Category Archives: Movies

General, Movies

Et tu, David Lynch?!

David Lynch was profiled/interviewed in The Guardian (the article is by Rory Carroll and you can read the whole dang thing here) and, though the article focuses mostly on the man behind the camera, a look at his work and Twin Peaks in particular, it went on to other things.

Strange things.

Controversial things.  To put it… nicely.

From the article:

Politically, meanwhile, Lynch is all over the map. He voted for Bernie Sanders in the 2016 Democratic primary and thinks – he’s not sure – he voted Libertarian in the presidential election. “I am not really a political person, but I really like the freedom to do what you want to do,” says the persecuted Californian smoker.

He is undecided about Donald Trump. “He could go down as one of the greatest presidents in history because he has disrupted the thing so much. No one is able to counter this guy in an intelligent way.” While Trump may not be doing a good job himself, Lynch thinks, he is opening up a space where other outsiders might. “Our so-called leaders can’t take the country forward, can’t get anything done. Like children, they are. Trump has shown all this.”

The second paragraph is the one that really hit sour to a lot of people (Harron Walker over at jezebel.com offered one of the funniest, IMHO, takes in her very brief article which, of course, focuses on that second paragraph presented above).

My take?

While it is tempting to take these paragraphs and say something along the lines of “David Lynch is such a brilliant filmmaker… how could he?!”, I suggest one read the whole article instead of focusing on this one element.

The article paints a portrait of a man who is, at the age of 72, essentially isolated in his own world and has been, one can surmise, for quite some time now.  His studio is described as a “bunker”.  He is asked about going out to see movies (you would think, as a filmmaker, he’d be interested in seeing other films) and he says he doesn’t go out to see movies.  How about seeing them at home?  Not interested.

Look, I’m no David Lynch apologist.  I love some of his works, especially the film Mulholland Drive (a brilliant work which doesn’t seem to get the love of Blue Velvet or Twin Peaks).  I think he is an important figure in the film/TV industry.

However…

I’ve always said people should separate the person from the work.

There are works by many people that I absolutely love, but when one looks at the person behind the works that I love so much, I’ve come to realize that some of them may be fascinating while others… not so much.  Some, I would even say, were people I would want absolutely nothing to do with had I encountered them on a personal basis.

I, someone who cannot stomach Donald Trump and feel he’s a plague on this country and, by extension, the world, don’t feel David Lynch is some kind of an idiot or wacko.  Based on the article, it strikes me he is a man who is so isolated and seems to have so little interest in things outside his world, that it shouldn’t be surprising he would say something like that about Donald Trump.

I feel his statement reflects his ignorance of general events more than anything else and its freaking sad to read but, seriously, what can you do about it?  Tell Mr. Lynch to read more?  To immerse himself in current events?  If he did, I suspect he might develop a more nuanced –perhaps!– understanding of things going on outside his world and -again, perhaps!– his opinion might change.

Having said all that, it ultimately doesn’t matter all that much.  Perhaps as a fan of David Lynch you may be disheartened -to put it mildly- with his opinions.  If they impact you greatly, you can certainly choose to not follow him and his works anymore.  That is within your ability to do.

Otherwise, take it for what it is: The depressing reality of one artistic person.

Movies

Thor: Ragnarok (2017), a (mildly) belated review

For the first twenty-thirty minutes of watching Thor: Ragnarok, I strongly feared I was about to repeat the Guardians of the Galaxy experience, ie see a comedic action/adventure/superhero film that most critics/audiences like but which Mr. Contrarian here would absolutely hate.

And it was a terrible sinking feeling, because I really enjoyed director Taika Waititi’s What We Do In The Shadows and was hopeful his comedic skills would suit the Marvel Universe films.

But those opening minutes were a freaking chore to watch, first with a confrontation between Thor and Surtur, who is presented as considerably less powerful than those familiar with Thor and his mythology would think, followed by a semi-amusing (but which went on too long) cameo by another prominent actor, to an incredibly unfunny Dr. Strange cameo (I recall a video clip released shortly before the movie was released hyped up the great “chemistry” between Benedict Cumberbatch as Strange and Chris Hemsworth as Thor.  There may be chemistry -though I feel this is arguable- but the whole encounter, IMHO, was dull reflected with the groan worthy line “not tea”.), I felt my fingers reaching for the remote, to shut this whole thing down before more permanent damage is done.

And then, after most of this (IMHO!) boring/unnecessary stuff is dealt with, the movie proper actually began.

Thor and Loki meet Odin and then face the movie’s “big bad”, Hela (Cate Blanchett… merely OK in the role but that is more related to the fact that the script doesn’t give her much more to do than be evil) and things finally get off the ground and the movie starts to rock n’ roll.

Thor: Ragnarok may be the third Thor film but it eschews the past Thor films and instead tries hard to be a thematic twin to the 1980 film Flash Gordon.  Don’t believe me?  Check out this trailer…

If you’ve seen Flash Gordon, you probably know what I’m talking about.  If you haven’t, this trailer might give you some idea (and compare it with the trailer for Thor: Ragnarok below).

Thor: Ragnarok, like Flash Gordon, presents bright and very wild sci-fi worlds and at times the goofy encounters the hero has with the various wild creatures all while keeping his chin up despite the long odds against him.

There is the appearance of yet another very big superhero in this movie whose role, I strongly suspect, was meant to be a surprise but that didn’t happen (the trailer below shows who I’m talking about, in case you don’t know).  That character’s appearance adds to the overall fun of the film as does Jeff Goldblum’s delightfully bizarre turn as the Grandmaster, Tom Hiddleston’s wonderful return as Loki (he just gets better and better in the role!), and Tessa Thompson as Valkyrie.

But a special mention should be made to Karl Urban as Skurge.  His role is relatively minor but his character has the best story arc within the movie, from big mouth fool to unwilling ally in evil to… I won’t give it away, but with little actual dialogue and plenty of acting with his eyes and body posture Mr. Urban gives viewers a sense of a man in great conflict.  Very much liked his role.

In sum, if you decide to see this film and you’re just about to shut it off after the first twenty or so minutes, stick around.  The good stuff comes after the bad.

Recommended.

Movies

Jumanji: Welcome to the Jungle (2017) a (mildly) belated review

There are some films I can’t help but feel are “unreviewable”.  By that I mean that almost anyone that goes to see such a film will likely walk away if not loving what they’ve seen at least feeling they’ve had a good time.

So it is with me and Jumanji: Welcome to the Jungle.

Is the film some kind of cinematic classic?  No.  Did it feature a plot that was so out there and so expansive that it shook/wowed me to the core?  No.  Did it play on my heartstrings with such precision and/or make me laugh or cry hysterically until I was a puddle of emotions?  Was the acting within transformational and re-define to me what it means to be an actor?

Nope, nope, nope, and nope.

But the film moved along at a brisk pace and provided enough laughs  -both big and small- and smiles and, yes, even a few surprise twists (which I won’t give away) that the film was certainly worth seeing.

The plot is essentially the same as the original Robin Williams starring Jumanji only presented with a video game twist.  In this case our four heroes, High School students who for various different reasons are sent to detention, find an old video game machine in the basement they’re serving their detention, connect it to a TV set, choose their characters in the Jumanji video game, then find themselves transported into the game proper, where they -very amusingly, IMHO- take on the video game characters who, of course, look like Dwayne Johnson, Jack Black, Kevin Hart, and Karen Gillan.

Which High Schooler becomes who is part of the fun, and I’ll just say that Jack Black in particular really does well in a role that might have proven difficult for others.

Now, there are a few things one can quibble over.  The special effects, especially some of the CGI, isn’t always great.  In fact, there are moments where it is surprisingly crude.  But, again, that’s something either you’ll accept -I’ve personally seen worse- or not.

A little more troublesome is the movie’s main villain, who unfortunately barely registers.  Granted, this is a movie where we have to get up to speed with four characters really quickly and spending precious screen time with yet another might have been hard to accomplish in the movie’s running time.  Still, I kinda wish there was a little more meat on this character’s bones, even if he is an NPC (see the film to understand!).

Obviously, I recommend this film!

Movies

Pardon me a moment…

I know many out there simply don’t care, and I understand.  There are many out there that absolutely cannot stomach Zack Snyder’s run of DC movies, from Man of Steel to Batman v Superman to… well, whatever hybrid Whedon-esq film Justice League was.

Regarding the later film, there has been curiosity by those who enjoyed the Snyder DC films (or, as some smug people have called us, “idiots”) as to when/if the Snyder version of Justice League will ever appear.  Further, there is even a question of whether such a thing even exists.

Well, here’s some of the latest on that.  Ana Dumaraog over at screenrant.com notes that artist Jay Olivia, one of those who worked on Snyder’s Justice League, has stated…

Snyder had a full cut of Justice League before leaving

Essentially -and at the risk of completely spoiling everything in the article, Olivia stated that before he left Justice League, Mr. Snyder had indeed left behind a full cut of the film, albeit one that needed some work.  From Olivia…

It may not be 100% polished but all of the planned scenes were shot and edited into a full timeline.

So we have what may amount to, using a literary term, seems to be a full “rough draft” of the film that requires some “polishing,” likely some editing to trim whatever fat is unnecessary and likely quite a bit of effects work.

In other words, what’s keeping the Snyder “cut” of Justice League from being released looks to be a matter of a) Warner Brothers deciding it is worth doing (I suspect, rather strongly, that Mr. Snyder would love to finish the work up), and b) money.

The later is the big issue, of course.  There are some rumors that Warner is willing to release a Snyder cut of the film but only if Mr. Snyder or his production company pay for the remaining work needed to be done to finish it up.  I imagine this could be a big amount, but who knows.  Further, this could be a negotiating tactic: Warner is willing to pay some monies to finish the film up, but they don’t want to take the whole hit.

Stay tuned… if you’re not one of us idiots.

Movies, TV

So… about Wonder Woman 1984…

Yesterday director Patty Jenkins took to twitter to offer a still from the now filming Wonder Woman 1984, the sequel to her very popular Wonder Woman film, starring Gal Gadot, and set in (duh) the year 1984.

The image caused much curiosity:

Yep, that’s Chris Pine in an 80’s getup (though check out the people behind him… if nothing else, the movie sure does seem to want to get the aesthetic of 1984) … thing is, and SPOILERS FOR THOSE WHO HAVEN’T SEEN IT, Chris Pine’s character in the original Wonder Woman appeared to, well, not make it out alive.

Which begs the question: How the heck is he in this film?

If you have even a casual knowledge of the Wonder Woman TV show featuring Lynda Carter, you should know that the series had the character appear in both World War 2 and, in subsequent seasons, the “present” of the 1970’s.  What was curious about that series is that actor Lyle Waggoner played two roles in the series.  In the first, taking place during World War 2, he was Major Steve Trevor…

Image result for lynda carter lyle waggoner wonder woman

In the “new” adventures of Wonder Woman, set in the then present, he played… Coloner Steve Trevor Jr.!

Image result for lynda carter lyle waggoner wonder woman

So it would seem the Wonder Woman movies are perhaps doing something similar, having Chris Pine appear in both eras.  The question is, will this be a distant relative of Chris Pine’s original Steve Trevor from the first WW movie?

You know what?

I don’t really care too much about that.

What intrigues me much more is the fact that this movie is set in 1984.  Clearly there must be some reason for setting it in that year versus, say, in the “present”.

Thinking back to 1984, I recall world events of that time and wonder if those will play a role in the movie.  The Soviet Empire was on its way down but the Cold War was still in effect (the Berlin Wall would come down in 1989).  There was a feeling, at times, that nuclear conflict might happen.

Conversely, and within the U.S., there was the issue of cocaine and drugs in the U.S.  The TV show Miami Vice premiered in 1984 and for better or worse it became something of an aesthetic of that era…

So I’m wondering… could this movie take a little more from something like Miami Vice rather than world events at the time?  Or will it be a little of column “A” and column “B”?

Stay tuned… same Wonder channel, same Wonder time!

General, Movies

What a weekend…

So much happening, so many things to note… or not.

First off, the Trump-G7 summit… blah.  How surprising Mr. Thin-Skin got all huffy with the other leaders when he arrived late and left early.  And all that crap he -and his sycophantic underlings- heaped on Canadian PM Justin Trudeau?  Really?  (Wanna read more?  Here’s an article by Matt Spetalnick for Reuters and presented on HuffingtonPost.com, Trump blasts NATO Allies, EU, and Canadian PM Trudeau).

Then there was the Tonys which featured one truly beautiful moment in the Parkland students singing Seasons of Love…

…and Robert DeNiro giving some… uh… rough shout-outs toward Mr. Trump…

Man… I’m really conflicted about the later.  On the one hand, I’ve been shouting the same in private to my television for quite a while now.  On the other hand, I can’t help but feel that this sort of public insulting is exactly the type of crap that feeds Trump and his supporters and makes those who are against him look terrible.

Ah well.  Given the way that the news cycle is running (at about 5 million RPMs), it’ll probably be forgotten very soon.

Finally, Solo: A Star Wars Story continued to underperform though it looks as if it won’t bomb quite as hard as John Carter or The Lone Ranger did.  Ron Dicker at (again) HuffingtonPost.com writes about director Ron Howard’s twitter reaction to the movie’s box office:

Ron Howard tells fan he “feels badly” about Solo’s Box Office

To be more precise, when asked about his feelings about the movie’s box office, Ron Howard wrote:

I’m proud of and the cast & crew worked hard to give fans a fun new addition. As a director I feel badly when people who I believe (& exit polls show) will very likely enjoy a movie… don’t see it on a big screen w/great sound.

I mean, what else would Mr. Howard write?

You fucking fans blew it!  BLEW IT!  Why won’t you go see my film?!  It’s getting good reviews!  YOU CAN STILL  MAKE IT A SUCCESS!!!!  FOR THE LOVE OF GOD GO SEE IT!!!! #AAAARRRRRGGGGHHH!

I kid, of course, but despite his too-polite tweet (the real one, not my phony one) I’m sure Howard must feel considerable frustration.

Yet the reality is the reality: Sometimes you create something that may be good -or, if you search out a variety of reviews, something that is decent or even mediocre-yet-better-than-expected- and despite the fact that it may be at least decent-and-possibly-good, audiences will either come or they won’t.

And its maddening.

How many times has a film come out and it explodes at the box-office… despite the fact that it is at best mediocre?  How many times does a film get released with tons of great reviews and it… does ok?  Or perhaps worse?

Audiences are fickle.

There was a time that westerns were box office gold and audiences couldn’t get enough of them.

Then, one day, people no longer cared for westerns and, with few exceptions, they are hardly made today.

Superhero films are incredibly popular nowadays, but who’s to say they will remain so five years from today?  Or next year, for that matter?

Consider the Transformer films.  Despite getting slaughtered by reviewers and many fans, they nonetheless made tons of money, until the last one did only “ok”.

Solo may be a good film.  It might be a typical Ron Howard film, decent but not terribly extraordinary.

Regardless, audiences weren’t terribly interested in seeing it.  Perhaps it was due to the fact that people are tired of Star Wars films.  Perhaps people were so bothered by The Last Jedi -at least those who hated it- that they wanted to punish Disney.  Perhaps it was due to the fact that people were suspicious of a film with all the baggage this one had (previous directors fired, Ron Howard brought in at the last minute, etc.).  Perhaps people simply didn’t feel the need to see a Han Solo “origin” story… with or without Harrison Ford in the role.

Perhaps it was a combination of all those elements.

Ah well.

Movies

The Hitman’s Bodyguard (2017) a (mildly) belated review

Sometimes, you just sit back, put your brain in neutral, and enjoy whatever you can about a goofball comedy you’re watching and, afterwards, decide its best not to think too hard about what you’re seeing.

Such is the case with the Ryan Reynolds/Samuel L. Jackson film The Hitman’s Bodyguard.

I mean… where to start?

The plot, in a nutshell, is this: Ryan Reynolds is Michael Bryce, a very good “bodyguard” who, in the movie’s opening minutes, loses a charge.  Two years later he’s considerably lower rent and dealing with some clearly whacko clients.

Meanwhile, villainous ex-Dictator Ladislav Duckhovich (Gary Oldman in what amounts to an extended cameo role) is under trial at the Hauge for his brutal reign in Belarus (or some such country) and it turns out the case isn’t very strong and prosecutors need to get the testimony of Darius Kincaid (Samuel L. Jackson).  Kincaid is imprisoned in England but offered a deal for his testimony.  He agrees to testify.

Bryce’s ex-girlfriend Amelia Roussel (Elodie Yung, who is OK in a pretty blandly written role) is in charge of moving Kincaid to Amsterdam but, of course, things go sideways and after a bloody encounter with the ex-Dictator’s thugs winds up having Roussel and Kincaid in the wind.

Roussel calls in her ex-boyfriend Bryce to protect and take Kincaid to the Hauge and hilarity ensues as the two are familiar with each other and, of course, don’t like each other much at all.

(It is not terribly clear why Roussel brought her ex-boyfriend in to do this.  You would figure in another movie she would have moved Kincaid on her own.)

Anyway, what follows are some good laughs and plenty of -at times- bloody action.  Of course in The Hitman’s Bodyguard world, stray bullets or out of control vehicles or explosions don’t hurt any innocents and Kincaid, who is shot in the leg early in the film and is so weak from bleeding out, nonetheless recovers remarkably well minutes later and moves around with a light limp which doesn’t affect the action all that much.

Look, its a silly film and I’m starting to do what I shouldn’t: Think too hard about it.

The Hitman’s Bodyguard aspires to be nothing more than an entertaining work which gives people a few chills and thrills, laughs and romance and it accomplishes this, though the plot itself lurches around and could have been streamlined—

Again, don’t think too hard about it!

I recommend the film.  It is at times quite fun.

Just don’t expect much more than that.

Books/Literature, Movies, TV

Whose property is it anyway…?

I love the internet.  It allows me fast access to near unlimited information, be they technical information, opinions, reviews, analysis, articles, etc. etc. etc.

I’ve learned much, almost every day, and while at times reading people’s opinions (and trolls) can be frustrating, sometimes you have to take the good with the bad and sort things out on your own.

One thing that I’m noticing, however, is that this opening in allowing people to opine on things like movies, books, and TV shows and I’m realizing this leads to a sense of ownership of these properties on the part of fans.

I’ve long pondered why there was an almost literal lynch mob around the release of Batman v. Superman, a movie I liked quite a bit -moreso in its Ultimate Cut- and its director Zack Snyder.  Whatever your opinion of the film is, to many it was as if Mr. Snyder had committed some kind of unforgivable sin with what he did with the characters.

After the film left theaters, the anger turned toward the Ghostbusters remake, though to a somewhat lesser degree, yet for many this too was some kind of unforgivable sin against a beloved property and the people behind it should be… I don’t know, what exactly?

More recently, there appears to have been something of a repeat in the release and the fan reaction with Star Wars: The Last Jedi.  To many fans, the movie was a betrayal of the original Star Wars films (I don’t know… I have the film but as of yet haven’t seen it).

Today and over at Slate.com, I found this article by Willa Paskin which focuses on fan theories regarding the Benedict Cumberbatch starring Sherlock series, specifically that many fans of the show feel the character of Sherlock Holmes and Dr. Watson were/are lovers…

The case of the fractured fandom

I find that speculation, which isn’t terribly new regarding Holmes/Watson (the idea that they might secretly be homosexual lovers has been around since at least the 1940’s and likely before!), nonetheless in this era of the internet allowed groups of people, including someone mentioned within the article itself, to really go to town with developing this theory and offering examples of how the creators, in their opinion, were pointing towards this alleged relationship.

Which brings me to this point: Speculation and/or scorn toward the way characters are handled by fans is perfectly fine, but bear in mind: These characters are the property of others and they will do with them what they choose.

Sure, Sherlock Holmes is now in public domain, but the Sherlock TV show is being made by the BBC under the control of several individuals who make the decisions of how the show will progress.  They can, if they want to, read the many fans’ opinions on how the show should progress and whatnot, but ultimately they decide the direction of the show.

(A digression: I suspect the show is done and will not return for a fourth season.  I could be wrong, but that’s just my opinion).

Similarly, whether you liked them or not -and its certainly your right to love or hate them!- the people behind Batman v. Superman and the Ghostbusters remake were granted authority to use these characters and create these properties by the people/companies that control them.

The films themselves may have been great or horrid, but them’s the breaks… not everything works out and with properties such as Batman and Superman, just because one version comes out not to your liking doesn’t mean the ceiling’s about to fall in on any future incarnations of said characters.  Superman survived the release of the not very good Superman III and the outright terrible Superman IV and Batman certain survived the release and ridicule which came after Batman and Robin.

I guess my point is this: Sometimes fandom needs to back off, at least a little, take a breath, and understand that your pleasure/disgust and speculations regarding property X are just that: YOUR opinions on it.

Do you hate Batman v. Superman?  Do you feel the characters in Sherlock are lovers?  Do you feel The Last Jedi was a betrayal of the original Star Wars films?

That’s perfectly legitimate… for you.

And you have every right to either hate these works or love them or speculate about their meaning or anything else you desire.

My worry -and the great danger- is that when fandom becomes powerful enough to dictate the release of new creative endeavors, then we’re treading into dangerous waters.

I feel fandom did affect what DC has done since the release of both Batman v. Superman and Suicide Squad.  One has but see the Justice League film to see that end result.

Will the pressure of fans lead, if it should happen, to have Sherlock season 4 reveal that Holmes and Watson are lovers?  Will we have a Last Jedi redo where Luke Skywalker is treated “better”?

I worry when fans become such a powerful force.

But I suppose I also worry too that certain properties have become as big as they are and brings out these emotions in people.

The other day I looked up the top films of 1979 (don’t ask) and it surprised me that the #1 box office film of that year was… wait for it… Kramer vs. Kramer.  The other nine films, in order, were:

The Amityville Horror, Rocky II, Apocalypse Now, Star Trek: The Motion Picture, Alien, 10 (the Bo Derek film), The Jerk, Moonraker, The Muppet Movie.

Interesting list, no?  Only two of the movies were sequels and/or part of a series (Rocky II and the James Bond film Moonraker) while a few others became series and/or had sequels but at this point were original works.

Compare that list with the top box office films of last year, 2017:

Star Wars: The Last Jedi, Beauty and the Beast, The Fate of the Furious, Despicable Me 3, Jumanji: Welcome to the Jungle, Spider-Man: Homecoming, Wolf Warrior 2, Guardians of the Galaxy Vol. 2, Thor: Ragnarok, Wonder Woman.

Of these ten films, a whopping EIGHT of them are part of a series and/or are sequels to other films and one of them, Jumanji: Welcome to the Jungle, is a somewhat-sequel/remake of an original work.  The only “original work” is actually a live action version of Disney’s Beauty and the Beast animated film!

So, essentially, NONE of the top 10 highest grossing films of 2017 were “original” works from start to end.

None.

In conclusion, perhaps it’s no wonder, given how many sequels and cultural blanketing these works have created, that fans become so enmeshed in these works.

Movies

Solo: A Star Wars Story’s (2018) release

Frank Pallota over at CNN.com notes that the Memorial Day release of Solo: A Star Wars Story hasn’t exactly been a box office juggernaut:

Solo: A Star Wars Story disappoints at the box office

According to the article, the movie drew in approximately $101 million, a decent amount but far lower than the hoped for $150+ million that was originally estimated.  Interestingly, over at Box Office Mojo they list the movie’s three day weekend take at a lower $83 million, but I’m not certain if their estimate does not take into account today’s date (it is Memorial Day, after all) and thus is a lower amount.

Regardless, the movie hasn’t done all that well, especially given its a Star Wars movie and, equally oddly, the reviews for it were generally positive.

Count me, though, among those who isn’t terribly surprised.

No, I’m not some kind of movie release guru or have psychic powers (how I wish!), it just seemed there were many factors working against the movie almost from the get-go.

To begin, the movie’s troubled production -it was originally being directed by Phil Lord and Christopher Miller (The Lego Movie, 22 Jump Street) but they clashed with the powers that be at Disney and were essentially fired from the production and replaced, hastily, with Ron Howard.  Rumor had it that the movie was nearly done with its principle photography by that point.  There was also word that actor Alden Ehrenreich wasn’t doing all that well stepping into Harrison Ford’s shoes and was given acting lessons while the movie was filming (I don’t know if I believe this… seems a particularly nasty rumor and smells a bit like someone who has a real beef with the actor trying to hit him where it hurts).

In some ways, that element reminded me of what happened with the Justice League film.  Initiated under the direction of Zack Snyder, he left the production (or was fired, yet more rumors) after his adopted daughter committed suicide and the movie was taken over by Josh Whedon, who went on to remake much of the film and released what was a decent, if obviously very different work from what Mr. Snyder would have likely given us.

Justice League underperformed as well, and my feeling is that those early news of a troubled production had to weigh on potential filmgoers’ minds as they did with Solo.

But there’s more.

Solo also has the misfortune of being released at the tail end of two very big hero/effects films: Avengers Infinity Wars and Deadpool 2.

In fact, it seems in retrospect rather silly to release so many films like these one on top of the other.  I’m noticing, for instance, that Avengers Infinity Wars, after a red hot initial release, has cooled down considerably at the box office and drew in “only” $16 million in its fourth week of release.  It appears almost spent at this point.  Similarly, Deadpool 2 came out of the gate hot but not quite as hot as was hoped, and I can’t help but wonder if maybe being released so soon after the Avengers film that too didn’t suck up the oxygen in the box office as well.

You see, there are only so many dollars out there to be made in films and if we have three very big films targeted to the same audience released at roughly the same time, the audience might have to pick and choose which one they will see, and the end result might be a sense of box office “failure” that might not be the case had more care been made toward finding an appropriate release date.

Finally, and as mentioned in the original CNN article I linked to, there is a worry that people might have a “fatigue” toward Star Wars properties.  It’s a logical concern: Too much of a “good” think might prove, in the long run, not so good.

You can certainly oversaturate a fan base and it is possible this is what may be happening.  On the other hand, the film comes very shortly after the release of The Last Jedi which, to many fans, left them with a source taste in their mouth and this too could have dissuaded some people who otherwise might have given the movie a look to skip it.  At least for now.

(Apropos of nothing, I have a copy of Last Jedi and plan to see it soon enough.  The back and forth -those that are well thought out and not just trolling- among fans of the film and detractors certainly has me curious)

Regardless, I’ll probably skip Solo for now and catch it later on when it reaches home video.  Which is, coincidentally, what I’ll likely do with Infinity Wars.

Movies

Deadpool 2 (2018) a (almost right on time!) review

It’s so very rare to review a just released film… one that’s still in theaters.  In fact, one that was released less than a week before!

Let’s bask in that particular glory for a second or two…

All right, enough of that crap: Deadpool 2.  My 0.02 cents…

When the original 2016 Deadpool was released, I liked but did not love it.  (You can read my review of the first film here)

My hope was that the people who made this film refined their formula and made a better overall work.

Long story short: They did.

Now, I know there are people out there who have expressed a preference for the original Deadpool, but I’m not one of them.

Deadpool 2 follows the manic formula and kicks it up several notches, this time around offering a surprisingly meaty plot that -take it from someone who writes- was very well thought out, despite the fact that it offered plenty of silliness.

In some ways the film’s silliness is not unlike the works of the Zucker Brothers and Abrahams (Airplane!, Top Secret!, The Naked Gun films) in the sense that the jokes come quick and thick and I’m sure, having seen the film this one time, that I missed many, many jokes.

For example, over at one website I was on a little while ago, someone mentioned laughing out loud when, during the movie, we see a TV News report and the crawl on the bottom of the report says something like this: Christopher Plummer rejects role of Deadpool.

Totally missed that one!

I also loved many of the new characters brought into the feature.  Josh Brolin was great as the gravel voiced, grim time traveler Cable.  Zazie Beetz, similarly, was a delight as Domino, the hero whose big power (or mutation) is… luck.  She more than held her own in the craziness that came around her.

If there’s one thing I wish there was more of, its Brianna Hildebrand’s Negasonic Teenage Warhead.  She was, IMHO, one of the great delights of the first Deadpool.  I loved her silent exasperation at the antics of Deadpool but this time around she doesn’t show quite as much of that.  On the other had, they expanded on her character by introducing her girlfriend Yukio (Shioli Kutsuna, quite delightful!), and this character’s interactions with Deadpool were quite a hoot.

I’ve tried very hard not to get into spoilers here regarding the story presented in the film, up to and including what happens in the opening minutes, and I’m not about to give that stuff up now.  I will say this, though: There are two hilarious cameos by big named actors, one of which if you blink you’ll miss it, the other of which is pretty heavily disguised so, if you don’t notice it, you’ll be forgiven for checking the web for who/when this person appeared.

In conclusion and suffice to say, I recommend the film and highly suggest you stick around during the credits as there is an extended bit that’s quite hilarious and… I’ll say no more.

What are you waiting for?  Go see Deadpool 2!