Moon (2009)

No Spoilers!! (Though it's an older movie, many haven't seen it, and I would hate to ruin its twists for anyone)

Director: Duncan Jones

A fairly quiet, still-underrated modern sci-fi classic featuring a brilliant performance by Sam Rockwell.

Rockwell plays the character Sam Bell, the lone worker on a moon station where he he oversees the sending off of a resource - known as helium-3 - that has helped vastly reduce Earth's reliance on other forms of energy. Sam is nearing the end of his three-year stint at the station, where he has worked in total isolation except for his computer/robot assistant GERTY (voiced by Kevin Spacey). With only a few weeks to go, however, Bell makes a discovery about the station and possibly himself that throw his entire existence into a horrifying new light.

Moon is a great example of that rare science-fiction movie that plays things simple, without sacrificing the intelligent speculation and the connections to human emotion that make for the very best of the genre. With relatively little reliance on special effects or dazzling sets (though they are perfectly crafted), this movie does what the best sci-fo movies do: plausibly imagine the impacts on a person's psyche and emotions of the advancement of science and technology. It doesn't take long to establish that Sam's job of gathering and sending of helium-3 has been an invaluable boon to mankind as a whole. But as you learn of its cost to Sam himself, some serious questions arise. Questions that one could easily apply to many of the wonderful advances in technology in recent decades and those in the decades to come.

Sam chats with GERTY, his robot assistant and a welcome
departure from the artificial intelligence units that you
may be used to in sci-fi movies.

Being a movie with a single actor inhabiting the screen for about 99% of the entire time requires a certain skill level to keep an audience engaged, and Sam Rockwell was more than up to the task. The incredibly versatile Rockwell has to display a wide range of emotions here, all without any acting partners to play off of. I imagine that this is something which not many film actors could do, and it is captivating to watch Rockwell work through the wild ride that the story sends him on.

It's also worth noting how Moon echoes certain earlier, iconic space flicks, though modifying things to satisfying degrees. The notion of the "one savior in space" is one that's at the heart of cult sci-fi classic Silent Running (a film with a good premise but, in my opinion, some awful execution). And the presence and voice of GERTY can't help but remind one of HAL in landmark sci-fi masterpiece 2001: A Space Odyssey. Again, though, GERTY is a rather welcome variation of HAL, which had long been overly mimicked to the point of unintentional parody.

My hat's really off to writer and director Duncan Jones for this one. I haven't seen any of his other movies (though I've heard that Source Code is quite good), but I'll be checking at least one of them out sooner rather than later. 

New(ish) Releases from 2019: Ad Astra and El Camino

No Spoilers for either show. Read away!!

Ad Astra (2019)

Director: James Gray

A decent enough sci-fi flick with enough to keep a person tuned it, but not inventive enough to stand out very much.

In a not-too distant future, Brad Pitt plays Roy McBride, an astronaut called upon by the government to embark on a mysterious mission to the far reaches of the Solar System. Some sort of strange energy is emanating from a location there, and it threatens to destroy the entire system. As if that weren't enough, the government believes that the person behind the imminent catastrophe is the last astronaut sent to the area, none other than McBride's own father, H. Clifford (Tommy Lee Jones), long hailed as a national hero and icon.

The movie is a solid, space-faring sci-fi flick that does the sci-fi elements better than the emotional ones. Like the very best mission-to-space flicks - I'm thinking 2001, Interstellar, and Europa Report, among others - Ad Astra maintains a cool, meditative tone throughout, especially once the story brings Roy outside of the Earth's atmosphere. The vision of director and co-writer James Gray is an engaging one that seems grounded in a very believable possible future. There is a thrilling pursuit on the Moon, and a rather striking and eerie vision of what Mars might become, which offer some nice food for thought on how humans may be interacting with the nearest celestial bodies long before the century is over. Anyone who enjoys such topics and themes is bound to appreciate these aspects of the movie. And there is the greater mystery of what, exactly, is the threat in deep space to pull one along through Roy's journey farther from home.

The more personal story about Roy and his father? Not nearly as engaging. While Pitt and Jones play their roles perfectly well, the entire relationship never feels like it is offering anything that is novel or surprising. Right from the jump, it's clear that Roy's mission is as much about finding closure with his father, long-presumed dead. I suppose one could read a certain amount of symbolism into the narrative about an absent father's ability to mysteriously have the ability to annihilate one's world, but that's a bit of a stretch. Because Roy is a rather repressed individual (not uncommon for astronauts, who need the ability to subdue and overcome their own nerves), there is a certain detachment which runs through the film. Had there been a few more moments of vulnerability sprinkled in here or there, the film may have had a bit more emotional impact. As it was, though, there was only so much pathos to be found.

If you're like me, and enjoy good space-faring movies for their ability to inspire awe at the cosmos, then Ad Astra can give you that. If you're looking for the more human drama elements, though, this one may leave you wanting.

El Camino (2019)

Director: Vince Gilligan

Compelling, entertaining, and satisfying sequel movie to the brilliant Breaking Bad TV show, which ended its outstanding run in 2013.

The sixty-odd episode run of Breaking Bad represented one of the very best TV shows of all time, created and run by Vince Gilligan. It saw the rise and eventual fall of high school chemistry teacher-turned-drug kingpin, Walter White, who used his genius for chemistry to concoct the most potent formula for crystal meth ever known. White, who had been diagnosed with terminal cancer, took this bizarre career shift in an effort to quickly earn enough money to support his family after his impending death. The problem was that, once White got a taste for the money and nefarious reputation which his recipe brought him, he found that he liked it. So much, in fact, that it sent him spiraling down darker and darker paths in order to maintain and grow his place in the drug-peddling world. By the end of the show's run, White had destroyed or alienated everything which he had once held dear; and although he found some measure of penance and rectification, he still died a tragic and lonely death.

White's partner through nearly his entire journey was Jesse Pinkman, a confused former student of his who had been dabbling lightly in the drug trade during his few years removed from high school. Pinkman, played brilliantly by Aaron Paul, while likable and funny in many ways, was always a lost soul, never knowing exactly who he was or what he wanted from life. As such, he was ripe to be pulled into the dark gravity of Walter White's drive and obsession. As White's decisions grew grimmer and more self-serving as the show progressed, Jesse felt more and more tied to him, despite his pangs of conscience and general reluctance to get so deeply involved in such dastardly deeds. In the show's finale, the last image we see of Jesse is him driving away from a white supremacist compound, where he had been brutally imprisoned and forced to cook meth for them for six straight months.

This is where El Camino picks up the story. In the hours immediately after the fiery end of Walter White, in which he freed Jesse, gunned down and killed all of his tormentors, and then died himself, Jesse has to elude the police as they look to put the pieces together of the entire bloodbath at the compound. A beaten and traumatized Jesse must seek out any friendly faces and places of sanctuary that he can, in an effort to not only escape capture and certain imprisonment, but also to truly decide who he is and what he wants to do with the rest of his life, should he even have one.

The movie is every bit as good as Breaking Bad was, even if it doesn't have the power of some of that show's most memorable moments (think Walter's showdown with Tuco or Gus Fring's death). El Camino certainly has a few great thriller sequences, with some fun twists of their own, but a two-hour movie is never going to be able to have the build-up necessary for the explosive moments that a longer-form TV show can offer. This movie does, however, make the most of its time, balancing Jesse's soul-searching and recovery from a horrific situation with the more cat-and-mouse elements that come from his scrambling away from his pursuers and towards an uncertain future.

Jesse, after cleaning himself up a bit, during one of several
moments of desperation. Viewers of Breaking Bad may
recognize the blurred outlines in the back of Skinny Pete and
Badger, two of several familiar faces who appear in the film.

The show is split roughly in half, with the tale alternating between the roughly 48-hours immediately after Jesse's escape and a series of flashbacks, some going way back into Breaking Bad's first season, when he and Walter White were just getting into the meth-cooking business together. We get to see scenes and moments never revealed during the original show, and they all make maximum use of the many open areas in the story, adding extra shading to certain familiar characters, some friendly and others downright evil. It all makes a great follow-up and addendum to the entire story.

I can't say enough about Aaron Paul as Jesse Pinkman. This film requires nearly every bit of the immense acting chops and range that he showed during Breaking Bad, and he seemed able to get right back into the character's head, despite having been away from it for a good six years. He exhibits, by turns, all of the terror, misplaced swagger, soul, and humor that he did at various points during the original story. Though Breaking Bad was mostly the story of Walter White, Jesse Pinkman was the soul and often the tragedy of the tale. Aaron Paul's ability to play the character with just the right type of vulnerability at just the right times is what elevated the show well above other drama/suspense/thriller fare.

Obviously, I can't recommend this movie highly enough for fans of Breaking Bad. If you haven't seen the show, then the movie won't make much sense to you. In fact, you should stay well away if you haven't watched the original show. It will mostly baffle. But feel free to use this as yet another endorsement from me to go ahead and start watching Breaking Bad. I've watched the entire series twice now, with a likely third time coming at some point in the future. It's brilliant, and El Camino only further enhanced the entire amazing show. Now, we just have to wait for the next season of Better Call Saul for more stories from this incredible tale that Vince Gilligan has created. 

Retro Reviews: Predator series Part II: AVP: Aliens vs. Predator (2004); Aliens vs. Predator: Requiem (2007); Predators (2010)

After the relative commercial failure of Predator 2, a decent movie but a letdown from the classic original, the film franchise went dormant for some time. To get Predator (and Alien) movie stories, one had to get the comic books released through independent publishers Dark Horse. Though both the Predator and Alien movie franchises cooled off/died off through the 1990s, Dark Horse continued to publish very popular stories, including the mini-series Aliens vs. Predator in 1990. This was the premise that filmmakers decided to use well over a decade later, when they decided to resurrect not just one but both film series:

AVP: Alien vs. Predator (2004)

Director: Paul W.S. Anderson

I watched this movie for the first time not long ago, and did a longer review of it here. For this reason, I'll keep this summary short.

AVP was a decent romp, and more entertaining that I had actually expected. I didn't bother with it when it came out because the concept just seemed too contrived for a movie, and the reviews were generally quite poor. Over the succeeding year, though, I had more than one friend tell me that it wasn't all that bad. So last year, I gave it a shot, and found my friends to be correct: AVP is hardly a great movie, but it isn't bad, either. The acting is shaky here and there, and the writing and dialogue are average, at best. But the underlying premise is intriguing enough, and the setting of an underground, labyrinthine gauntlet is fun enough to hold one's attention. For one viewing, anyway. I'll never feel the need to go back and watch this movie again, but I didn't feel like I had wasted my time seeing it the once.

Aliens vs. Predator: Requiem (2007)

Director: The Brothers Strause (Colin and Greg)

Despite being told by everyone I know whose seen this movie that it's terrible, the compulsive part of me took over and demanded that I watch this entry into the Predator series, for the sake of this post and obsessive completionism.

It was pretty much just as awful as my friends and the critics had told me.

The starting premise of the film actually isn't terrible. As teased at the end of AVP, on a "predator" spacecraft outside of earth's orbit, a xenomorph face-hugger gets lose, then attacks and implants an egg inside of a "Predator" alien, creating a "predator xenomorph." This frightening hybrid kills the few other predators on the ship, gathers a number of other face-hugger aliens, takes an escape pod and heads for earth. It soon crashes in a sleepy little Colorado town. Meanwhile, the news of the death of the several predators on the original ship reaches their home planet, where another intimidating predator gathers his weapons and head towards earth to find and kill the creature that laid waste to its comrades.

It's not a terrible setup. The problem is that the positives for the movie end there. Once the action gets to earth, almost nothing about the movie holds together or is enjoyable to watch. Very quickly, we see just how far the writers are willing to go to disturb us, as a father and his 10-year-old son are attacked by face-huggers and we see new aliens punch their way out of these victims' chest. Later in the movie, we see the same things happen to a bunch of pregnant women in a maternity ward. I understand that there has always been a horror element to the Alien movies, but these scenes were grotesque to the point of being completely revolting, not unlike things I've seen in the disposable Species films.

This is about as bright and clear as any of the action scenes
get in this movie. Trying to determine just what the hell was
going on in these sequences was a true exercise in frustration.

Then there was the pacing and the human stories, which seemed as if they had no idea whatsoever where to go. The movie hints and two or three stories about some of the human characters, but never develops any of them remotely well enough for us to care about them. The one that gets furthest along is a high school teenage drama between a couple of 17-year-olds, but the girl gets brutally murdered by an Alien about two-thirds into the movie. One of the characters is a soldier returning home (we never learn from where), and the actress actually seemed believably tough, but we never get to see her actually do much of anything. And then there's the ending of the movie, which I'll get to shortly, that makes the utter lack of character and story development all the more baffling.

But by far the most frustrating thing about this movie is the visuals. Bluntly, the action scenes were among the very worst I've ever seen in a decently budgeted movie. The budget is reported as $40 million. For comparison, James Cameron's high-octane action/sci-fi classic Aliens worked with a budget which, adjusted for inflation, is still less than the budget of AVP: Requiem. The fight choreography may have been really good, but no viewer would ever know because the framing, editing and lighting are so awful. During the movie's many fight scenes between xenomorph, predator, predator xenomorph, and humans, I quite honestly could not tell what the hell was going on most of the time (and I was watching it in my completely dark living room, on a 48" HD TV). It was impossible to get any sense of perspective or movement, making the fight scenes increasingly infuriating as the movie went along. It's generally not good when a movie titled "Aliens vs. Predator" doesn't allow the viewers to clearly see the aliens versus the predator.

And then there was the final insult that is the movie's end. By the middle of the movie, the local sheriff has had the good sense to call in the National Guard. The people who show up, though, are obviously some shady branch of the U.S. military. Instead of leading the surviving townspeople to a safe zone to be rescued, they direct them into the center of town and literally drop a nuke on the entire place. I suppose we're meant to assume that this was to contain the alien threat? OK, but then why does that same branch allow the four survivors who make it out to live, covering them with blankets and caring for them? The nuke renders the entire predator versus alien fight a completely moot point, and allowing survivors renders the nuke pointless. Pure idiocy, in terms of writing. At least the nuking serves as a fitting, though accidental, analogy for what this film did to the entire "Aliens vs. Predator" film series.

The funny thing is that, as bad as this movie was, it made over $120 million worldwide. I am surprised but very glad they didn't bother with another "AVP" film, if this was the best followup they could muster. Instead, they mercifully ditched the crossover idea, went back to focusing solely on the predator aliens, and dug out a script and idea that had been in their bins for 15 years:

Predators (2010)

Director: Nimrod Antal

A fellow Predator devotee and close friend and I saw this one in the theater back in 2010. We were not pleased. Still, it had been a good eight years since seeing it, I wanted a fresh viewing for this post, and I was guessing that following AVP: Requiem would only reflect well on this one.

Ever-more self-indulgent film writer and director Robert Rodriguez had apparently written a script for a sequel to the original two Predator movies back in 1994, while he was still a rising underdog star in the independent film world. After the critical lambasting that AVP: Requiem received (though it was rather profitable), the studio decided to get somewhat back to basics, dig up Rodriguez's script, and allow him to produce a reworking of his vision.

Now that I've rewatched it very shortly after watching AVP: Requiem, it's pretty clear that the movie's greatest asset was following that absolutely horrendous entry into the series. Predators is not a particularly good film, but it is certainly far better than Requiem.

This movies starts with a mercenary, played by Adrian Brody, falling out of the sky. His automated parachute opens, he lands, and soon finds other strangers who've had the same thing happen to them. These seven people - each one a person steeped in violence in some way - have been shanghaied from Earth and brought to a planet used as a hunting game preserve for the predator aliens. The humans, who start getting picked off one at a time, must figure out how to survive and possibly get off the planet.

Like every other Predator movie, even the wretched Requiem, the premise is decent. Changing the setting to another planet is novel, and it offered a chance to include some fun, science-fiction elements regarding life on other planets. The problem is that the writers never took the opportunity to really explore these aspects. It was just one of several missed opportunities in this movie. Another was the chance to show or at least dig a bit deeper into a few of the characters' backstories. The movie never does, so it's difficult to care much about any of them. This doesn't even take into account how certain questions can't be answered, such as how the predator aliens know these characters' stories and that they're all such accomplished killers. This is an especially difficult question to answer in the cases of the two psychopath murderers played by Walton Goggins and Topher Grace.

The basic idea behind the diverse cast was a decent one, but
there were a few illogical inclusions, such as the characters
played by Topher Grace and Walton Goggins.

Speaking of the characters, I will say that the casting of this movie was mostly strong, with the glaring exception of the lead - Adrian Brody. Brody is obviously an excellent actor, but he simply doesn't come anywhere close to looking the part of an action movie hero. Given just how much Predators tries to echo the original movie it was ill-advised to fill in the role played by Arnold Schwarzenegger with a thinly-built, slightly goofy-looking Englishman who put on a bit of muscle and a gruff, tough voice. That aside, the rest of the crew is great. Unfortunately, the script never rose above "OK," and was fairly humorless.

The most frustrating thing about Predators, though, is how it simply couldn't help itself in deferring (i.e. "out of ideas") to the original Predator movie. I'm always fine with a sequel giving one or two fun little tips of the cap to a classic original movie. Predators, though, goes way over the line between "homage" and "unoriginal." I counted no fewer than thirteen separate things that this movie copied straight from John McTiernan's classic film. These included props like Blaine's gatling gun to character designs like the Sierra Leonean being a facsimile of Billy to direct dialogue like, "Over here. Turn around," "What the fuck are you?" and "I'm here! Kill me!!" And there are plenty of others. When you add all of this to the familiar setting of the jungle and the general premise of a group of soldiers, then you basically get a movie that clearly felt that it couldn't be better than the original, so it just changed a few elements but told the same story with way too many of the same details.

I must say, though, that the movie was the best-looking one since Predator 2. While I do feel that it great too dark too soon (the second half of the movie all takes place at night), the cinematographers did well all of the things that Requiem did poorly. I was actually amaze to discover that the two movies had exactly the same budget. When you factor in that they were made only three years apart, it's a testament to what a difference a skilled visual crew can make for a movie.


The Predator film franchise Final Rankings

Now that I've seen all six films in the franchise, here are my final rankings, along with a very brief summary thought on each:

1. Predator (1987): A masterpiece of sci-fi action that will never get old. 
2. Predator 2 (1990): A major dropoff from the 1st, but a decent flick.
3. The Predator (2018): A messy, mediocre movie somewhat redeemed by fun dialogue, a solid ensemble cast, and some decent action.
4. Predators (2010): Another OK effort that suffers from a weak third act and riding the original movie's coattails way too hard. 
5. AVP: Aliens vs. Predator (2004): Not without its fun elements, but still an inferior movie. 
6. Aliens vs. Predator: Requiem (2007): Two workable ideas turned into cinematic garbage that only the most obsessive fans of the franchise could remotely enjoy. 

Retro Reviews: Predator series Part I: Predator (1987) and Predator 2 (1990)

Having recently seen Shane Black's newest entry into the Predator film series, I had the urge to go back and watch (or rewatch) a few of the earlier movies which I hadn't seen in a number of years. This year's The Predator marks the sixth movie in the series, and I'd seen all but one of the previous five with varying degrees of recency. Without further ado:

This is the actual poster that I had on
my bedroom wall as a kid.

Predator (1987)

Director: John McTiernan

I didn't need to bother going out of my way to rewatch the original movie, as I watch it every couple of years or so. This keeps it rather fresh in my mind, even aside from the fact that my Predator-loving friends and I have been quoting the movie for a couple of decades now.

For those who have somehow never seen it, the brief summary is that a rescue team of special forces soldiers, led by Dutch (Arnold Schwarzenegger), go into the Central American jungle on what is supposed to be a rescue mission. After the mission goes south, Dutch and his team start to be brutally killed, one-by-one, by some mysterious, unseen being. The being turns out to be an extra-terrestrial hunter that pursues the most challenging "game" on this planet. Dutch and his crew try to survive, with all but Dutch and a local freedom fighter, Anna, being slain by "the Predator."

This movie is, quite simply, a masterpiece of action film-making. It was the first major film by action movie directing legend John McTiernan (Die Hard, The Hunt for Red October), and this was the movie that got him larger budgets for his later films. With a relatively paltry budget of $15 million, he transported viewers into a Central American jungle to follow Schwarzenegger's small platoon of completely badasses, as they are ruthlessly hunted by a mysterious killer using impossibly advanced technology. The story is relatively simple, but the characters are great, the pacing and dialogue are perfect, and the action and tension are top-notch. I have to assume that it was the quality of this film that urged movie studios to throw far greater sums at McTiernan for his next movie - the following year's iconic Die Hard, another absolute masterpiece of action cinema.

Back to Predator. It's not often that a movie gets made that is so much of its own time yet is timelessly enjoyable. The great noir cinema of the '40s and '50s comes to mind, as do several other films. Predator is one of those. A friend of mine once brilliantly described the movie as "Beowulf told through the lens of Reagan-era America," which I found astoundingly fitting. Like so many things in the 1980s, this movie was about undiluted machismo. You have several famously muscle-bound dudes: Arnie. Carl "Apollo Creed" Weathers. Jesse "The Body" Ventura. And several other obvious tough guys, most of whom were military veterans. This resulted in a very organic, humorous Alpha-male chemistry between everyone in the platoon. Without authentic soldiers playing these roles, it's easy to imagine how this movie could have fallen very flat. A strong argument can also be made that Schwarzenegger - never known as being a particularly great actor - was at his acting best in this movie. No, the role didn't demand much, but it fit Arnie like a glove, and he nailed it to a tee.

Two more of the obvious strengths of the film are the narrative pace and dialogPredator have tried to work in a fraction of this movie's great lines and flawless deliveries, and nearly all have failed.

Dutch and his men. They look like serious badasses probably
because nearly all of them were in real life. Even beyond the
muscles and hard stares, though, each character quickly
displays some charisma, making many of the deaths
meaningful to us viewers.

ue. The movie does spend a little time setting up the "rescue mission" story, but it's barely five minutes before we're with the guys on a chopper, listening to "Long Tall Sally" blasting over the radio and Hawkins fire off one of his crass jokes, and getting to love the entire squad through their busting of each others' balls. The movie is then off and truly running, with the slower, tenser moments bridged to the explosive action sequences through a highly memorable and quotable script, compliments of the punch-up writing of Shane Black, who plays Hawkins in the film. Countless action movies before and since

One last observation about this movie - the ending. I think it's often a somewhat overlooked piece of genius. Whereas so many lesser action/horror movies follow the trope of ending the movie with the surviving hero firing off a one-liner, or the movie leaving us viewers with an obvious teaser for a potential sequel, Predator doesn't do that. The final shots of this movie are of Dutch being carried off in a rescue helicopter, staring into the distance as the reality of his men's deaths sets in. No more pithy one-liners. No hints of further "Predators" arising to seek revenge. Just the haunted stare of an elite soldier who has survived a horrific ordeal - one which has taken the lives of every one of his closest brothers-in-arms. It's rare that such an overtly "action" movie chooses to end on such an effectively somber note, but Predator pulls it off.

There is a very good reason that this single film spawned so many other stories, mainly in movies and comic books. In terms of the films, none of the five succeeding ones has come anywhere close to matching the muscled-up magic of the original.

Predator 2 (1990)

Director: Stephen Hopkins

A sequel that was rather disappointing when it was released, given how very different it was from its predecessor. It is one, however, that holds up fairly well.

Predator 2 completely shifted the setting from a tropical rainforest to a blisteringly hot Los Angeles in which a wildly violent gang war is taking place. This was the first jarring shift away from the memorably primitive setting of the original movie. Another is that, while a sequel, not a single character and only one brief reference is made to the horrors which Dutch and his men suffered in Predator. And the final large difference is simply the complexity of the plot, which includes more than the simple survival tale of the original film. Here you have a Dirty Harry-like cop, Mike Harrigan (Danny Glover), who catches the eye of a new "Predator" alien. The Predator, for whatever reason, decides to toy with Harrigan by following him around and gradually killing of members of his squad. Hovering around all of this is a shadowy government group who is interested in trapping the Predator, in order to study it and its amazingly advanced weapons technology.

While it never really comes close to the overall quality of the original, Predator 2 is a decent follow-up and a solid enough action movie. I admire the film-makers' willingness to completely change settings, and it was fun to dig a bit deeper into the culture of the Predator species. While the drug war plotline never gets terribly interesting, it serves well enough as a hotbed of action in which the Predator and Harrigan can play their cat-and-mouse game. The cast it also strong. Although Maria Conchita Alonso can overact and over-inflect quite a bit, Ruben Blades, Gary Busey, and Bill Paxton are all great. There are a few moments when the tone is just a tad off - basically when anyone not named Bill Paxton tries to be funny - but this was a decent entry into the series.

Though never noted as an "action star," per se, Danny Glover
actually plays the part of hard-charging super-cop Mike
Harrigan fairly well. His epic chase-down of the hunter
alien packs a solid amount of intensity to it.

I feel that one thing that weakens this movie is that a fair bit of the violence is purely gratuitous. Namely, some of the gang violence, especially the scene in which Jamaican gang members string up a rival and mercilessly thrust a massive knife into his chest. This scene also includes one of several clumsy attempts to emulate the memorable one-liners from the original film. The knife-wielding Jamaican in this scene, for no clear reason, utters the line, "Shit happens," with his thick accent. This becomes a line that the Predator alien utters later, much the same way that the alien utters "What the hell are you?" in the original movie. These were just two of several moments which seemed to be going for a little more shock value or "cool" factor than the original movie, which achieved its strength and coolness in a nearly effortless and organic manner. When Predator 2 tries, it comes off as cheap B-movie fare.

I wasn't able to find a final budget for this movie, but it made notably less that the original. This is why, I assume, the series was put to sleep for well over a decade.

New-ish Releases (no spoilers): Brawl in Cell Block 99 (2017); Ready Player One (2018)

*both reviews are spoiler-free - read away!! 

Brawl in Cell Block 99

Director: S. Craig Zahler

It speaks well for a movie when you put it on late at night, only intending to watch about 30 minutes of it, only to find yourself still up at nearly 2:00 AM, having been gripped for two full hours. Such was the case with Brawl in Cell Block 99.

Vince Vaughan plays against type here, as Bradley Thomas, a hard-working blue collar guy who has a run of some bad luck. He's already having some marital problems, and then he loses his job. He and his wife decide to regroup and try to have a baby, but in order to have the money, they also agree that Bradley will return to his old job of running drugs. When one particularly risky job goes very wrong, Bradley ends up in prison. On top of this, his now-pregnant wife is taken hostage and Bradley is told that the lives of his wife and unborn baby depend on his getting into a different, maximum security prison, and killing another inmate there, all at the behest of some supremely vicious gangsters.

This movie is gritty, brutal, and it uses the slow-burn approach to near-perfection. But where this approach is often used to describe the pacing and rhythm of the plot unfolding, in Brawl in Cell Block 99, it's more about the shift in tone and setting. The first 20 or so minutes of the movie take place in the middle of several bright, sunny days. But as things start to go south, actions take place more at night. Once Bradley is in prison, things continue to darken and constrict, until he is in virtual hell, with the visuals to match this descent every step of the way. The sense of Bradley being a man being slowly and horribly boxed in is palpable, thanks to strong performances and a cohesive visual style.

And the violence? Oh boy. What is only revealed in infrequent, relatively tame moments early in the picture devolve into full-on B-movie, grind-house gore by movie's end. Bradley is a supremely tough human being - a former boxer who knows how to handle himself, as well as keep his considerable anger in check. In an early scene, when he has very good reason to be enraged, he uses his bare hands to do a few thousand dollars' worth of damage to an innocent Dodge in his driveway. As situations grow more dire and intense around him, though, blood starts to spill and bones start to break. And the camera does not flinch in these moments. The final few sequences become an all-out, revenge fantasy gore-fest that would be much more disturbing if it weren't so completely over the top.

As brutal as it is, I was riveted by this movie. Vince Vaughan is actually quite good as this ultra-dark version of Cool Hand Luke. Sure, this southern accent slips a bit here and there, but he has Bradley's attitude down pat. And all the villains, who are pure evil, are played to perfection by faces both unknown and known, including Don Johnson and Udo Kier. Often, one-dimensional villains can be boring, but Zahler knows that they can work in a very straightforward, violent fantasy story such as this.

I now plan to go back and see some of Zahler's earlier work, especially Bone Tomahawk, which I'm told is arguably better and just as gory as Brawl in Cell Block 99. Fans who don't flinch from dark themes and violence that crescendos to cartoon-like levels by film's end should give this one a shot.

Ready Player One (2018)

Director: Steven Spielberg

Really disappointing. If it weren't drawing a few worthy elements from its source material, this would have even been a bad movie.

After recommendations from several fellow video game nerd friends, I finally read Ernest Cline's popular 2011 pop sci-fi novel Ready Player One. It's a fun read, despite not being particularly deep or intellectually engaging. Rather, it's a genuine love letter novel by a Generation X devotee to the popular video games, fantasy, and science-fiction entertainment that he grew up with in the 1980s. The premise is clever and intelligent enough to carry the heavily plot-driven story and make for a real page-turner. Though not a particularly fast reader, I plowed through the 370-page book in a few days, thanks to a compelling tale and the endless pop culture references. I know never to expect a movie adaptation to be as good as a decent novel, but this film fell woefully short of its potential.

The story takes place in the early 2040s, when the world is fully immersed in a decades-long degradation into the overpopulated, ever-more dystopian future that we in the 2010s are currently fearing. One of the few universally-shared pleasures of humanity in this future is the open-access virtual online world, The OASIS, which was created by a genius game designer in the 2030s and quickly became an escape for a stunning percentage of humanity. The designer, the reclusive James Halliday, left a tantalizing contest embedded within the OASIS upon his death in the late 2030s - an "Easter egg," or hidden prize - which will grant its finder complete ownership of the OASIS, which is worth hundreds of billions of dollars. One young egg hunter, or "gunter" as they're called, is Wade Watts, an 18-year old kid stuck in a particularly impoverished area in Ohio. Wade and a few fellow dedicated gunters begin to find a few of Halliday's well-hidden clues and beat some of his tremendously difficult challenges to get closer to The Egg. Unfortunately, The Egg is also being hotly pursued by the corporation IOI and its CEO, Nolan Sorrento. The ever-expanding and profit-oriented IOI wants to take over the OASIS and monetize every last scrap of it.

The film itself, in short, was too fast and way too much flash over substance. Let me be very clear here - I love video games. I think that Ernest Cline, who also helped co-write the adapted screenplay, along with Zak Penn, and I would have plenty of common interests to geek out over. It's part of the reason I enjoyed the novel. But the novel is paced very well, allowing the story to breathe a bit between the more thrilling segments. It allows the hunt for the keys and eggs to take on great significance, as Wade, the other gunters, and IOI's brain trust wrack their brains trying to puzzle out Halliday's riddles over the course of weeks and sometimes months. In the film, though, the keys and eggs are all found within a matter of a couple of days. There's barely enough time to see the importance of anything before you're being whipped around a bunch of hyper-kinetic, pure CGI landscapes crammed with dozens and sometimes hundreds of characters. Even the handful of "main" characters - Wade and four other top gunters - get almost no time to make much of an impression. We learn only so much about their backgrounds or motivations, and even these are glossed over so quickly that they have little to no time to inspire much sympathy. While Cline's novel isn't overly adept at creating deep and genuine characters, they were at least fleshed out enough that I cared about their relationships with each other a bit.

The CGI is about a s good as it gets, which only serves to
illustrate how even the best computer effects can't compensate
for a story that lacks proper rhythm and depth.

This is yet another in an ever-growing list of movies that I feel would have been better done as a multi-film series or a longer-form TV mini-series. I can only guess at why the movie studio didn't opt for this, despite having the rights to an immensely popular novel that geeks like me will gladly pay to see adapted well over multiple films, as well as Steven Spielberg's immense clout and vast financial resources. Maybe they were afraid to commit? Maybe Cline and his co-writer Zak Penn (whose stories I find to be much better than his scripts) thought they could effectively cram it all into one movie? Whatever the reason, the film suffers greatly for it, while it is very easy to imagine a 3-film trilogy or 8- to 10-episode TV series being able to tell Cline's story extremely well. I will concede that a few of Cline and Penn's ideas to streamline certain plot points work just fine, but these are vastly overwhelmed by the lack of the measured pace the tale demanded.

I was actually even more surprised that Steven Spielberg was in the director's chair for what I found to be a clumsy effort. Yes, the visuals are stunning, as you would expect from a director with his eye and cutting-edge visual film techniques at his command. But I expect far better story-telling from Spielberg. Even beyond how incredibly rushed everything is, there are so many hackneyed and cheesy elements that I was rolling my eyes and wincing by the third act.

This is ultimately a movie that I think is a missed opportunity. Many tantalizing ingredients were there, but the chefs rushed it and ended up with a dish that felt under-cooked and unsatisfying. 

New Release! Upgrade (2018) [Spoiler-Free First Section]

Spoiler-Free Section. Read Away!!

Director: Leigh Wannell

Really glad I got a chance to see this one in the theater before it quietly vanished into the world of on-demand and at-home rentals. This was a fun, ripping sci-fi action yarn that actually had one or two nice little tricks up its sleeve.

Written and directed by Australian director Leigh Wannell, best known for horror films such as Saw and Insidious, Upgrade is a fairly striking departure. Taking place in a not-too-distant future where technology has become a part of underground bio-enhancements and weaponization, we follow Grey Trace, a self-professed "low tech" man who prefers rebuilding his 20th-century muscle cars with his bare hands, rather than rely on the conveniences of the hyper-smart technology found all around him. When a serious of unfortunate events finds Grey in possession of a cutting-edge tech implant called STEM, his entire existence starts being flung back and forth between his own mission of revenge and a larger, more mysterious conspiracy at work. As the dangers around Grey increase exponentially, the STEM implant continues to reveal shocking abilities that both thrill and terrify its owner, Grey.

My viewing experience of this movie was of the variety which are my favorite - knowing very little about a film, thus having almost no expectations, and being wonderfully entertained. No, it's not a mind-blowing, heady sci-fi classic on the Blade Runner scale, or even more modern greats like Ex Machina. Still, it taps into our culture's concerns about artificial intelligence and whips it into a movie that is plenty of fun for much of its length. And when the fun takes a dark "cautionary tale" turn, it gets even better.

The aesthetic of the movie goes for something akin to a slightly grittier, more cosmopolitan version of something in a sci-fi flick like the outstanding Looper from a few years ago - mostly familiar settings and technology, jazzed up in urban areas by dazzling incorporation of near-futuristic architecture and decoration. But just as much of the real action takes place in neighborhoods, bars, and rundown apartment complexes that would be right at home in the late-20th and early-21st centuries (Upgrade seems to take place sometime in the mid-21st century). It all lends a welcome verisimilitude to a genre that often goes overboard with hyper-polished facades and CGI.

One of the few truly tranquil moments in the film. After this
early basking in the open air and sun, things get dark and
gritty in a hurry.

The action itself is often thrilling, entertaining, and highly kinetic. Utilizing a few different camera techniques, blessedly avoiding slow-motion, and calling for some really frenetic fight choreography, the movie taps into the "John Wick" type of action that I prefer to either the aforementioned slow-motion or the Paul Greengrass "shaky cam" style. Instead, director Wannell makes sure that we can see exactly what's going on, in real-time, presented at a riveting pace. There are a few pretty graphic deaths, but I never felt that it approached grotesque levels of gore - something which I don't particularly care for.

This was a thoroughly enjoyable movie that will have me checking to see what Leigh Wannell does in the future. While his preceding horror movies didn't grab me in any particular way, I'll be looking to see if he does anything as good as Upgrade in the action or sci-fi genres in the years to come.

Additional Thoughts After Another Viewing (July, 2020)

Just watched this one again, and it's still great. The efficiency of this film is amazing. It so quickly establishing everything it needs to, and it goes through several very distinct passages, without ever feeling terribly rushed. I'll continue going back and watching this one every few years.

Spoiler Section! You've Been Warned!!!

Just a few things on the details in the movie.

The "twist" of having Eron be behind Grey's paralysis and his wife's death was easy to see coming from a mile away. What I didn't see coming was that it was actually STEM behind it all. While this plotline has a bit of trouble holding up under very close scrutiny (how exactly did it coerce its own creator into doing its bidding over and over, etc.?), it manages to hold up just well enough not to scuttle the whole thing.

And STEM ultimately winning was a very dark twist that I really did not expect. The general tone for the movie up until the final ten or so minutes had been a tad more playful. Yes, the assault on Grey and his wife was pretty brutal, and the pain of his struggle with quadriplegia was palpable; but once he acquires STEM, the movie felt much more like a rousing 1980s action/revenge flick. It had ass-kicking, a bit of suspense, and even some decent one-liners and gags here and there. But when STEM has fully taken over and relegated Grey's consciousness to a distant corner of his mind and uses Grey's now-usurped body to walk away from everything, it was eerily reminiscent of the unsettling ending of Ex Machina. And I thought that all of this elevated Upgrade beyond being a simple popcorn flick. 

New-ish Releases: The Trip to Spain (2017); Annihilation (2018)

The Trip to Spain (2017)

Director: Michael Winterbottom

If you've seen the previous two "Trip" movies, starring Steve Coogan and Rob Brydon, then you know exactly what to expect. And you won't be disappointed.

The third in this film series, The Trip to Spain is a loosely-scripted, semi-documentary style show that follows the two British comedians as they tour the locales and noted restaurants of Spain. During their long car rides and frequent meals together, the two constantly riff off of one another's observations and spontaneous celebrity impressions.

It seems like a formula which might get tired, and yet it hasn't. One part of this is that Coogan and Brydon, despite having rather different comedic styles and purvues, compliment and feed off of each other brilliantly. Though the series has never been completely ad-lib, the two have plenty of freedom to improvise, which keeps things quite fresh, even three films in. The other major strength is how each of the three movies has also had a distinct vision for these semi-fictionalized versions of Coogan and Brydon, and consequently their relationship to and dynamic with each other. In the first film, Brydon was the congenial, broad, "people's" funnyman, while Coogan was a self-obsessed, semi-depressive snob. In The Trip to Italy, the roles were slightly reversed, with Coogan being more balanced and at peace with himself and Brydon having doubts about his stable but somewhat tepid home life with this long-time wife and two children. In Spain, we get a slight shift back to Coogan playing the more dislikeable character, once more being rather high on his own success (he often cites his real-life accolades for his film Philomena) and an insufferable know-it-all. These changes between the films all manage to give each one a feel of its own, to great effect.

There isn't much more to be said in a review of this movie, as its major strengths come down to watching and listening to two expert comedians do their thing. The only oddity with this chapter in the series is that the end is a bit strange, even borderline surreal. But this is a pretty minor issue. The only other thing I would recommend is that, if you are considering watching this and have not seen the previous films, you should begin with The Trip. If you find it to your liking, watch the following two films. While you certainly could watch them in any order, seeing the two progress in their order of release does offer a little extra, overarching narrative cohesion.

Annihilation (2018) [Spoiler-free first section]

Director: Alex Garland

Trippy. Cerebral. Intermittently intense. This was another strong film by Alex Garland, though I didn't find it as good as his previous film.

Adapted from the novel of the same name, written by Jeff VanderMeer, Annihilation follows Lena (Natalie Portman), a former army soldier and medic who is now a university professor of biology. Through a series of strange events, Lena is brought to the site of a strange anomoly being dubbed "The Shimmer" by thr group monitoring it. The Shimmer is a strange field of wavering lights that has surrounded a remote lighthouse on the coast. Any attempts to reconnoiter inside The Shimmer has produced nothing; in fact, nothing and noone who has ever entered the anomoly has yet returned, and The Shimmer is growing to encompass more and more of the surrounding area. Lena opts to join four other women - all either expert scientists, soldiers, or both - to enter The Shimmer and see if they can discover what the previous teams could not - just what the strange effect is and what its done to their search teams. Once the five women are inside, they begin to discover odd plant and animal life that seem to defy the known laws of biology and genetics. And as they begin to uncover clues about the fate of the previous scout team, some baffling and terrifying realizations begin to emerge.

As with most of Garland's other movies, Annihilation is more of a thinking person's sci-fi movie, which is what I enjoy most about it. From the outset, we are given a few mysteries to wrap our heads around, starting with Lena's initial quarantine and her first flashbacks to before she even knew about The Shimmer. The mystery only deepens as the film progresses, with answers being parsed out at just the right pace to satisfy, while raising larger, more frightening questions. I will admit that, while I'm no expert in physics or biology, the basic premise (which I won't spoil) only seems to stand up to so much close scrutiny. Still, it is a rather fascinating idea, and it leads to one of the movie's other great strengths - the visuals.

As the quintet of explorers go deeper into the shimmer, there are more than few visual images that are stunning in their creativity and vibrance. Others are horrifying and equally impressive. Although the movie never felt slow to me, the measured pacing allows us viewers to drink in the images and disturbing ideas which they imply. People who expect or hope for frequent, dynamic action in their films will probably grow frustrated with Annihilation, but for my part, I found the balance just right. There are several short and effective action sequences, along with a handful of suspensefuul moments, but these are hardly the movie's greatest strength. Rather, there is a strong balance of stunningly colorful scenes, along with a few eerily quiet, expansive shots that are a bit reminiscent of subdued sci-fi classic Stalker by Russian master Andrei Tarkovsky.

At this point, only a couple of days after my viewing of this movie, I'm not completely sure of whether I'll feel the need to watch it again. This is somewhat telling, as I usually feel the need to watch my favorite sci-fi movies multiple times, as the best ones are always rich enough in ideas and/or sophisticated enough in structure to warrant multiple viewings. I suspect that I will see it again at some point, but I currently feel as if there wasn't much that I missed on this initial viewing. In terms of Garland's other films, this one has less in common with the masterpiece Ex Machina than with his slightly uneven though worthwhile Sunshine.

Comments with Spoilers

Just a few thought and feelings about specific details in the movie.

The visual of the soldier who has basically "exploded" into some bizarre plantlife in the swimming pool is amazing. It's perhaps the most striking of several indelible images in the movie.

The sequence towards the end with Lena facing down the source of The Shimmer was completely entrancing. The visuals and the music score had me enrapt the way that you hope a movie can do, even if for only a minute or so.

I had a bit of an issue with the way one scene was written and the way one character was performed. The minor one is how Gina Rodriguez's character, the brawny soldier Thorensen, melts down into tears at one point. This may have been a reflection of her gradually-warping mental state, but it smakced a bit of gender stereotyping to have a woman - even a hard-bitten soldier - start crying when things get tough. I had to wonder whether Garland would have written this scene the same way if it had been a male soldier in that position.

Leigh's turn as Dr. Ventress was the one aspect of the movie
which seemed out of place.

The greater frustration to me was the performance of Jennifer Jason Leigh as the psychologist and operation director Dr. Ventress. I usually find Leigh to be a great actress, but I found her portrayal of Ventress oddly out of tune with what her character was. For the entire movie, she has an oddly distracted air of near-apathy that seems completely unconnected to the urgency which she is supposed to be feeling. I understand that her nerves are worn thin from seeing multiple groups go into The Shimmer and disappear, but it seems as if this should manifest itself more as a desperate drive to get to the bottom of it all, rather than the fatalistic, apathetic attitude that she wears on her sleeve for every second of her screen time. I can't be sure if this performance choice was Leigh's or director Garland's, but it resulted in a portrayal where the facts about and even dialogue coming from the character were horribly out of sync with her demeanor.

I don't know that the movie had to "tag" the final mystery by showing the rainbow Shimmer in Lena's eyes. I thought that just showing her embracing "Kane" was suggestive enough, while leaving a little bit of room for doubt for us viewers. 

Retro-Trio: Noah (2014); AVP: Alien vs. Predator (2004); Eagle vs. Shark (2007)

Noah (2014)

Director: Darren Aronofsky

My third time seeing the movie, and I still think it's phenomenal.

I gave this one a full review back when it was released, and you can view it here, so I'll keep this one short. It's been about two years since I last saw the movie, and it has grown no less impressive to me. What stands out most at this point for me are the overarching theme of the burden of responsibility and the film's expert pacing.

I still find Aronofsky's take on the titular Old Testament protagonist highly compelling. With Noah almost literally having the weight of the world on his shoulders, his anguish is palpable. This, however, had the potential to become a bit dull if it had been the only struggle or storyline in the movie. Rather, we also get the added and essential layer of Noah's misunderstanding of the responsibility thrust upon his shoulders by his lord. Because of his sorrow at having to see and allow nearly every person in the world die around him, he takes on a completely apocalyptic view of everything - to the point that he swears to slaughter even his own adopted grandchildren, should they be born. It is a brutally dark turn, but one that captures both the light and dark sides of Old Testament "heroism."

The pacing of the movie is also phenomenal. Considering how much is covered - from revealing this particular version of Noah's earth, right through the entire flood and its toll on Noah and his family, the tale moves along at a very satisfying pace. Nothing feels bogged down or rushed at any point, with the entire epic tale clocking in at just a bit over two hours. It's a testament to Aronofsky and his editor Andrew Weisblum that they told such a grand story so efficiently.

I actually bought this movie on blu-ray, and I haven't regeretted it. It's one that I've obviously gone back to a few times already, and will continue to do so in the future.

AVP: Alien vs. Predator (2004)

Director: Paul W.S. Anderson

After so many years avoiding this movie, I have to say it wasn't bad. Not great, by any means, but not bad either.

Like plenty of sci-fi adventure geeks, I revere the original two Alien movies, and I absolutely love the original Predator. I own all three movies and watch them about every year or two, and still rank them among my favorites. Still, I'm all too aware that, like many sci-fi "franchises," the quality of the originals faded severely as studios kept cranking out follow-ups. The Alien and Aliens are iconic; Alien 3 was mediocre at best, and Alien: Resurrection was a total mess. Predator is brilliant; Predator 2 was decent but a dropoff, and 2010's Predators was a dull rehash of the original.

Tucked in, just before that final Predators film were the two "AVP" flicks - Alien versus Predator. This first one, released in 2004, tells the story of a group of scientists gathered by billionaire Charles Bishop Weyland (a name familiar to Alien movies devotees) to explore a mysterious heat signature detected at a remote, abandoned station on Antarctica. The team digs deep beneath the surface to discover a wildly elaborate, labrynthine pyramid structure. As they explore, they ascertain that it was built by a race of extra-terrestrial hunters - the "Predators" introduced in that film series - as a staging ground for periodically staged hunts of trapped xenomorphs known from the Alien series. Little does the team of explorers know that the initial heat signature also acted as a beacon to a trio of Predators, who have also arrived on the scene to take part in the ritual hunt.

Nobody will ever mistake AVP for the very best of either of its root film series, in terms of quality. The acting is spotty at best, with the two main leads clearly being hired for their looks over their acting skills, and the dialogue is rather tepid throughout, with nary a decent one-liner to be found. And the little attempts at human connection or emotion fall pretty flat. But as an action/adventure film, the movie does just enough right to hold one's attention; at least it did for me. The backstory of the Predators arriving on earth centuries earlier and being revered as gods by the ancient Aztecs is fun, and the setting of the subterranean pyramid works well for this sort of picture. None of it is overly original, but it shows just enough novelty to keep things interesting. And the fights between the Aliens and Predators, mostly kept to small-scale, one-on-one fights, work well.

This movie is a decent way to scratch the "Alien" or "Predator" itch that one might have, while not watching the vastly superior original films. Several friends had recommended it to me, and I can now see why they enjoyed it, for what it is. However, since those very same friends have told me what a piece of garbage the followup AVP: Requiem was, I will avoid that movie like xenomorph blood.

Eagle vs. Shark (2007)

Director: Taika Waititi

Within the last few years, I've grown to become a great fan of New Zealand director Taika Waititi. It began around 2015, after watching and loving his vampire mockumentary What We Do in the Shadows. Then, my wife and I fell in love with his 2016 film The Hunt for the Wilderpeople, followed by backtracking to his earlier film Boy, which we also greatly enjoyed. The most recent icing on the cake for me was his deft and hilarious handling of large-scale superhero movies with the brilliant Thor: Ragnarok. Having gone 4-for-4 with me, it was only logical to go all the way back to Waititi's very first feature-length film, the low-budget regional Kiwi flick Eagle vs. Shark.

The wife and I really liked it.

The movie tells the story of Lily (Lauren Taylor), a rather shy young woman who works at a fast food restaurant and harbors a crush for the nerdy Jarrod (Jemaine Clement), who works at the nearby video game shop. When Lily is callously fired, she dares to crash a video game party that Jarrod hosts, and the two sleep together. Lily is then caught up in Jarrod's grand plan to return to his hometown and fight the boy who used to bully him in high school. In Jarrod's hometown, though, Lily begins to see Jarrod as more self-involved and immature, which culminated in his breaking up with her. However, she also sees that much of it stems from a bizarre home life where his deceased elder brother has cast a long shadow over the entire clan. Lily ultimately finds herself stuck in Jarrod's remote, rural town, biding her time for several days before Jarrod's scheduled fight.

This movie is a nearly perfect blend of Wes Anderson's sweeter films, a few dashes of Napoleon Dynamite, and Waititi's innate, quirky New Zealand sensibilities. The main characters Lily and Jarrod are painfully awkward in most circumstances, though Jarrod in particular is possessed of a wildly misplaced self-confidence and arrogance sometimes found among nerddom. Despite their trouble in most social situations, the two find just enough common ground to let each other into their lives, at least to a certain extent. While the tone is certainly off-beat, there is a certain level of authentic heart to the proceedings - something which Waititi would more masterfully use in his later films. In Eagle vs. Shark, these elements may not be as finely tuned, but they are still highly effective. This is all balanced well with a steady dose of oddball humor - from Lily's uncomfortable interactions with her snooty fast-food coworkers to Jarrod's "kung fu" training in preparation for his revenge fight, plenty of the scenes would be right at home among the best things you've seen in Rushmore and the like.

Not that I needed any more encouragement, but this film only solidified Waititi's place in my mind as a modern director whose films I now eagerly anticipate. And as much as I loved Ragnarok, I would actually prefer that he go back to smaller-scale, more personal flicks such as Eagle vs. Shark. This is clearly where he has made and can continue to make more meaningful, unique, and touching movies.

Retro Duo: 1408 (2007); War of the Worlds (1953)

1408 (2007)

Director: Mikael Haefstrom

This was my first time seeing this one, which I gave a shot since I was in the mood for a horror flick and had kept seeing it pop up on various lists of "underrated" or "quality Stephen King adaptations." I found it to be compelling and fairly well done, if not as consistently novel or eerie as the creators might have been aiming for.

The story follows Mike Enslin (John Cusack), a cynical writer of travel guides to haunted hotels and motels around the United States. Though he does it for a modest living, Mike has no belief in the existence of ghosts or the supernatural. After receiving a mysterious postcard, Mike checks into a supposedly haunted room at the Dolphin Hotel in Manhattan, specifically room 1408. Despite highly stern warnings from the hotel manager, Enslin goes into the room, where before long reality is gradually turned on its side and Enslin is assaulted by all manner of physical and psychological torture. The room seems to have some sort of evil purpose of its own, hurling Enslin through all sort of trials, never really allowing him to escape, although suggesting that it could all end if he commits suicide. After it becomes clear to the worn down Enslin that no escape is truly possible, he decides to in fact commit suicide; however, he decides to do it by burning himself and the room along with him, so as to prevent the diabolical place from entrapping anyone else in the future. This act of altruism seems to absolve Enslin, and he is pulled from the burning room in time to save his life.

1408 is essentially a redemption story, and a decent one at that. John Cusack does well playing the painfully cynical Mike Enslin, and the narration adequately reveals just how and why the jaded writer became so disaffected. The movie also does a great job building up the mystery around room 1408, thanks in no small part to Samuel L. Jackson's relatively minor turn as the Dolphin Hotel's manager. By the time Enslin is putting the key into the room door, I was itching to see just what might happen.

Of course, the real show is all about what does happen in the room. For the first fifteen minutes or so, I was riveted. In slow, eerie steps, things begin to go awry in pretty effective ways. As the torments grow more intense, though, I found that they started to become a bit more predictable and even slightly redundant. Early on, it is easy to assume that this is a "no escape" scenario for Enslin, so that all of his several attempts to flee the room have completely foreseeable outcomes. And while there are certainly some truly creepy moments to go with a handful of well-crafted jump scares, I found that the first half of the movie was more engaging than the second.

For me, horror movies do not often have a high rewatchability factor, and 1408 is no exception. It was enjoyable to finally see it, but I don't feel any need to ever go back to it.

War of the Worlds (1953)

Director: Byron Haskin

It's easy to see why this movie was a major hit in its day, and even why it became a science-fiction classic rather quickly. These days, though, it doesn't hold up terribly well.

H.G. Wells's original novel has understandably been adapted many times since its publication back in the late 19th century. The tale is one that captures the imagination well enough: beings from the planet Mars send an array of invasion ships to Earth and begin to systematically wipe out all of humanity. Because of their highly advanced technology, no form of weaponry devised by man can so much as damage the eerily silent flying crafts as they devastate human cities and populations with unstoppable heat rays.

This story brought a rather novel approach to the basic human fear of forces so powerful that we are helpless against them. This, combined with the enigma surrounding the actual nature of the Martians are what made Wells's novel so curious, and it is a part of any successful adaptation of the story. The problem with this 1953 film adaptation, however, is the exact same one that can found in the original story, as well as most other adaptations, such as Steven Speilberg's version in 2005 (which did reenact several of the exact same sequences as the 1953 version). The problem is the utterly anti-climactic resolution to the tale. Just as humanity is down to its last few days before annihilation, the alien invaders all simply drop dead due to infection from earthen bacteria. It's the reverse story of what laid low certain indigenous populations during incursions by invaders and conquistadors at various periods in human history. While this is a fairly interesting plot twist from a science perspective, the execution is thoroughly dull and smacks of the lame Deus ex machina cop out that became a tiresome trait way back when the Greek dramatists began to overuse it over two millenia ago.

Aside from that, the 1953 version does have its merit, as long as one keeps in mind the time when it was released. It's not difficult to see how the effects and even certain concepts were ahead of their time. Compared to other films using heavy special effects in the 1950s, War of the Worlds was about as good as one could get. It's also rather commendable that the story doesn't dally too much on extraneous melodrama or atonal, hokey jokes, something that other sci-fi classics like The Forbidden Planet couldn't completely avoid. War of the Worlds didn't hesitate from showing people getting atomized, including a well-meaning minister and other do-gooders. This creates a slightly darker tone than the Technicolor veneer might suggest.

For its time, the effects were cutting-edge for film. Today,
though, it can be hard not to smirk at the rudimentary nature
of the visuals and light effects.

But it is a movie from the early 1950s, and it does include a few of that era's trapping. Most obvious to me was the laughably helpless main female character, Sylvia. Like virtually every star of Hollywood movies from that time (and years afterward), Sylvia's primary purpose seems to be three-fold: (1) serve as a voice for viewers' fears by screaming a lot, (2) provide some sort of love interest for the male lead, and (3) look pretty. Nearly all other characters are equally one-dimensional and uninteresting. This film was clearly made back when science-fiction movies rested entirely on the wonder that the story's premise and special effects provided, not bothering to do anything novel or creative with characters or dialogue.

When one keeps in mind the time and context, it's not at all difficult to see why this movie was, and still is, considered a seminal sci-fi movie. When one simply judges it on its own merits, though, it just cannot stack up to more modern, sophisticated science-fiction movies.

Retro Duo (sort of): Paul (2010); Logan [Noir version] (2017)

Paul (2011)

Director: Greg Mottola

This is the fun result of using a film to put together some science-fiction fan/writers with some of the most naturally funny actors in the business.

Nick Frost and Simon Pegg (who also co-wrote the movie) play Graeme and Clive, two massive fans of all things science-fiction and comic book, who have traveled from Englad to go on a massive road trip in the U.S., starting at the San Diego Comic Convention and then taking their RV through to and through sites noted in modern extra-terrestrial lore. In the middle of the desert, though, they come across an actual alien, who calls himself Paul. Paul speaks perfect English and has all the mannerisms and outlook of a foul-mouthed, good-timing Gen X-er. He's also quite kind and in possession of several amazing abilities, including invisibility, a sort of telepathy, and the ability to heal others. Paul is on the run from the U.S. government agency which has kept him in captivity for decades, and he plans to rendevouz with a ship from his home planet. Graeme and Clive agree to help him, odd as it seems for these two men of little action.

The movie is good fun, especially for science-fiction nerds. There are plenty of references, both obvious and subtle, to classic sci-fi and fantasy adventure films and shows. The tale itself is interesting enough, and it does use Paul to explore a few headier notions about humans' place in the grander scheme of things. It actually could probably have delved a little deeper in this area had it desired, but the movie seemed to opt for a more comedic tone. And this is where the strengths mainly lie. Pegg and Frost have shown to be strong comedy writers in their past TV show Spaced and their co-written movies with Edgar Wright. Paul is really not different, though it is further enhanced by a great ensemble cast of seasoned comic veterans from the Paul Feig and Judd Apatow crews of regulars. This includes Kristin Wiig, Seth Rogan (the voice of Paul), Bill Hader, Jane Lynch, and a host of other familiar faces from those directors' noted films. As always, they bring razor sharp comic timing, physical humor, and ad libbing abilities second to none. Many of the laughs my wife and I got were from short, simple reactions or facial expressions.

There are some scenes and gags that either don't quite hit or are beaten into the ground a little, but this is fairly standard for this type of comedy. Anyone who enjoyed Pegg and Frost in Shawn of the Dead or the other Cornetto trilogy films will certainly enjoy this one.

Logan (2017) - "Noir" version

Director: Nick Mangold

In a move that I hope other filmmakers embrace, the makers of Logan released the blu-ray version of the film with an additional disc containing a black and white version of the movie. This is great for film nerds, especially those of us who greatly enjoy many movies from the black and white days and classic noir films.  After sitting on this version of the movie for a few months, I finally gave it a shot. My review of the color version is here, so I'll only really comment on the throwback absence of color, rather than get back into the other elements of the movie.

Seeing Logan in black and white is worth it to those who enjoy black and white films, even if I didn't feel that it is a superior version to the original. It's a curious exercise for two reasons. One is that seeing the black and white version does accentuate just how the story does draw from traditional noir tales. Unlike other superhero movies, including the half-dozen X-Men team movies and the solo Wolverine films, Logan features a doomed protagonist who is all but completely resigned to his bloody fate. The figure of the disaffected, wounded anti-hero has been a part of the genre since the days of James M. Cain. This was brought to magnificently dark life in classic noir films in the forties and fifties, most notably Double Indemnity and Out of the Past. Just in terms of basic character, Logan is very much in line with the protagonists of those great stories, and seeing the movie devoid of color drives the point home nicely.

One of a handful of setting where the noir version does
surpass the color version. Black and white filming seems to
be all about light and shadows, and Logan wasn't truly
intended to place such emphasis on those visual elements.

The second reason it is curious is more cinematic. When one watches those old classic noir films by the likes of Billy Wilder and Jacques Tourneur, it is easy to see how skilled they were at using light and shadow to amazing effect. Truly, the noir genre of films all but requires the absence of color, due to the grim themes and tones that are at its core. The composition of the scenes and sequences is some of the finest work in all of world cinema, as it illustrated a perfect meeting of story, mood, and artistic medium. This, unfortunately, is where Logan can't live up to its noir predecessors. Most likely since it was not meant to be shot only in black and white, there are many scenes that are not enhanced, and in fact are somewhat diminished, by the lack of color. There are a few scenes which bear out the black and white contrast well, such as the early scenes with Professor X in the collapsed water cooler, with its beams of sunlight peeking through an otherwise dark ramshackle prison. Or a couple of visceral fight scenes which take place at night - one at the very beginning of the picture and one in the middle. But the sequences in vibrant Las Vegas or the lush, verdant forests that are the setting for the film's finale lose something in black and white.

Watching Logan this way is something I recommend to fans of the film who want to change it up a bit. I'm certainly glad I gave it a try, but I think all, or nearly all, of my future viewings will be in color.