Idiot Boxing: Westworld season 2 (2018); Luke Cage season 2 (2018)

Maeve is one of a few of the "women" of Westworld who flex
their new-found muscles and freedom in season 2. 

Westworld, season 2 (2018)

I have no doubt that this season probably lost a certain number of the fans that it garnered in its first season. I wasn't one of those lost, and I loved this second season.

In the final bloodbath episode of season one, we see a certain number of the Westworld park's hosts (the artificial humans) become self aware and kick off a full-scale uprising. The real ignition point is Dolores's (Evan Rachel Wood) very public execution of park co-founder and co-creator Ford (Anthony Hopkins), all of which Ford himself had very meticulously orchestrated. Along with Dolores, the host Maeve (Thandie Newton) has become self-aware and even upgraded herself to allow certain freedoms and abilities - freedoms and abilities which she plans to use to find her daughter somewhere in the vast Westworld landscape. Roaming around in all of this is William "The Man in Black" (Ed Harris), the owner of the entire park who is madly searching for some mysterious finding which Ford has teased him with for decades.

Season two follows these threads in a very measured way, with Dolores and Maeve mustering allies, and William fighting through now-deadly hosts while on his obsessive quest to beat Ford at whatever game he feels the now-dead genius had created. Unlike the first season, it soon becomes apparent within the first episode or two that we are not in a linear narrative. There are flashbacks galore, as we start to learn things about Dolores's and the park's origins that deepen the mysteries surrounding the place which ostensibly is a massive, violent Disneyworld for adults to play out their wildest fantasies. These back stories are presented in parallel with the more "modern" tale, which is a skillful technique that show creators Nolan and Joy have used to great effect. This second season is no different. While this non-linear method seems to frustrate some viewers, I've always enjoyed the puzzle being presented in such fashion, as it can be stimulating to keep an eye out for little details that serve as narrative connectors and small revelations which build into greater ones.

Akecheta. Episode 8, which sees all of the bizarre changes in
the park from his very unique and touching perspective, was
my favorite of the season.

Aside from the twisting narrative, another element which probably led to some viewer frustration had to do with the character perspectives. At this point in the story, we are mostly following the hosts. For most of the first season, especially the first five or so episodes, it was all about the human guests and the revelation of the park itself. In this season, now that all of those basics have been established, the show delves much deeper into the cerebral, speculative fiction elements which had gained steam towards first season's end. We dig into the minds and natures of Dolores and Maeve, which is interesting enough. And the Bernard host is an entire mess of conflicts all by himself. But perhaps my favorite episode was focused solely on a character who only had a few brief cameos in season one - the Native American Akecheta (played brilliantly by Zahn McClarnon). This episode spins several things on their heads, and actually provides a certain emotional depth to the hosts which I had felt was slipping away a bit, even with Maeve's heart-felt quest to find her "daughter."

The season did have what I found to be a bit of a lull around episodes four and five, which brought Maeve and her crew into the neighboring park of Samurai World. Despite having a ton of potential and offering a few interesting scenes and characters, this little part of the story felt as if it took a bit too long to work through and ultimately didn't have a great impact on the overall tale. Fortunately, this came and went by the mid-point of the season. After that, I found that everything picked up, built, and resolved itself nicely.

So another good season. Apparently, a third is on the way, though not for another 18 months or more. That's fine with me. I look forward to re-watching the entire labyrinthine story again before getting the next chapter, which looks to further expand upon what has come before.

Misty Knight and Luke, ready to bring some justice to the
streets of Harlem once again.

Luke Cage, season 2 (2018)

Like much of its Netflix MCU brethren, season two of Luke Cage suffers a bit in a few areas, but is a solid entry into the canon. This is thanks to a compelling villain and a strong finish.

Following on the heels of its first season and the subsequent Defenders mini-series, season two of Luke Cage picks up with Harlem's bulletproof protector trying to settle into his role as neighborhood celebrity. As he deals with efforts to monetize his fame, a new threat emerges, as the mysterious Jamaican John "Bushmaster" McIver arrived in Harlem with a vicious streak and a mission of vengeance against Mariah Stokes/Dillard, the dirty politician much to blame for the first season's problems. As Mariah and her right-hand man Hernan "Shades" Alavarez seek to divest from the criminal underworld, Bushmaster start to make his presence known, using rather violent tactics and his own inexplicably enhanced strength and healing abilities, to go along with immense martial arts prowess. As this deadly islander hones in on Mariah and Shades, leading to escalating bloodshed in Harlem, Luke Cage inevitably gets involved.

As with nearly every Netflix MCU show thus far, this season of Luke Cage has a solid premise, several highly workable pieces in terms of character and plot, and some excellent acting. The main weakness is that it felt like about 7 or 8 good episodes worth of material stretched out over a 13-episode season. This led to a fair amount of overly drawn out and repetitive story loops that took much too long to progress, most of them involving characters trying to suss out their identities. The two most obvious were Misty Knight and Mariah Stokes/Dillard. By episode 9 or 10, they lock in, but for nearly the entire middle section of the season, the two storylines seem to flounder in ways that are sometimes dull and sometimes inorganic or illogical. They do come around, fortunately, by season's end.

The other weakness to me was dialogue which was inconsistent, which I felt in turn affected the performances of nearly all of the primary actors at times. There are no doubt some fun and tense exchanges between the several strong and fairly dynamic characters in this series, but more than a few of the conversations felt forced or clunky at times. It seemed as if the writers occasionally started with the idea of giving certain characters their "speech" or "preach" moments, and then shoehorned them into scenes, regardless of whether it fit the context or natural speech patterns established for the character.

Arguably the best aspect of season 2 was Bushmaster as one
of the primary villains. Mustafa Shakir's portrayal of the
lethal, vengeance-obsessed Jamaican was brilliant.

Those gripes aside, I liked the season. John Colter still makes a great Cage, and the returning cast from the previous season brought everything they had, especially Alfre Woodard as Mariah. Even when I wasn't crazy about how she was being written in certain scenes, Woodard acted the hell out of each and every one of them. And Mustafa Shakir and the imposing Bushmaster was a revelation for me. The towering Harlem native radiates all of the physical strength and burning rage demanded of his vengeance-obsessed character. And as his story is revealed over the season, Shakir shows some versatility to adapt to the story's demands. It helped that he does the Jamaican accent (not an easy one to pull off at all) so well that I initially thought that he might be native to that island, and he seemed to do many of the stunts and fight sequences himself. Bushmaster ended up being one of the best and most well-rounded arch villains in any of the MCU TV shows to date.

After pointing out the pacing problems in the middle of the season, I would be remiss not to say that the final few episodes of the run saved it from being an overall tepid one. After some rather slow and meandering plotting, all of the primary and secondary storylines come together quite well at the end. I was actually quite satisfied with how nearly every major character's arc concluded and where they ended up. The one exception was that of Matilda "Tilda" Stokes/Johnson. Hers was, throughout the season, a tale that never seemed to figure out what really made her who she was. There are several moments when it seems as if she's resolved something inside of her, only to reverse course not long after, for reasons that are not always clear. Her aside, I found the final two episodes of the season highly enjoyable, and this generally speaks well of a show.

So I'm on board for another season, which I imagine will be forthcoming. I do, however, repeat a familiar refrain - Netflix really needs to figure out how to fill out a 13-episode season; something they still haven't managed to do in 5 different MCU shows, across 8 different seasons. Either that, or go with 8-episode seasons, like they did with The Defenders. 

New Release! mother! (2017)

No spoilers. Rest easy.

One of the official movie posters, which
more than hints at the visceral scenes
which you can expect in the picture.

Director: Darren Aronofsky

This movie is one trippy, nightmarish horror show of unrelenting tension. And I was fascinated.

The movie follows a young woman (Jennifer Lawrence) who is married to a middle-aged poet (Javier Bardem) who is struggling with writer's block. The woman (her name is never given, but referred to as "Mother" in the credits) leaves her husband (name also never given, credited as "Him") to seek inspiration in solitude, while she meticulously repairs and refurbishes their entire house, which is a grand old country home that apparently suffered some sort of damage in the past. A visitor arrives (Ed Harris), and he very quickly imposes on the couple. While Mother is none too pleased with the unexpected guest's intrusion, Him seems oddly welcoming to this stranger. Soon, the stranger's obnoxious wife (Michelle Pfeiffer) arrives, adding Mother's concerns. After this point, the situation steadily spirals out of control for Mother over the course of time. The entire home eventually becomes a whirlwind of bizarre and aggressive behaviors which Mother tries to reckon with.

Darren Aronofsky, who wrote and directed the movie, has shown in past films that he is more than willing to offer commentary on grand themes, while using hallucinogenic visuals to convey discomfort. He did this in his first two features, Pi and Requiem for a Dream, which dealt with paranoia and addiction, respectively. mother! does an equally commendable job building a sense of claustrophobia at the hands of encroaching guests and ever-multiplying hordes of unwanted visitors. When you add in the hallucinogenic, sometimes surrealist visions which Mother experiences, the movie certainly creates a mood. It's not likely to be a mood which pleases you, but I have to think that Aronofsky's point was to make us squirm more than a little. Mission accomplished.

Lest you think that the movie is simply about freaking out us viewers, rest assured that there is far more to it than that. Aronofsky has never been one to shy away from swinging for the fences in terms of grand themes, and mother! is no exception. It becomes clear fairly early on that we are not meant to see the characters on screen as "real" people, but rather archetypes. The character names in the credits certainly confirm this, giving credence to the idea that we are watching an allegory for several notions, some much more obvious than others. Such relatively abstract forms of film are likely to annoy or frustrate many viewers, but I found them mostly fascinating.

If you have seen the cast list, you will probably not be surprised that the acting is outstanding. Curiously, as purely cinematic as much of this movie is, there are certain elements that put me in mind of a stage play. This is something that can require a certain extra grandiosity in actors' performances, and will rarely work in films. In mother!, however, it actually works, given the allegorical nature of the tale. Enhancing the performances are the framing, camerawork, and set designs, which certainly create a memorable setting and sense of ever-increasing chaos.

One of several scenes which depict how Mother is (or at least
feels) completely out of place and sync with everything and
everyone around her, including her husband.

If one has looked at reviews for this movie, you'll notice very mixed reactions (something Aronofsky movies have inspired in the past). I think that this is for a couple of reasons. If one is able to see this movie as a piece of art, not unlike bizarre or even grotesque works by masters like Picasso or Gustave Dore, then one is likely to appreciate much of what it has to offer. If, on the other hand, one is expecting a traditional horror tale or human drama, then one is likely to be disappointed at the least and outright offended at worst. So it helps to know what you're in for here.

This is one of those movies that I can't say that I "enjoyed" but that certainly held my interest and which I found to be a quality piece of art. Some of the social commentary can come off a bit obvious or heavy-handed here and there, but I was always curious about what the next scene would bring. At times, I found it was actually predictable, but there were enough surprises and oddly vague suggestions that I remained engaged for the film's full two hours. I may never watch it again, but I was glad to catch it on the big screen. 

Gangster Flick 3-Pack: Let Him Have It (1991); Layer Cake (2004); State of Grace (1990)

Let Him Have It (1991)

Director: Peter Medak

A harrowing drama about one of the most personal tragedies in criminal and judicial history.

Let Him Have It is a documdrama about the life of Derek Bentley, a mentally inferior young man who, in London of 1953, falls in with the wrong people and pays the ultimate price. Derek is a young, impressionable 19-year-old who is lured into a small gang of wanna-be criminals made up of boys still in secondary school. The leader is Chris Craig, an especially loud-mouthed lad who works hard to look and sound like the crooks glamorized in Hollywood gangster movies. He and three of his cohorts walk around town dressed in dark trenchcoats and black fedoras, trying as hard as possible to imitate Chris's authentically criminal older brother. Derek, an otherwise gentle soul, is taken in by the strong attitude and image of Chris's gang, and he begins to sneak away from his parents' home to hang out with them.

On the most fateful of nights, Derek finds himself on a warehouse rooftop with Chris, both of them playfully looking for a way to break in. The police arrive, however, and when one of them apprehends Derek, Chris pulls a gun. As the police officer demands that Chris turn over the weapon, a frightened Derek calls out "Let him have it, Chris," which Chris misunderstands as a prompt to shoot the officer. A firefight and standoff ensue, ending with Chris injured from a long fall, one officer wounded, and another dead by Chris's hand. The real tragedy begins when Derek and Chris are brought to court, where the penalty for their crimes is execution.

The movie is a strong one, and the tragedy of the situation is palpable. Thanks to very strong acting and pacing, what could have been a depressing slog is actually a sad but compelling account. Very much in the vein of Kieslowski's 1990 film Decalogue Five: Thou Shalt Not Kill and the 1995 movie Dead Man Walking, with their the juxtaposition of illegal murder with legal execution, Let Him Have It forces viewers to think long and hard about capital punishment.

As with any film which depicts a tragedy which happened in reality, the dramatization offers a buffer which a documentary would not. However, for cases which happened longer in past, such as this one, I feel that a well-crafted and respectful docudrama is the closest we can get to truly feeling the loss the the Bentley family did at the end of this affair. Let Him Have It is not a movie which needs to be seen more than once, but once is all but mandatory.

Layer Cake (2004)

Director: Matthew Vaughn

An entertaining British gangster flick, adding depth to the Guy Ritchie brand of films which preceded and obviously influenced it.

Layer Cake tells the story of a highly intelligent, never-named drug dealer (Daniel Craig) who is on the cusp of sealing a final "big deal" in London which will allow him to retire from the sordid, dangerous world of crime. As such stories go, though, things get extremely complicated, extremely quickly.

Up to the point of the tale's beginning, "Mr. X" has been expert at keeping his head down and remaining under the radar of more powerful or more volatile criminals in his industry. However, once the wrinkles start to pop up, X must navigate lethally treacherous waters infested with British gang lords, headstrong power-grabbers, and his own conscience. Following the actions and reactions of X certainly makes for a sometimes fun, sometimes harrowing, and often violent tale.

The style and construction of the movie is quite familiar to any who have watched 1998's Lock, Stock, and Two Smoking Barrels or 2000's Snatch, the two seminal modern British gangster movies by Guy Ritchie. There's a dizzying array of shadowy, vicious characters, and more than a little gallows humor sprinkled throughout. Compared to those earlier movies, though, Layer Cake ratchets down the insanity and overt comedy in favor of taut suspense. This is carried through with great performances all around by the brilliant cast, spearheaded by a pre-James Bond Daniel Craig.

One could criticize the movie for borrowing too heavily from Ritchie's hyperspeed style of storytelling (director Matthew Vaughn was, in fact, a producer of Ritchie's films), but this was easy for me to forgive. While there is nothing of great ingenuity here in terms of subject matter or methodology, Layer Cake feels enough like its own movie not to be overly harsh with any critique. It goes deeper into the protagonist's psyche than any Ritchie film ever dared, which prevents it from being a mere clone.

State of Grace (1990)

Director: Phil Joanou

If timing is everything, then State of Grace had nothing going for it from the jump. This is a shame, as it is a great gangster movie.

I had never even heard of this movie before I came across it on a "best gangster films" list. When I saw the cast list, I was further amazed that it was never on my radar. The movie follows young undercover police officer Terry Noonan (Sean Penn), who has returned to his old neighborhood in the Irish section of New York's Hell's Kitchen. Under the guise of a drifter looking to get back into the criminal lifestyle, he reunites with old friend Mickey Flannery (Gary Oldman), and the two soon begin cracking jokes and skulls, alike. Terry's ultimate plan is to obtain incriminating evidence on Mickey's older brother, Frankie (Ed Harris), who has become the boss of the local Irish mob. However, doing the right thing as a cop becomes far more difficult for Terry as he becomes further entrenched in his old environment.

The characters, plot, acting, and general direction of State of Grace are excellent. The drama between Noonan and the Flannerys is organic and tense, with a palpable emotional depth. The story unfolds and intensifies as well as the very best crime dramas. In addition to the great actors mentioned above, several supporting roles are played expertly by great talents like Robin Wright, John C. Reilly, and John Turturro.

At this point, you many be wondering how a high-quality movie, with such an outstanding cast, is not better-known. I wondered the same thing until I discovered that State of Grace was released on September 14, 1990. For those without a photographic memory for film release dates, this is the exact same day that Goodfellas was released. Yikes. When forced to go head-to-head against one of the absolute greatest gangster movies in the history of cinema, anything less than The Godfather would pale in comparison. Such was the fate of State of Grace. It could not have helped that, by this time, Martin Scorsese was well-established as a brilliant director, so that his return to New York crime tales was bound to drown out even an outstanding effort by a relative newcomer like State of Grace director Phil Joanou. No, Joanou's movie is not as great as Goodfellas, but it is one of the best of its kind.

The commercial and historical fate of State of Grace is rather sad. However, I highly recommend the movie to anyone who loves the gangster genre.