with the kids let me stop you for a moment and say, this one is not for the kids. This series embraces its adult content with its over the top violence, an abundance of sex, drugs and profanity that more closely resembles a Quentin Tarantino film than a comic book series, and I love it for that. Season one was a fun little romp that sets up the story of how Thomas Wayne, Martha Kane and Alfred Pennyworth all met. Season 2 delves deeper into the development of their friendships and relationships and in the process shows how Lucius Fox was brought into the fold. This is all done while a battle is taking place between London and the Raven Union which is led by Lord Harwood (Jason Flemyng) whom we met in the first season. Season two, while it does continue the story I’m a little disappointed with the direction it goes with this so much focus on a war and take over by the Raven Union, my disappointment is with how little most of it doesn’t involve Alfred at all.
Posted in: The Reel World by Jeremy Butler on July 24th, 2021
I guess you could say I have a bit of a love/hate relationship with M. Night Shyamalan movies. There are some that I really enjoy (i.e. The Sixth Sense, The Village, The Unbreakable Trilogy) and then there are those I’m just not fond of (i.e. The Last Airbender, After Earth, The Happening). When it comes to his new film, Old, I have a bit of a love/hate relationship with the film. There are several elements that I enjoyed, such as the premise, certain characters and their actors’ performances, but then in some instances the story felt underdeveloped, and certain actors were typecast. All in all, as the credits rolled I found myself with mixed feelings about what I’d just seen, and now with time to reflect, I’m still not a hundred percent sure how I feel about the film.
Let’s start with the elements that I enjoyed, such as the film’s premise. Several people get trapped on a beach where time appears to be accelerated, essentially making thirty minutes on the beach the equivalent of one year of their life. This a very intriguing undertaking that is full of suspense, as it ups the pressure to escape, as there is literally no telling which second could be your last. However, I did not feel that the severity of the situation was adequately addressed early on. The group comes to understand their situation quite quickly, but they are more wrapped up in their own personal issues than they are in figuring out a way to escape. Granted, there is a force that is preventing them from escaping, but I don’t feel that we got a good explanation as to what that force is. I feel that some time should have been devoted to that rather than all the individual storylines.
Posted in: Disc Reviews by Gino Sassani on July 23rd, 2021
"Some people have a hard time explaining rock 'n' roll. I don't think anyone can really explain rock 'n' roll. Maybe Pete Townshend, but that's okay. Rock 'n' roll is a lifestyle and a way of thinking... and it's not about money and popularity. Although, some money would be nice ... And one of these people is gonna save the world. And that means that rock 'n' roll can save the world... all of us together. And the chicks are great. But what it all comes down to is that thing. The indefinable thing when people catch something in your music."
It doesn't take much more than that little piece of dialog to understand that Cameron Crowe really gets what rock 'n' roll was once all about. If you need more proof than that, then you're in luck, because Paramount is giving you 163 minutes of proof, and for the first time in UHD Blu-ray in all the glory of 4K. Almost Famous is one of the best rock movies ever made. It's right up there with This Is Spinal Tap, but for very different reasons. The film captures that sweet spot in rock when the pioneers were still around and right before things became far more corporate. The early 1970's was the perfect moment of "the tour" and the rock star and The Cover Of The Rolling Stone. Cameron Crowe knows what all of that means, because he covered it for decades as a rock journalist. It's obvious he lived some of this stuff, if not all of it. And the hardest part was, he managed to put together just the right team of people to faithfully get it on film.
Posted in: Disc Reviews by Jeremy Butler on July 21st, 2021
"Throughout history, different cultures all over the world reference a great tournament of champions. That dragon marking, I think it's an invitation to fight for something known as Mortal Kombat."
While I do rate this adaptation of the popular video game better than its incarnations that came before it in the 90s, I still wouldn’t categorize it as a great movie. It’s a bit too short on explanation to reach that level. It starts off promising with a showdown battle between the two most popular characters of the game, played by Joe Taslim (Sub-Zero) and Hiroyuki Sanada (Scorpion). The fight is everything that I expected it to be; well-orchestrated with the right amount of bloodshed. However, as the story goes on, the quality of the storytelling takes a hit as the film takes the position that the audience is already well-versed in the backstory of the film. For me, this seemed liked the wrong approach to take, especially if you are trying to attract a younger generation to the series. We have to remember that Mortal Kombat is based off a video game series that is nearly thirty years old. Granted, it has seen much revamping over the proceeding years that has kept the series current, but even so, a voiceover explaining the backstory of the tournament would have gone a long way. We get a title card that offer some details, but it’s not enough.
On The Web
Sponsors
