This Is a Movie Review: Steven Soderbergh Captures Claire Foy Possibly Losing Her Mind in His Latest ‘Unsane’ Experiment

March 20, 2018

jmunney Cinema, Movie Reviews , , , , , , , , 1 Comment

CREDIT: Fingerprint Releasing/Bleecker Street

This review was originally published on News Cult in March 2018.

Starring: Claire Foy, Jay Pharoah, Joshua Leonard, Aimee Mullins, Amy Irving, Juno Temple, Polly McKie

Director: Steven Soderbergh

Running Time: 98 Minutes

Rating: R for Pill-Induced Distortion, Unsanitary Use of a Tampon, and a Violent Spree

Release Date: March 23, 2018

Steven Soderbergh has made a career out of messing around with the standard bounds of cinema, often in ways that could come off as a gimmick in the hands of a less assured director. His latest, Unsane, sets itself apart with its iPhone 7 Plus 4K cinematography (credited to Soderbergh himself). Smartphone photography is certainly advanced enough to make a feature film look as professional as it ought to, so for those who are capable, the smartphone option simply deserves to be added to the docket of available cameras. Thematically, an iPhone fits Unsane’s story of a woman committed to a mental institution against her will, as it compresses the depth of field and lends a dull sheen that lingers in the uncanny valley between intimate and detached.

Sawyer Valentini (Claire Foy) is a businesswoman rising up the corporate ladder, but she is haunted by a troubled past and feelings of loneliness in a new city. The nature of her job is never fully specified (kind of hilariously), but it appears to have something to do with customer service, and she also appears to have power to hire and fire. She has been dealing with occasionally crippling anxiety caused by a stalker . After one particularly bad episode, she drops by for a therapy session, which leads to her signing some forms, which somehow results in her being committed to a mental facility and unable to leave, as she has been declared a danger to herself and to others.

Sawyer’s circumstances quickly become too sinister for this to be a simple mistake or an innocent misdiagnosis, suggesting that a conspiracy is afoot. A staff member (Joshua Leonard) appears to be her stalker in disguise – has he orchestrated the whole thing? Or is the truth to be found from the most well-adjusted resident (Jay Pharoah), who divulges to Sawyer that she is the victim of an insurance scam in which the institution forces people to be committed for as long as their coverage will pay for it? Or is it some combination of forces, working together, or simultaneously coincidentally all ganging up on Sawyer? Of course, there is also the possibility that this could all be in her head, as everything unspools from her point of view the whole time.

This could be a formula for devastatingly unsettling ambiguity, but Soderbergh is not especially concerned about questioning the nature of reality. This is more just a setup for him to explore his particular tastes in psychological and claustrophobic thrills. In many respects, Unsane is satisfying simply on a lurid and pulpy level. Soderbergh does definitely dig deeper than that, presenting in stark terms how both institutional and corporate life can be dehumanizing, their loss of morals too easily justified with a sweep under the rug. Those moments of carelessness and lack of empathy do not usually result in ordeals as dangerous as Sawyer’s, but the opportunities for abuse are there for those who want to take advantage of them.

Unsane is Recommended If You Like: Side Effects, Shutter Island, One Flew Over the Cuckoo’s Nest, Gone Girl

Grade: 4 out of 5 Medical Forms

This Is a Movie Review: The New ‘Tomb Raider’ is the Old Everything Else

March 15, 2018

jmunney Cinema, Movie Reviews , , , , , , , , Leave a comment

CREDIT: Ilzek Kitshoff/Warner Bros.

This review was originally posted on News Cult in March 2018.

Starring: Alicia Vikander, Dominic West, Walton Goggins, Daniel Wu, Kristin Scott Thomas

Director: Roar Uthaug

Running Time: 118 Minutes

Rating: PG-13 for Bloody Violence in Which the Camera Cuts Away Before You See the Worst of It, and Indiana Jones-Style Skin Decomposition

Release Date: March 16, 2018

The latest big screen version of Tomb Raider supposedly justifies its existence by positioning itself as Lara Croft’s origin story, but it could hardly be considered untold, as it is fundamentally derivative of every other entry in the globetrotting action-adventure genre. Even if you have not seen the Angelina Jolie TR films or never played any of the video games (like myself), chances are you will still feel like you have already seen this “new” one. This is basically a video game transferred to a different medium, but without actually adapting it into cinematic form. To wit, Alicia Vikander’s Lara spends most of her time solving puzzles (like arranging rocks to open a cave door) or jumping across platforms (like bouncing around all the boats in a crowded dock to escape some baddies). Again, the conclusion to be drawn is: you’ve seen this all before, better and elsewhere.

The mythology that kicks Tomb Raider’s plot into motion is fairly fascinating: Himiko, Queen of Yamatai, is said to have had power over life and death, with the ability to kill people just by touching them. Lara’s father Richard (Dominic West) has spent much of his life tracking her down. After disappearing for years during his search, he is presumed dead, and an absentee dad is only the first classic genre trope TR makes sure to give us. We also get the timeless purity-vs-profitability conflict, as naturally enough the villain is Richard’s rival archaeologist Mathias Vogel (Walton Goggins), who only cares about getting rich off Himiko’s remains. Furthermore, the climax is essentially Indiana Jones-lite, with giant rolling rocks and unwise choices resulting in consequences akin to drinking from the wrong grail.

But despite all these shortcomings, I must accept that a fundamental aspect of my criticism (and all good criticism, I would argue) is identifying whether or not a film is exciting or boring. And on that score, Tomb Raider kept me engaged enough to feel like it was not a complete waste of time. Plus, it has a decently satisfying feminist bent, as any skin displayed by Lara primarily emphasizes Vikander’s athleticism, and at the moment when she thinks her father is being his most patronizing, he instead compliments her bravery. These are welcome elements, but they are mostly surface level. That shallowness prevents true terribleness, but it also leaves some uncomfortable implications less-than-fully addressed. Like, what is Mathias’ deal with wrangling up slave labor? There could have been an opportunity here for indelible villainy, but instead Tomb Raider plays it thoroughly safe.

Tomb Raider is Recommended If You Like: Every Indiana Jones knockoff, Watching someone else play a platform-jumping video game

Grade: 2.25 out of 5 Tank Tops

This Is a Movie Review: Zoey Deutch Shines in the Sweet and Sour ‘Flower’

March 14, 2018

jmunney Cinema, Movie Reviews , , , , , , , , , , Leave a comment

CREDIT: The Orchard

This review was originally posted on News Cult in March 2018.

Starring: Zoey Deutch, Adam Scott, Joey Morgan, Kathryn Hahn, Tim Heidecker, Dylan Gelula, Maya Eshet, Eric Edelstein

Director: Max Winkler

Running Time: 93 Minutes

Rating: R for Matter-of-Fact Crude Teen Dialogue, Implications and Discussions of Statutory Relationships, and an Artistically Impressive Penis Drawing

Release Date: March 16, 2018 (Limited)

When Tim Heidecker is playing the relatively normal person, you know that everyone else is stepping a bit outside their comfort zones and/or we have now realized that everybody is at least a little bit crazy. Along with his frequent partner Eric Wareheim, Heidecker has set the demented tone for much of 21st century comedy. But when he acts for other writers and directors, he works effectively as the most grounded presence. In the case of Flower, in which teenagers attempt to expose pedophiles through unsavory means, he comes across as the voice of reason, or at least the one most conscientiously attempting to do the right thing. Meanwhile, folks like Zoey Deutch and Adam Scott, who normally play sweet and wholesome, are afforded plenty of opportunities to tap into their darker impulses.

Heidecker plays Bob, the stepfather-to-be of Deutch’s Erica, who runs a small-time extortion scam with her friends Kala (Unbreakable Kimmy Schmidt’s Dylan Gelula) and Claudine (Maya Eshet), in which they lure adults into sex acts and then demand money once they reveal that they are underage. They sniff out a major opportunity when her future stepbrother Luke (Joey Morgan), stricken by panic attacks and suicidal tendencies, reveals that he was molested by Will (Scott), a former teacher of his who Erica recognizes as the hot older dude from the local bowling alley. She pronounces that shaking down a child molester is their “moral obligation,” but their sense of right and wrong is not exactly ideal, as they partly justify their actions by noting that they don’t want anyone to get fat after suffering abuse. Erica does seem to be motivated more by justice than cash, but her morals are too distorted to stop her from making things spiral out of control.

Flower is far from a Time’s Up rallying cry against abusers. It is much too complicated to be that. There are holes in Luke’s story, and Will seems too decent to be guilty of what he’s been accused of (and not in the way that abusers are often manipulatively charming), though it is certainly concerning that he allows the teenage Erica to insinuate herself into his life. And Erica and her friends are hardly appropriate symbols for victims reclaiming their dignity, as they are too quick to justify their own criminality as a means to the right end. Director/co-writer Max Winkler does not shy away from this messiness, getting a brazen but enticing performance out of Deutch in the process. But the ending ties everything up a little too neatly, opting for a romantic outlaw angle that ignores much of the film’s moral debris. The whole affair is a tonal ping-pong, for better and worse.

Flower is Recommended If You Like: The Edge of Seventeen, Donnie Darko, The Crush

Grade: 3 out of 5 Shakedowns

This Is a Movie Review: ‘7 Days in Entebbe’ Takes the Tension Out of Hijacking, But It Has Really Great Dance Scenes

March 13, 2018

jmunney Cinema, Movie Reviews , , , , , , , , Leave a comment

CREDIT: Liam Daniel/Focus Features

This review was originally published on News Cult in March 2018.

Starring: Daniel Brühl, Rosamund Pike, Lior Ashkenazi, Eddie Marsan, Mark Ivanir, Denis Ménochet

Director: José Padilha

Running Time: 106 Minutes

Rating: PG-13 for Threats of Violence Moreso Than Actual Violence and Outbursts Under Pressure

Release Date: March 16, 2018 (Moderate)

What does it mean when the best parts of a docudrama about a hijacking and a hostage rescue are its dance scenes? I don’t think this happens often enough to make any generalized conclusion, but in the case of 7 Days in Entebbe, it means that the dance parts are enthralling, while the actual meat of the story is not particularly attention-grabbing. And that is a problem, because while the dancing does take up a relatively significant portion of the running time, it still only amounts to about 10%. If Entebbe had suddenly turned into a full-fledged presentation of hoofing it up, it would certainly be strange and it would go against the promise its premise makes, but it would be a whole hell of a lot more interesting than what we have.

The nominal focus of the film is the 1976 hijacking of a plane en route from Tel Aviv to Paris by a group of two Germans and two Palestinians. They take the passengers hostage, rerouting them to Uganda, where they stow them away with the unlikely help of Ugandan president Idi Amin. They demand a ransom and the release of Palestinian and pro-Palestinian militants, making some provocative statements along the way, such as a claim that Israel is “the heir of Nazism.” The hostage operation offers little in the way of knuckle-biting thrills, and the film’s political bent is too ill-defined to say anything much beyond, “Israel and Palestine are stuck in an eternal impasse.”

But back to the dancing, because that’s the only aspect of this film that I really want to talk about. Choreographed by Ohad Naharin and performed by the Batsheva Dance Company, the dance scenes are justified by a subplot in which one of the dancers is the girlfriend of an Israeli commando. That justification is remarkably thin, but not unwelcome, considering the electric charge of the performances. About a dozen dancers are arranged sitting in chairs in a semicircle, popping up in stiff poses when the music hits an explosive note. The commando’s girlfriend has been struggling, and she keeps falling when everyone else stands up. But this routine is so powerful that that mistake could legitimately be part of the routine, and it would make perfect sense. Bottom line: if you’re an action aficionado, Entebbe will be sorely disappointing, but if you’re an appreciator of dance, summon the patience to deal with some boring action for the opportunity to witness some brilliant movement.

7 Days in Entebbe is Recommended If You Like: The existential prison of the Israel-Palestine conflict, Pina

Grade: 2 out of 5 Humanitarian Hijackers

This Is a Movie Review: ‘Gringo’ Finds Humor and Redemption in a World Gone Mad

March 8, 2018

jmunney Cinema, Movie Reviews , , , , , , , , , , Leave a comment

CREDIT: Amazon Studios

This review was originally posted on News Cult in March 2018.

Starring: David Oyelowo, Charlize Theron, Joel Edgerton, Amanda Seyfried, Thandie Newton, Sharlto Copley, Yul Vazquez, Harry Treadaway, Alan Ruck

Director: Nash Edgerton

Running Time: 110 Minutes

Rating: R for Corporate Profanity, Office Sex and Euphemistic Propositioning, and a Few Gunshots and Amputations

Release Date: March 9, 2018

Gringo exists mainly to stoke the ire of anyone who believes that the insurance industry is the greatest scam in the history of humanity. I am sure that there are some agents putting in decent work, and there certainly have been times when a smart policy have bailed folks out of emergencies. But why do have to put money aside (or pay folks off, in cynical parlance) to ensure all that? Why can’t we as a species just agree to have each other’s backs as part of the human contract? I suppose that the insurance industry is meant to be that agreement, but as Gringo proves, there are plenty of opportunities for abuse in its current form.

A less humanistic film than Gringo would have Harold Soyinka (David Oyelowo) seeking his revenge on the world for being constantly taken advantage of or falling into a pit of despair over how nice guys finish last. But instead, it is about how he realizes how he is rich in what truly counts in life through a chaotically dangerous, screwball journey. He is a mid-level businessman at the drug company Cannabix who is just a little too trusting of everyone around him. He catches wind that a lot of jobs are going to get cut very soon in unscrupulous fashion, and he is shocked that his boss Richard (Joel Edgerton) would ever do such a thing. But that bit of news should not be surprising to anyone who has spent more than a few minutes with this most weaselly of alpha males. Furthermore, Harold and his wife Bonnie (Thandie Newton) are tens of thousands of dollars in debt, mostly due to her highly irresponsible financial habits. Plus, she’s cheating on him (take a wild guess with who), and she’s kind of taking pity on how much he’s been letting this all happen right under his nose.

As Harold begins to learn the truth, Richard and his other boss, the more openly terrible Elaine (the scary when she’s funny Charlize Theron), bring him down to Mexico for a little business trip, making it the perfect time for Harold to win back a little of his dignity. So he fakes his own kidnapping in a scheme to make off with a ransom of $5 million. Such a kidnapping is believable, as the company has recently developed a very valuable product (medical marijuana in pill form), and they do business with a cartel. At first Richard and Elaine are willing to play ball (sort of) to get Harold home safe. But when it turns out that Cannabix’s insurance policies make it more valuable when an employee dies, things really go topsy-turvy.

Not that they ever weren’t pear-shaped in the first place. Harold may be faking his kidnapping, but he actually has been targeted for capture by the cartel, who mistake him for the boss. Adding to the fun are his run-ins with Sunny (Amanda Seyfried), a sweet and naive guitar shop employee who does not realize the extent of her boyfriend’s (Harry Treadaway) drug dealings, as well as Richard’s brother Mitch (Sharlto Copley), a sort of private special ops extractor who weirdly but effectively has some of the most integrity of any of the characters.

There is a lot of explosive coincidence in Gringo, but it is justified in that it is what ensures the hilarity. The humor is morally satisfying, as the worst actors are forced to reckon with what they deserve, while the lessons imparted are not overly didactic. Kindness is rewarded, as epiphanies emerge to show that life’s cruelty can be laughed upon. This is quite the loony bin of a cast, but ultimately this is The Manic High-Wire David Oyelowo Show, and he sells it with a supremely cool final shot.

Gringo is Recommended If You Like: Coen Brothers Crime Comedies, The Kind of Movie Wherein Gunfire Leads to Hilarious Screaming, Satisfying Morality

Grade: 3 out of 5 Gorilla

This Is a Movie Review: Tamara’s Still Not Home, and ‘The Strangers: Prey at Night’ is Frustratingly Minimalist Horror

March 8, 2018

jmunney Cinema, Movie Reviews , , , , , , , Leave a comment

CREDIT: Brian Douglas/Aviron Pictures

This review was originally posted on News Cult in March 2018.

Starring: Christina Hendricks, Martin Henderson, Bailee Madison, Lewis Pullman

Director: Johannes Roberts

Running Time: 87 Minutes

Rating: R for Knives, Blood, Axes – The Usual

Release Date: March 9, 2018

A lot of franchises straddle the line between sequel and reboot with their follow-up entries. In the case of The Strangers: Prey at Night, that confusion is baked right into the very premise. The first Strangers featured a group of masked, essentially motiveless killers terrorizing a couple. Prey at Night features a group of masked, essentially motiveless killers terrorizing a family. Are these the same killers? The masks are the same, as are the methods, and therefore any continuity or lack thereof is beside the point. So let’s ignore what Prey at Night does or does not mean as a sequel and just deal with it as its own thing.

The victims this time around are a family of four taking a weekend trip at a trailer park owned by some relatives. I’ll mention the actors because they deserve credit. I was going to skip mentioning the character names because they hardly register as fully fleshed-out human beings, but then I decided I might as well name them for the sake of making it more convenient to explain what happens. So there’s mom Cindy (Christina Hendricks), dad Mike (Martin Henderson), and their teenage kids Kinsey (Bailee Madison) and Luke (Lewis Pullman). The whole family is on edge, mostly due to Kinsey’s recent behavior, which is never specified. She is wearing a Ramones T-shirt and a plaid jacket tied around her waist, which I guess is supposed to symbolize rebelliousness? Or it could mean nothing at all. Either way, it’s not worth getting hung up on.

But the thing is, we spend so much time with these people that I cannot help but get hung up on something about them. This film asks its audience to consider, “What if you were relentlessly attacked by a group of killers just because they had nothing better to do?” Thus it is understandable why the main characters lack any discernible identity. These people are just supposed to be Any American Family. In theory, that is an intriguing approach, but in practice it is frustrating to spend so much time with these people and know essentially nothing about them.

Before the screening, there was an intro video from director Johannes Roberts (47 Meters Down) who explained that he meant for Prey at Night to be his own spin on John Carpenter. Specifically, he’s referring to the small town portion of Carpenter’s oeuvre, particularly The Fog and of course Halloween. But that influence feels misplaced in a film marked heavily by its gory extremity. There are some striking, Carpenter-esque shots (like a mailbox surrounded by fog), but they do not really feel incorporated into the killers’ reign of terror. Elsewhere, there are some vicarious thrills when the family fights back. But overall, this is a situation that would be plenty scary if it actually happened to you but on screen in this case it doesn’t offer the catharsis necessary for a successful horror film.

The Strangers: Prey at Night is Recommended If You Like: Horror Movies with Characters Devoid of Any Personality

Grade: 2 out of 5 Cracked Cell Phones

This Is a Movie Review: ‘Thoroughbreds’ is a Psychopathic Murder Scheme with Primary Color Flourishes

March 6, 2018

jmunney Cinema, Movie Reviews , , , , , , Leave a comment

CREDIT: Claire Folger/Focus Features

This review was originally posted on News Cult in March 2018.

Starring: Olivia Cooke, Anya Taylor-Joy, Anton Yelchin, Paul Sparks, Francie Swift

Director: Cory Finley

Running Time: 90 Minutes

Rating: R for a Psychopathic, Clinical Approach to Blood and a Little Bit of Language and Upper Middle Class Drug Use

Release Date: March 9, 2018 (Limited)

As as I became acquainted with the premise of Thoroughbreds – Lily (Anya Taylor-Joy) and Amanda (Olivia Cooke) team up to kill the former’s stepfather (Paul Sparks) – I of course had to ask: what is it that drives Lily all the way to murder? But alas, that is not really a question this film cares to answer. It is not exactly ignored, but you would expect a grave decision like this to be given more consideration than Lily gives it. If he were abusing her in some way, you could understand why she would go to such an extreme. But the conflict basically boils down to: he wants her to stop freeloading and she thinks he’s a jerk. It is totally understandable why they have such a chilly relationship, but it hardly justifies murder.

It should be noted, though, that that shallow decision-making and outsize retribution is kind of the point. This is a bloody satire in the vein of Heathers. But the whole affair is so underplayed that you never feel the over-the-top nature of the premise. There is a matter-of-fact presentation that makes it hard to peg what writer/director Cory Finley wants us to conclude about Lily and Amanda’s motives and machinations. Since one or both of them is in essentially every scene, we are immersed in their perspective to the point that what they are scheming seems like so much less of a big deal than it obviously is.

Thoroughbreds works best as a showcase for its two leads. Amanda is some sort of sociopathic or psychopathic, unable to intuit the meanings of facial expressions, but practiced at faking emotions. Cooke nails a combination of off-putting but somehow friendly. Lily is the apparently more “normal” of the two, but that description really only fits insofar as how she is more adept at displaying and interpreting typically genuine emotions. She is prone to moral slipperiness that reads as inherent to her nature. The title basically refers to how these two have been groomed by nature to be the perfect criminals. Anton Yelchin (in one of his last roles) shows up as a drug dealer to privileged kids who Lily and Amanda hire to help them carry out the deed. He puts his own spin on the “you’re all blind sheep” shtick, but mostly he just serves a plot convenience.

These off-kilter individuals get their very appropriate soundtrack in the form of Erik Friedlander’s weird percussive score. It is so lacking in melody or any aspect of musical structure that I wonder if what I’m recognizing is actually just part of the sound mixing. Either way, it is an appropriate fit. It is a cold and clinical soundscape that is fit for me to love, while that same approach with the narrative has more modest results.

Thoroughbreds is Recommended If You Like: Heathers, The Loved Ones, American Psycho, Avant-garde percussive scores

Grade: 3 out of 5 Practice Smiles

This Is a Movie Review: Eli Roth’s ‘Death Wish’ is Plenty Entertaining If You Don’t Want to Grapple Too Much with Vigilantism’s Complicated Morality

March 2, 2018

jmunney Cinema, Movie Reviews , , , , , , , , , , Leave a comment

CREDIT: Takashi Seida/Metro Goldwyn Mayer Pictures

This review was originally posted on News Cult in March 2018.

Starring: Bruce Willis, Vincent D’Onofrio, Dean Norris, Kimberly Elise, Beau Knapp, Elisabeth Shue, Camila Morrone, Mike Epps

Director: Eli Roth

Running Time: 107 Minutes

Rating: R for Brutal Gunfire and the Corresponding Bloody, Bone-Breaking Injuries

Release Date: March 2, 2018

By Eli Roth standards, Death Wish – a remake of the notorious 1974 Charles Bronson franchise-starter of the same name – is actually rather tame. The director of such modern-day exploitation as Cabin Fever, Hostel, and The Green Inferno has made a career out of pushing buttons, but the most objectionable elements of Death Wish are borrowed from the original. Based on the evidence on display here, I don’t know if Roth is an advocate for vigilantism, or if he even necessarily has any fully formed opinion. But no matter his own personal feelings, the film is plenty confrontational and liable to stir up heated feelings.

The setup is essentially the same as the original: Chicago-based surgeon Paul Kersey (Bruce Willis) turns to vigilantism after a robbery by professional burglars leaves his wife Lucy (Elisabeth Shue) dead and his daughter Jordan (Camila Morrone) in a coma. He is frustrated by the lack of leads in the case and the constant gang-related violence in his city, so he takes to heart those who bandy about the maxim that police only arrive after the crime has happened. So he procures a gun, dons his hoodie, and does what he can to clean up the streets, initially dispatching the likes of carjackers and soon working his way up to executing career criminals in broad daylight. He becomes a viral sensation, with some calling him the “Guardian Angel,” with others opting for “Grim Reaper.” There are some clear racial overtones, underlined by footage of real talk radio personalities discussing his activity, as Kersey is white and his targets tend to be people of color. But pointedly, he is also protecting many people of color. Admirably, Roth actually lets this issue remain as complicated as it deserves to be, but it could still have been addressed more head-on

When viewed straightforwardly as action movie fish fulfillment, Death Wish is well-crafted, crackerjack entertainment. I cannot deny that I was thrilled, nor can I dispute the comic relief that comes in the form of Vincent D’Onofrio as Paul’s schlubby but loyal younger brother, or Mike Epps as the resident horndog doctor, or just a well-timed gunshot. But naturally enough I find myself hesitant to cheer any movie in which a vigilante is the clear hero. That is somewhat mitigated by the fact that Paul is so clearly a decent person and that everyone he kills is clearly a bad guy. But then that clear demarcation between good and evil makes for its own problems. That stark opposition can work, with Lord of the Rings perhaps the best example.

So I would like to propose a theory of the Uncanny Valley of Realistic Violence, wherein a fantastical setting makes it easier to stomach an inherently good character killing an inherently evil character. But the closer the setting is to reality, the harder the killing is to accept, because the good/evil split is not so easy in real life. Roth flirts with examining that complication, but for the most part he is more interested in being a showman. Despite my problems with Death Wish’s ickiness, I do not feel too compelled to condemn it all that strongly on moral grounds. After all, it is clearly a fantasy, because where else but in the movies would the lead detective (Dean Norris) close the case with a delicious bite of pizza and an equally delicious one-liner?

Death Wish is Recommended If You Like: Eli Roth’s in-your-face style, Bruce Willis downplaying while remaining intense, Comic relief when it might not be appropriate

Grade: 2.5 out of 5 Head Shots

This Is a Movie Review: ‘Foxtrot’ Takes the Book of Job to Modern-Day Israel

February 28, 2018

jmunney Cinema, Movie Reviews , , , , , Leave a comment

CREDIT: Sony Pictures Classics

This review was originally posted on News Cult in February 2018.

Starring: Lior Ashkenazi, Yonaton Shiray, Sarah Adler, Shira Haas

Director: Samuel Maoz

Running Time: 113 Minutes

Rating: R for Shocking, Sudden Violence and Exaggerated Comic Book Nudity

Release Date: March 2, 2018 (Limited)

All life is suffering, at least according to the Judeo-Christian view. There’s a particular strain on the Judeo side of things that goes at least as far back as the Old Testament, specifically the Book of Job, in which humans are pawns in a system of dramatic irony at the hands of a confounding god. The Coen brothers took a deep dive into this mythology with A Serious Man, and now Samuel Maoz’s Israeli film Foxtrot takes it to particularly tragic ends. The result is a striking look at the toll borne by individuals living constantly on the edge of conflict.

Foxtrot begins with Tel Aviv couple Michael (Lior Ashkenazi) and Dafna Feldmann (Sarah Adler) informed that their soldier son Jonathan (Yonaton Shiray) has fallen in the line of duty. At first it looks like the film’s focus will be an examination of the effects of shock. Dafna immediately faints and remains unconscious for the first thirty minutes or so. Michael is able to remain awake, but he must rely on an alarm clock to remind him to drink water at regular intervals so as to keep his anxiety in check. It is an awfully clinical approach to take towards any film, and in this case it would seem to be promising a profound slog. But Foxtrot goes more mammoth and less straightforward. It is an emotional rollercoaster, with a force from beyond controlling the dips and the turns. When the focus shifts to what Jonathan is up to, the truth is brought into fuller, clearer focus. The irony comes to the fore, serving up the twin lessons that tragedy is both not as bad as it originally appears and also that it is just as bad as it originally appears.

An affluent middle-class couple dealing with loss is an unfortunately too frequent story present throughout the world. Jonathan’s portion of the story, meanwhile, is particularly resonant in its Israeli setting, but its existential milieu is also a significant aspect of the general human experience. He is assigned to a crossing outpost, and his days are mostly filled with waiting. Occasionally he lifts a crossing gate to let a camel walk through. But that boring setup belies the constant potential for explosiveness.

Foxtrot makes itself felt by interspersing a mostly steady, even-keeled narrative with occasional bursts of tragedy and character revelation. The latter is felt most strongly in an animated section in the form of a comic book drawn by Jonathan that tells his father’s story. The Feldmanns are not a particularly voluble family, which is why this subtextual understanding between father and son (also demonstrated by their shared love of the titular dance) is so appreciated. For a Job-like existence to be bearable, there needs to be love.

Foxtrot is Recommended If You Like: The Book of Job, A Serious Man, Finding bits of humor in the most tragic situations

Grade: 3.5 out of 5 Camels

This Is a Movie Review: ‘Annihilation’ is a Beautiful Hybrid

February 22, 2018

jmunney Cinema, Movie Reviews , , , , , , , , , , 3 Comments

CREDIT: Paramount Pictures/Skydance

This post was originally published on News Cult in February 2018.

Starring: Natalie Portman, Jennifer Jason Leigh, Gina Rodriguez, Tessa Thompson, Tuva Novotny, Oscar Isaac, Benedict Wong, David Gyasi

Director: Alex Garland

Running Time: 115 Minutes

Rating: R for Gator-Shark Attacks, Giant Bear Attacks, Swirling Intestines, and a Little Bit of Nookie

Release Date: February 23, 2018

Annihilation needs you to trust that sometimes disorientation can be good. Or at least, that it can be exciting. I will admit that disorientation does not necessarily work out so well for this film’s characters. The relative safety afforded the audience in vicariously experiencing this vexing and dangerous journey makes secondhand disorientation easier to defend. But still, I think the message here is the same for both participants and observers: venturing into the confusion is how to make the spectacle happen.

Biology professor Lena (Natalie Portman) has been mourning the disappearance of her husband Kane (Oscar Isaac) ever since he took off for a highly classified military expedition a year ago, when suddenly he just reappears in their house one day. But Kane has essentially no memory of what happened, and it is clear soon enough that there is so much of his mission left to complete. So Lena is recruited by Dr. Ventress (Jennifer Jason Leigh) to join her and her team of scientists (Gina Rodriguez, Tessa Thompson, Tuva Novotny) to trek into Area X, the coastal location that Kane and many others have gotten lost in, and figure out what the hell is going on there.

I do not recall Annihilation specifying the exact geographical location of Area X. It is possible it did and I just missed it, which can happen when a film mentions a significant detail only briefly. But in this case it is appropriate that I would miss such a detail, whether or not it was actually omitted. Area X is surrounded by a liquidy substance, or perhaps “presence” is a better word, referred to as “a shimmer,” which disorients anyone who approaches or moves through it. When Ventress and her crew first awake in the area, they seem to have immediately lost days, maybe even weeks. If we as an audience feel like we are missing just as many details as they are, then writer/director Alex Garland is probably pulling off what he set out to do. What awaits all of us is a world of wonders that can be explained by science, even though science says they should be impossible.

Flowers of clearly different species are growing on the same branches. The team is attacked by a gator with shark teeth. Plants in the shape of walking humans have sprung up. Eventually these ladies recognize their own blood and DNA swirling and transforming. These combinations are supposed to be fundamentally incompatible according to life as we know it. Lena’s on-the-fly theorizing of this continuous mutation works as a sort of explanation of how mythical hybrid creatures or the monstrosities from genre films could come to exist if they were to exist in reality.

The crew confronts Area X and its inhabitants with a mix of paranoia, wonder, fatalism, and determination. Considering the constant transformation inherent to this setting, it could be argued that all or none or some indefinable combination of these approaches is the right plan of action. Appropriately, it is all rendered by a design and effects team inspiring awe on a thoroughly devastating scale. The lush greenery is both beautiful and explosive. The music, courtesy of Ben Salisbury and Portishead’s Geoff Barrow, is unnerving and entrancing, including a set of reverberating notes that the trailer has already made famous. This intoxicating mix also offers up a series of killer set pieces, including a riff on The Thing’s notorious blood test scene, but featuring the main animal from a creature feature imbued with the Freddy Krueger-style power to maintain the dying cries of its victims.

Annihilation hits that sci-fi sweet spot of a confusing, complicated premise that ultimately explains itself, but not in a way that betrays its intricacies or ambitions, or makes matters particularly comforting. This is visionary cinema, flourishing and fully realizing itself from glorious setup to perfect ending.

Annihilation is Recommended If You Like: The Thing, 2001, Fringe, Cronenbergian body horror, The design elements of A Nightmare on Elm Street, Mulholland Drive

Grade: 5 out of 5 Shimmers

Older Entries Newer Entries