Dirty Dancing: Havana Nights. A Review

 

DIRTY DANCING: HAVANA NIGHTS

I think that one can enjoy a film that is not good. Such is the case with Dirty Dancing: Havana Nights. I was expecting a disaster, yet Havana Nights ended up being pleasant. I did not say good. I did not say Havana Nights is anywhere close to the original Dirty Dancing. I said, "pleasant", which is in the end works at least for me.

It is November 1958. Katey Miller (Romola Garai) is unhappy about having to move to Cuba. She is there because her father Bert (John Slattery) is working there. As such, the entire Miller family has to move to the tropical paradise: Katey, Bert, his wife Jeannie (Sela Ward) and Katey's younger sister Susie (Mika Boorem). Susie easily fits into the other young American expatriates like James Phelps (Jonathan Jackson), whose father is Bert's boss. Katey, more intellectual, does not mix well in this circle. She especially does not fit in with mean girl Eve (January Jones). 

Katey does have an easier time with hotel waiter Javier Suarez (Diego Luna). They meet when she accidentally knocks out his tray and gets berated for "his" clumsiness". Javier, who does speak English, is the son of an opponent to the current Batista regime. Javier's brother Carlos (Rene Lavan) is a supporter of Fidel Castro and the revolution. Javier is nominally sympathetic, but he would rather be at La Rosa Negra, where he can free himself in sultry Latin dancing.

As Bert and Jeannie were once skilled dancers themselves, Katey has some background in the art of movement. She also finds Javier's world more exciting than the WASPish world people like James and Eve live in. A dance competition piques her interest, especially with a chance for the winners to go to America. Taking the advice of the hotel dance instructor (Patrick Swayze), Katey eventually talks the now-fired Javier into being her partner.

How much of a partner will the erotic Latino become? Will the Millers find the prospect of a Cuban boy squiring their daughter a pleasant one? Will the impending revolution upend all their lives? Will Katey and Javier win the dance contest?

As I reflect on Dirty Dancing: Havana Nights, I think that Boaz Yakin and Victoria Arch's screenplay (from a story by Kate Gunzinger and Peter Sagal) pretty much drew from the original Dirty Dancing. It is almost a surprise that Javier didn't go up to the Miller table and say, "Nadie pone Bebe en una esquina". You have the opening voiceover. You have the parents and two sisters, one bookish, one flirtatious. You have the luxurious hotel setting. You have the guy from the wrong side of the tracks with the moves. You have the young man that the parents would prefer for their older, bookish daughter. You have a dance rehearsal montage. You have a climatic dance.

Granted, there are some differences: you did not have revolutionaries attempting to kill people at Kellerman's Resort. Overall, though, Havana Nights is a bit of a Dirty Dancing clone. 

Things get more complicated when you see Patrick Swayze in Havana Nights. Technically speaking, he is not recreating his role as Johnny Castle. He is not billed as "Johnny Castle" but as "Dance Class Instructor". He appears briefly in the film, giving Katey a pep talk and cheers our dancers on the sidelines. I think people assume that Swayze is playing Johnny Castle, but he is strictly speaking not. I do not know exactly why Swayze could not be Johnny Castle. He could have served as a mentor to both Javier and Katey. Instead, his character, whatever he was, was just there and could have been cut out.

In terms of performances, Havana Nights does not ask much from our cast. Romola Garai makes a valiant effort, but sometimes her British accent slips through. It would have been easier to have made her an American who grew up in Britain with her family having lived there before being transferred to Cuba. That way, she could speak in her natural voice versus trying to sound like an American. To be fair, Garai's American accent was serviceable, though not always convincing. She was fine as the hesitant young girl who discovers the rhythm of the island. 

I cannot say that Garai and Diego Luna had chemistry, but they were fine with each other. I find it slightly amusing to see Luna in something like Havana Nights. I do not know if in retrospect, he is particular about being a Mexican playing a Cuban. He was fine in the part of this working-class man who found freedom in the steamy Havana clubs. I think he did as well as he could with what he was given. 

Both Jonathan Jackson and January Jones early in their careers were all right in their roles. I think it might have been better if Jackson's James had not taken a particular action against Katey and been more a dupe than a semi-villain. Jones' efforts to be the mean girl were again, fine, but she was not given much to do.

The real crime is against Sela Ward. She is a talented and beautiful actress who somehow just did not become the star that she I think could have and should have been. While she has done well on television, Ward has never fully broken into film. Havana Nights misused her. I would not go so far as to say that she is miscast. I will say that her efforts to be snobbish and hostile towards Javier and Katey fell a bit flat. It is as if Ward was trying too hard to be harsh. Slattery looked slightly sleepy in the role, but in fairness when he and Ward take to the dance floor, they do look nice.

A major compliment that I can hand Havana Nights is in its soundtrack, full of good Latin music. I cannot extend that to the dance sequences. Guy Ferland filmed some of them poorly, using many midlevel shots and spins, sometimes cutting excessively. While we did get some good numbers, the training montage felt choppy. Worse, we did not get Garai and Luna in full-form shots.  

I did find the ending curious. It is ostensibly a happy ending, with everyone going to La Rosa Negra shortly after Batista flees. Are we supposed to believe that everyone is celebrating Castro's takeover of Cuba? Maybe Luna in real life thinks this is a wonderful thing. I would have thought it would be more realistic to think that the Millers would have fled in terror versus hitting the clubs.

I did not end up hating Dirty Dancing: Havana Nights. It is inoffensive. Yes, it has no reason for being, coasting on the Dirty Dancing name and being a prequel in name only. Still, if you go into Dirty Dancing: Havana Nights, you could end up Havana good time.

Sorry, I could not resist. 

DECISION: C+

Psycho IV: The Beginning. The Television Movie

PSYCHO IV: THE BEGINNING

One more round with our favorite serial killer Norman Bates in Psycho IV: The Beginning. I do not know if one needs to quibble how a Part IV (or 4 for those unfamiliar with Roman numerals) can be "the beginning". This is especially true since Psycho IV is both prequel and sequel to the original film. With some strong performances, Psycho IV serves as a good way to close out this epic series but a poor way to set up any new films.

Late night radio talk show hostess Fran Ambrose (CCH Pounder) is covering the subject of matricide on Talk of the Town (which is also called The Fran Ambrose Show). Among her guests is Dr. Leo Richmond (Warren Frost), who once examined a mother-killer named Norman Bates. Into this comes a caller calling himself "Ed", with his own tale of murdering his own mother.

That caller is in reality Norman Bates (Anthony Perkins), who recounts his story. As a young man (Henry Thomas), he was loved, smothered and abused by his mother Norma (Olivia Hussey). Sometimes she could be very tender and loving. Other times, she would put Norman in compromising positions, enraging her if he got aroused. She would even force him to wear women's clothes. Things are already unstable when Norma begins an affair with Chet Rudolph (Thomas Schuster). Chet is a bully, and he also threatens Norman's place in Norma's world. With that, he poisons them both.

This is already concerning to Fran and Dr. Richmond, who eventually realizes who "Ed" is. The true horror is that Norman, who has married his former psychiatrist Connie (Donna Mitchell), has informed him that she is pregnant. Norman was always dead set against having children, fearing that they would inherit his insanity. Connie, however, opted to get pregnant anyway. Now, on what is his birthday, he tells Fran and her listeners that he plans to kill her and her unborn child to stop the insanity. Will Norman be able to break free of the past once and for all, or will he kill one more time?

For better or worse, for good or ill, Anthony Perkins was so good as Norman Bates that he was never able to fully escape his shadow. Whatever feelings he might have had about his most famous role, Perkins brought a mix of menace and tragedy in Psycho IV. He was eerily calm as Norman, a man who could casually cook while telling strangers of his murderous plan. Joseph Stefano, who wrote the original Psycho script, came back and added as much to the character as Perkins' performance. We see how Norman Bates was shaped by his mother, a disturbed woman who could offer moments of genuine love and kindness between psychological torture.

Stefano's script also allows for some black humor, intentional or not, to emerge. When Connie calls Norman about the possibility of him making his own cake, he tells her, "I'm not good at icing". I do not know if it was meant straight or some kind of pun. I do know that I found it amusing.

As a side note, I cannot help but think that Norman using the name "Ed" was a nod to Ed Gein, the inspiration for Norman Bates. 

Psycho IV ignores the sequels that came before and takes a "back to basics" manner. We go back to Norman's origins to find at heart a good kid, a shy kid, who struggles with sexual desires. Director Mick Garris deserves much credit in how Psycho IV's shifts from past to present are not jarring or feel out of place. He does also attempt to keep tension building in the present-day sections. For instance, there is a strong debate between Fran, Dr. Richmond and Talk of the Town/Fran Ambrose Show's producer Mike (John Landis) about whether or not to contact the police about Norman/Ed's call. 

It is impossible to imagine anyone other than Anthony Perkins playing the part of Norman Bates. However, we found a worthy successor in Henry Thomas. Thomas has an almost innocent manner to his young Norman, making the moments when he is psychologically or physically tortured more difficult to see. He, however, is no wimp. He also shows a more calculated manner, capable of cruelty and violence. In Psycho IV, we see Norman killing more people. Here, we see Thomas able to make Norman both villain and victim.

The late Olivia Hussey was still quite beautiful in Psycho IV. She was able to show the shifts between the good mother and the bad mother quite well. One does wonder why the filmmakers opted to let her keep her British tones as that makes her sound curious in this American setting. Despite that, Hussey made Norma frightening and cruel without making her thoroughly inhuman. CCH Pounder is an underused talent, and here she managed to hold your attention as Fran Ambrose, the talk show hostess with a most eccentric caller. Warren Frost did well as the smug Dr. Richmond, though I wonder how he did not recognize "Ed" sooner given how he had examined him long ago.

Donna Mitchell was probably the weakest performance as Connie Bates, the original Harley Quinn. Once we got to the third act where Norman plans to ice his wife, the television film lost a bit of its footing. It would have been too much to see him go this far. It did not help that Mitchell looked a bit blank at times. 

On the whole, Psycho IV: The Beginning works well. It has strong performances from Anthony Perkins and Henry Thomas as Norman Bates as well as Olivia Hussey as Norma Bates, mother from hell. It has a good story that builds on the original without diminishing or trashing said original. Psycho IV: The Beginning is a good way to end the original franchise.

Little did anyone involve know that this would not be the end of Norman Bates.

7/10

PSYCHO FILMS AND TELEVISION

Psycho (1960)

Psycho II

Psycho III

Psycho (1998)

Bates Motel (Television Movie)

Bates Motel (Television Series)

Dominion: Prequel to The Exorcist. A Review

 

DOMINION: PREQUEL TO THE EXORCIST

How many prequels can a film have? The Exorcist, a hallmark in horror films, got two prequels. The first was 2004's Exorcist: The Beginning. A year later, we got Dominion: Prequel to The Exorcist. We therefore have a situation where we get both "the beginning" and a "prequel" to the same movie. More bizarre, with The Beginning and Dominion, we get pretty similar stories. It isn't a surprise given that they share origin stories, so to speak, with studio involvement shaping a very convoluted situation into having both films. Dominion is held as superior to The Beginning. I can say that it is, but not by much.

Holland, 1944. Catholic priest Lankester Merrin (Skellan Skarsgard, one of the two Dominion cast members who was also in The Beginning) attempts to stop a Nazi commandant from killing villagers in revenge for the killing of one of his men. Despite the commandant's whispered offer to soften the blow by killing someone who is local scum (someone who beats his wife or is a drunkard), Merrin refuses to help. With that, the commandant kills at random, causing Merrin to lose his faith.

Now going to British East Africa three years later, Mr. Merrin is leading an archaeological dig where a Byzantine church has been discovered despite the Byzantine empire never coming that far south and before the introduction of Christianity to the area. Under supervision by Major Granville (Julian Wadham, the other Dominion cast member who survived into The Beginning), the half-English Merrin continues the dig accompanied by young Father Francis (Gabriel Mann). They later meet Dr. Rachel Lesno (Clara Bellar), who runs a clinic for the Turkana community. 

As the dig continues, Merrin becomes intrigued by local Cheche (Billy Crawford), a disabled man shunned by the Turkana. He is just one of the many strange figures and situations going on, everything from cattle eating the hyenas that have been hounding them to the discovery of a demonic temple beneath the church. Tensions begin to build between the Turkana and the British, the former convinced that the latter have brought great evil to them. The tensions build to a climax when two British soldiers are found gruesomely killed in the reopened church. 

Could their killings be something that the Turkana did? Is there a greater, supernatural evil at work? Francis, who barely survived a reprisal attack on his school by a vengeful Turkana warrior, at first sees Cheche's physical recovery as a miracle. However, he soon sees that it is not a miracle, but a sign of demonic possession. Will Merrin rediscover his faith to save Francis, Cheche and Rachel while stopping a war between the British and Turkana? Will this great demonic force lure Merrin into attempting to absolve Merrin's guilt at the expense of his soul? Who will win this great battle between good and evil?

The problem is that Dominion is too similar to The Beginning, so those who have seen The Beginning will be hampered when watching Dominion. Presuming that you have not watched The Beginning, I think that you would find Dominion to be slightly more meditative about issues of faith in a world beset by evil both supernatural and man-made. I think people going into Dominion expecting a lot of gore and blood will be terribly disappointed.

There are other elements that do disappoint in Dominion. Right or wrong, the visual effects are downright ghastly. Some scenes like the cannibal cows and the final battle between Cheche's possessed figure and Merrin are so poor in their VFX that they come across as unintentionally funny. Other elements in William Wisher and Caleb Carr's screenplay are puzzling. For example, Father Francis is found in a situation that echoes the martyrdom of Saint Sebastian. How exactly Father Francis found himself in this situation is a bit unclear, but it does give one a chance to admire the physical beauty of Gabriel Mann.

Another element is how both Rachel is underused and the truth about how she survived the concentration camp is revealed. It does not help that Bellar's performance near the end runs dangerously close to being parody. Sometimes, Crawford's possessed Cheche is surprisingly frightening, especially when he threatens Father Francis in English, which he should not know. However, he too at times hammed it up when playing evil.

Fortunately, there are other elements in Dominion that do work. One strong element is Skarsgard's Father Merrin. He makes one think that this man wants to break from faith because of what he has seen and been forced to partake in but who still has some part of him not want to turn completely away from God. He makes that transformation from priest to archaeologist back to priest believable. 

Another positive element is a fantasy sequence where Merrin sees what would have happened if he had made a different decision in 1944 Holland. This shows what I think is a great truth: that a particular decision might have a worse outcome than what we think it would have had, a case of unintended consequences. We also see this when Granville unintentionally recreates the same situation with the Turkana as that which Merrin had witnessed during the war. Here, we see that evil is not just the realm of Satan, but well within the hearts of men.

I think Wisher and Carr deserve credit for exploring these concepts, even if the execution did not fully work. 

Somehow, I do not feel it in my heart to throw blame on director Paul Schrader. The visual effects, awful as they are, may have been a result of poor funding. Dominion was plagued by interference from Morgan Creek, the studio behind the film. While there are some scares in Dominion, my understanding is that Morgan Creek wanted more in keeping with their idea of what The Exorcist franchise was seen as: scary and graphic. That resulted in the strange situation of having these two prequels.

Dominion: Prequel to The Exorcist is a much more serious film than perhaps the producers would have wanted. It is not a great film, but it is a passable film that could have been better.

DECISION: C+

THE EXORCIST FILMS

The Exorcist

Exorcist II: The Heretic

The Exorcist III

Exorcist: The Beginning

The Exorcist: Believer

Exorcist: The Beginning. A Review (Review #1950)

EXORCIST: THE BEGINNING

I have never understood why The Exorcist inspired an entire franchise. I think the first film works well on its own, with every succeeding film unnecessary. If that is not bad enough, The Exorcist managed somehow a most curious situation. It apparently has not one but two prequels that serve as origin stories. Another time I will look in at 2005's Dominion: Prequel to The Exorcist. For now, I will look at Exorcist: The Beginning, which came out a year prior. I do not understand the hate that Exorcist: The Beginning gets. It is a serviceable albeit flawed opening to this franchise which maybe tries too hard to be graphic, but which worked well for me.

Cairo, 1949. Archaeologist and former priest Lancaster Merrin (Stellan Skarsgard) has been hired by the mysterious Semelier (Ben Cross) to find a rare artifact in British Kenya: a figure of a demon hidden within a Byzantine church that was buried and recently unearthed. The strange thing is that this church should not be there, as it predates the introduction of Christianity to the area. How did it come to be there, and why is it so well-preserved that it looks as if it has never been used?

Arriving in the Turkana region, Merrin is joined by eager young priest Father Francis (James D'Arcy), the chief archaeology overseer Jeffries (Alan Ford) and Dr. Sarah Novak (Izabella Scorupco). They begin looking into the church but find blasphemy and mystery within. The angels point their weapons downward rather than towards Heaven. More shocking is how the crucifix is deliberately inverted. The evil within it has escaped to infect figuratively and literally two Turkana boys. Older brother James (James Bellamy) is torn to pieces by hyenas as his younger brother Joseph (Remy Sweeney) watches. Joseph soon becomes infected with something, which might require the Turkana people to perform their own version of exorcism.

Merrin and Sarah, a concentration camp survivor who had been imprisoned for her anti-Nazi activities, soon begin to bond. Merrin too is traumatized by the war, forced to select people to be shot by a sadistic Nazi officer. This was what broke him from God and the priesthood, but now he will need those resources to fight a greater evil. Eventually, Father Francis reveals the shocking history of the region. Here, it is believed, is the place where Lucifer fell from Heaven as well as the sight of a major battle between Crusaders. The Vatican had attempted to keep all this from ever being discovered, but a recently unearthed letter in the Vatican Archives written in 1893 have enough of a mention that it sparked interest to find this lost church.

Merrin now must find and fight the demonic being that will claim many lives before it is sent back to hell. Not all will survive, but will Merrin find both strength and faith to fight Satan's minion?

After watching Exorcist: The Beginning, I am at a loss to understand why it is seen as such a bad film. I thought it was miles ahead over both Exorcist II: The Heretic and The Exorcist III. One of Exorcist: The Beginning's great flaws is in the visual effects department. Some effects within the film are almost laughably bad. The hyenas were not convincing. The worst one was when a demon-possessed person attempted to get to Merrin to kill him. The overall look was more comical than frightening. The storm that overwhelmed the hospital too was something that a bad Syfy show would find a bit lackluster.

I also was not particularly fond of some of the graphic violence in Exorcist: The Beginning. Of particular note is the gruesome end of Dr. Bession (Patrick O'Kane), the French chief archaeologist who went bonkers and offed himself in what I thought was a particularly gruesome way. This is strange given that some other deaths were more restrained. Also, I have a strong reaction against seeing children killed regardless of how visual or not it is. James getting torn to pieces may have been obscured, but it still bothers me.

I figure that some of the graphic nature to Exorcist: The Beginning was director Renny Harlin's way of giving audiences what he thought they wanted: lots of gore. I think that such things were not needed. However, I found more positives than negatives in Alexi Hawley's screenplay from a story by William Wisher and Caleb Carr.

Some of the performances were quite good. Stellan Skarsgard did well as Merrin, this haunted man who must rise to embrace his faith against this ultimate evil. D'Arcy in a smaller role did well as Father Francis, making him a more youthful and inexperienced priest who actually knows more than he lets on. Scorupco had an interesting backstory that she worked with, though she was a little more blank as Dr. Novak. Alan Ford as Jeffries was a bit over-the-top for my tastes, and I loved how Ben Cross had basically two scenes and got paid for it.

Overall, I found Exorcist: The Beginning an acceptable prequel to this franchise. I wrote at least twice in my notes how I did not hate the film as much as I was supposed to. Is it a great film or even a good film? I would say no, but nowhere as abysmal as many insist that it is. Serviceable, with some good performances and efforts at frights, Exorcist: The Beginning was fine, and I can't fault a film for meeting my expectations. 

DECISION: C+

THE EXORCIST FILMS

The Exorcist 

Exorcist II: The Heretic

The Exorcist III

Dominion: Prequel to The Exorcist

The Exorcist: Believer

The First Omen: A Review

 

THE FIRST OMEN

It is not easy to craft a prequel to any franchise, especially one that was unintentional. The First Omen attempts to create the situation that would eventually lead to the events that unleashed Damien Thorn, the Antichrist. It works hard to be atmospheric and menacing. If only it had worked on being good and logical.

Rome, 1971. While the Eternal City is plagued by protests, American novitiate Margaret (Nell Tiger Free) comes to work at an orphanage before taking the veil (official become a nun). She is delighted to be reunited with her mentor, Cardinal Lawrence (Bill Nighy) and taken under the wing of Abbess Silva (Sonia Braga). 

Margaret also has to endure the very bizarre Sister Anjelia (Ishtar Currie-Wilson) and the shockingly liberated Luz (Maria Caballero), another novitiate. Luz is openly sexual, down to taking the innocent Margaret to a disco, where they dress provocatively, drink and at least openly flirt with men. Margaret is uneasy about being within such decadence, but finds Paolo (Andrea Arcangeli), a nice Italian boy to dance and make out with.

She, however, has no memory of what happened later that night. Luz assures her that she was well-behaved. However, Margaret has other issues to contend with. There is Carlita (Nicole Sorace), a disturbed young girl whom the nuns mistreat due to Carlita's own abusive manner. There is Anjelica, who sets herself on fire and hangs herself. Margaret sees demons all around: emerging from women's wombs and trying to drag her down during a political riot. 

Why does she see all this? What does seemingly crazed Father Brennan (Ralph Ineson) have to do with all this? What of "Scianna", the only clue in a photograph Brennan has to indicate what evil work the Catholic hierarchy is involved in. Margaret and the priest Father Gabriel (Tawfeek Barhom) learn the shocking truth: the Church has decided to breed the Antichrist in order to bring down secularism and maintain power over the populace. However, their efforts have failed due to the Devil, in the form of a jackal, continuingly conceiving daughters. Will either Carlita or Margaret herself be the mother of the Antichrist? 

The First Omen works to tie itself to the 1976 original, but I wish it had instead gone for the 2006 remake. That is because The First Omen and the 2006 The Omen are of similar quality. They are both bad films. Granted, the 1976 version did not specifically say "1976", but if we go by The First Omen, Damien's birth takes place five years before it should. Yes, the original The Omen could have taken place in 1971-1972. However, that takes away from the idea of 666, with Damien being born June 6, 1976: 6/6/76. Since The First Omen clearly takes place in 1971 (since it literally reads "Rome 1971"), I think it is almost impossible to fit in The First Omen with the 1976 The Omen.

It is a curious detail to focus on. However, what is so menacing about the Antichrist being born June 6, 1972? 

Director Arkasha Stevenson worked hard to create an eerie atmosphere in The First Omen, with grand images of the forced conceptions and the eventual birth of Damien and his hereto unknown twin sister. The first appearances of both Sister Anjelica and Luz, as well as the disco scene, are effective visually. The demonic creature being birthed is also effectively visualized. However, you cannot make a good film solely on its looks. You need a story behind the imagery. Stevenson's screenplay (cowritten with Tim Smith and Keith Thomas) is not that script.

At times, it goes almost out of its way to have callbacks to the original. Sister Anjelica's death is an almost exact replica of Damien's nanny's suicide from The Omen, minus setting herself on fire. She even has the same line, "It's all for you", though exactly who the "you" Anjelica refers to remains a bit opaque. Other times, it reminds me of Rosemary's Baby and through no fault of its own, Immaculate. 

Both Immaculate and The First Omen revolve around nuns being impregnated by Satan and the machinations of the Catholic Church to create and control the Antichrist. Immaculate came out a month before The First Omen, though the latter drew upon an earlier film. It is, to my mind, interesting how both films are similar in theme and mood, even to some plot points. It also reflects what seems to be a hostility by creatives towards Catholicism in particular, seeing it as some dark force bent on world domination through terror. Yet I digress.

The First Omen does not have particularly great performances to recommend it. Free is competent as the innocent Margaret. She is better when appearing to be seduced by the World, particularly in her hesitancy to appear so immorally dressed to go to the disco. Granted, the entire idea that these two novitiate nuns would hit the clubs, dressed so provocatively and be boozing it up while making out with hot guys is in of itself crazier than getting knocked up by Satan. However, Free acquitted herself fine in that. 

Much more interesting was Caballero as Luz, this brazenly sexual novitiate who has her own secrets. Nighy was playing the part as if he knew this was all meant to be menacing. Braga shifted from pleasant abbess to demonic conspirator well. Ineson, playing the part that Patrick Troughton would play in The Omen, I think attempted to play Father Brennan as Troughton had. However, his voice was much deeper and growler than Troughton. 

The First Omen is a poor way to start the story of Damien Thorn. It does not connect well with the original The Omen. It tries too hard to be atmospheric and menacing rather than being atmospheric and menacing. Trying to cash in on this unintended franchise, The First Omen will mercifully be the Last Omen too.

DECISION: F

THE OMEN FILMS

The Omen (1976) 

Damien: Omen II

The Final Conflict: Omen III

Omen IV: The Awakening

The Omen (2006) 

A Quiet Place: Day One. A Review

A QUIET PLACE: DAY ONE

I never imagined that A Quiet Place would somehow create its own universe. I have not seen as of this writing A Quiet Place II, so I cannot say whether the prequel A Quiet Place: Day One fits into the narrative. I thought of whether A Quiet Place: Day One stood on its own separate from this accidental franchise. On the whole, A Quiet Place: Day One tells its origin story effectively and efficiently. 

Hospice care patient Sam (Lupita Nyong'o) reluctantly goes into Manhattan with her beloved comfort cat Frodo, the promise of a theater performance followed by her favorite pizza too hard to resist. The hospice care nurse Reuben (Alex Woolf) does not exactly lie to her about the theater performance but does not mention that it is a marionette show. Afterwards, they observe meteors falling onto the streets. Determined to get her promised pizza, Sam initially won't leave but soon everyone rushes when creatures appear while the meteors start creating chaos.

Sam eventually comes to with others hiding in the theater, Reuben included. She learns that sound attracts the aliens, so everyone must be quiet or as quiet as possible. She observes more attacks and Reuben's shocking end, with only another survivor, Henri (Djimon Hounsou) to protect those hiding in the theater. Sam opts to follow the government's advice to go to waiting ships to flee but another attack causes her and Frodo to separate. She does manage to steer two children to safety but now she is trapped.

Also trapped is shell-shocked Eric (Joseph Quinn), a British law student who finds Frodo and later Sam. She reluctantly joins forces with Eric to attempt to escape New York, though not with difficulties made harder by the pain of her illness without pain medication. Will they survive to get to the waiting ships? Will Sam get her pizza?

One of the best qualities in A Quiet Place: Day One is that is has a brief running time of a little over an hour and forty minutes. As such, it never lingers long on situations that might have dragged it down. That is not to say that perhaps A Quiet Place: Day One might not have benefitted from a bit more cutting (such as in having Eric and Sam take more time at Sam's apartment or the pizza hunt). However, that is not a dealbreaker here.

A Quiet Place: Day One knows when to stay and when to go, keeping things flowing relatively well. Even if brief moments, the screenplay by director Michael Sarnoski (from a story by him and original A Quiet Place star/director John Krasinski) manages to have moments of both tension and character development. There is when Sam comes upon the two children who have taken shelter underneath a fountain (the creatures unable to hear voices masked by the flowing water). We see the danger everyone is in, coupled with Sam's genuine concern for these innocent kids.

Essentially, A Quiet Place: Day One is split between Sam & Reuben and Sam & Eric, as if she needs someone to counter her. Each part works well in showing her rapport with these two men. The parts with both come across as authentic: a sarcastic but caring association with the former, a mutual need to survive with the latter. 

The film builds up tension as to whether certain characters will survive, though in one part it seems a bit ludicrous how one of the characters dies. In what is meant to be a tense moment, a giant generator starts being loud. It is shut down, but then a minor rip of clothing is enough to have the creature take that person out. It seems a bit curious why the creature could hear something so soft but not go into full attack mode with something so loud.

It is, as a side note, interesting how A Quiet Place: Day One has faint echoes of September 11, 2001, in the look of both a destroyed Manhattan and the dust and debris on character's faces. I do not know if it was intentional, but it for me added a level of haunting to the film.

Many of the actors were called upon to act with their faces, and it is a credit to both Sarnoski and the actors that they communicated so much with looks and their eyes. Nyong'o does an exceptional job as Sam, a woman who finds a late surge to fight to live despite being close to death. She is the person with whom we are supposed to identify with, our guide into this hellish world. She shows us her mix of sorrow, horror, quiet joy and finally peaceful acceptance mostly through her face. Nyong'o does have moments where she speaks, and she is able to convince the viewer that Sam is caring if a bit cynical.

Wolff is simply unrecognizable as Reuben, a generally quiet character who does his job the best he can. He cares for his patients but is also not above a little deception to get his way. Hounsou has a limited role, appearing for probably less than ten minutes overall near the beginning and briefly at the end. Nevertheless, he manages to hold your attention as Henri, the de facto leader of these survivors. Quinn does good work too as Eric, bumbling, terrified, in need of anyone to be around. He and Nyong'o work well together, balancing each other with her leading him, albeit reluctantly and with no enthusiasm.

A Quiet Place: Day One also knows how to use moments of tension and moments of stillness. A scene where Sam is trapped is built up to create effective tension. Eric timing the thunder to make needed noise is also well-done. As a side note, there is a scene outside a bookstore between Sam and Eric that I found funny. The bookstore's name is Argyle Bookstore, and while I figure it is not a nod to Argylle, I still chuckled. 

A Quiet Place: Day One balances horror and heart. At times perhaps a bit illogical (the generator scene still puzzles me), the film still gives viewers the horror they want to see with some strong characters to care about. On the whole, A Quiet Place: Day One works both as a prequel and its own film separate from the previous A Quiet Place films. 

DECISION: B-

Furiosa: A Mad Max Saga. A Review

 

FURIOSA: A MAD MAX SAGA

Mad Max: Fury Road is beloved on Film Twitter/X, held as some kind of turning point for cinema. I would call it the action movie approved by film nerds. While I gave Fury Road a positive review, I have not seen it since that first time. Moreover, I now feel that I was essentially bullied into giving Fury Road a positive review, almost like it was a requirement to hail it as this unimpeachable masterpiece. That second look is for another day. Instead, let us look on Furiosa, the prequel that tells the origin story of one of Fury Road's characters. Furiosa is not a horrible film, but I will not be pushed to lavish it with praise. Longer than it should be, at times boring, Furiosa never makes its case that this character is worth our time.

Split into five parts, Furiosa covers the early years of this character. Little Furiosa is a child living in the Place of Abundance until a group of marauding bikers comes upon it. They abduct her when she tries to raise the alarm, but her mother Mary (Charlee Fraser) manages to hear it and pursue the abductors. Fleeing from the Green Place into the Wasteland, Mary does manage to free her daughter but is herself captured. The leader of our biker gang, Dr. Dementus (Chris Hemsworth) kills Mary in front of Furiosa. He also takes her on as his unofficial daughter (though I did wonder if she was meant to be a child bride for him).

Dementus wants power, and he is able to force the powerful Immortan Joe (Lachy Hulme) into submission. While his plans to overthrown Immortan Joe fail, he at least is able to take control of Gastown as its ruler, a vassal for Immortan Joe. He also is forced in exchange for control of Gastown to surrender Furiosa, who will be added to Immortan Joe's harem. One of his sons, however, takes a liking to our tween female, but she manages to escape and hide in plain sight as a mute male.

Now, Furiosa (Anya Taylor-Joy) focuses her attention to avenge herself against Dementus. She gets help from Praetorian Jack (Tom Burke), one of Immortan Joe's henchmen impressed by her war skills. Becoming her mentor, she and Praetorian Jack work to destroy Dementus, who is crippling Gastown and Immortan Joe's control of it through his incompetence. However, Dementus has plans of his own to overthrow Immortan Joe. Will Praetorian Jack and Furiosa survive to destroy Dementus and for Furiosa to find her way, metaphorically and literally, through the Wasteland?

As I watched Furiosa, I realized that at heart, prequels have a problem. No matter how often you put your title characters in danger, you know that they will survive. If they didn't, you would not have the movie where the characters began. You can have a prequel that works, such as Rogue One, because there the focus is on new characters building to the familiar situation, not to the characters themselves. Perhaps that is a reason why the Star Wars prequels of The Phantom Menace, Attack of the Clones and Revenge of the Sith are flawed. No matter where Anakin Skywalker lands, we the audience know that he will survive, or we wouldn't have Star Wars (or A New Hope). You can't kill Anakin off before he shifts into Darth Vader, so even in the most seemingly dangerous situations, he'll be all right.

As a side note, I said "A reason". There is a myriad of reasons why the Star Wars prequels do not work, but that is for another day.

Like the Star Wars prequels, Furiosa opted to tell an origin story to this particular character. However, Furiosa is wildly miscalculated on many levels. First, I do not know if there was that much interest in the character from Fury Road to have people wait almost ten years to get one. Was she that interesting as to merit her early years chronicled? Second, for a film about Furiosa, we hardly get much of her. The first hour of this two-and-a-half-hour film is mostly about Dementus to where someone walking in a few minutes late might have thought the title was Dementus. Once we get to the third section, The Stowaway, I had pretty much forgotten Furiosa was even in the film.

Third, there is no justification for Furiosa being two and a half hours long. You could have cut down the punishing first two sections (The Pole of Inaccessibility and Lessons from the Wasteland) into at most a fifteen-minute section. All the political machinations of Dementus and Immortan Joe with Joe's sons Scrotus and Rictus Erectus (dear God, those names) is really boring and uninteresting to what should be Furiosa's origins. Furiosa is hardly a Furiosa origin story. My mind wandered a bit into wondering what ever happened to Furiosa's sister Valkyrie. Did those in the Green Place just say, "Well, your Mum and sister are gone, so good luck to you"? Director and cowriter George Miller (writing with Nick Lathouris) introduced this character and forgot about her. I hope she wasn't being held back for a sequel to a prequel. 

We now go to the performances. I have heard that Anya Taylor-Joy has 30 lines in Furiosa. I kept my own count, and I found a more generous number: 49 lines, though I did count one-word utterances as lines. I might have also split a sentence into two, raising the overall number. Little Furiosa (Alyla Brown) had eight lines that I counted. That means that, using my count, the title character had 57 lines altogether.

That is 57 lines. For the title character. In a two-and-a-half-hour film. It should be noted that we do not hear Furiosa speak until 15 minutes into the film. 

As Furiosa is not focused around Furiosa, we can pretty much skip Anya Taylor-Joy's performance. It was not a bad performance, and every so often we saw glimpses of what could have been. Her final confrontation against Dementus was not bad, though like much of Furiosa drawn out. 

Perhaps I can praise Hemsworth in saying that he devoured the scenery like an orphan from a Charles Dickens novel. I do not consider Hemsworth an actual actor, so I won't say he gave a performance here. I will say that he was so manically over-the-top that he seemed almost crazed. Granted, that was the role, so I cannot fault him for being gonzo in Furiosa. Still, it was pretty hammy, so take that as you will. It, perhaps, takes a certain skill to play calm when you've had your nipples ripped off. 

I understand that Burke is supposed to be a major character as Praetorian Jack, but I barely remember him. Take that as you will too.

Now, there are some good parts in Furiosa. The costumes were clever (one suit was made out of bullets). The music was not bad either. So, there are some good things in the film, I suppose. 

Furiosa: A Mad Max Saga had very little to recommend it, apart from a near-fanatical devotion to Fury Road among cinema intelligentsia. If I can say one positive about it, however, it is that at least it's better than Argylle. 

DECISION: D-

Wonka: A Review (Review #1775)

 

WONKA

I find that some films simply want to please, to be cute and whimsical. Willy Wonka and the Chocolate Factory was cute and whimsical while also being surprisingly dark. Wonka, the new prequel to the 1971 musical, leans heavily on its celebrated predecessor with mostly positive results. 

Former ship's cook Willy Wonka (Timothée Chalamet) has arrived in an unnamed city to make his fortune as a chocolatier with delicious and fantastical sweets. Owing to his naivete and generosity, however, Wonka soon falls into the clutches of launderess Mrs. Scrubitt (Olivia Coleman) and her henchman, Bleacher (Tom Davis).

Mrs. Scrubitt and Bleacher run a mix of hostel and laundry where those unfortunate enough to seek shelter there are hit with an outlandish bill owing to them not reading the fine print (Wonka being illiterate does not help). Willy soon becomes friends with Noodle (Calah Lane), a cynical orphan also working off an even larger debt. 

Willy won't be deterred in his determination to create chocolate concoctions to delight his clientele. Neither the brutal working conditions of Mrs. Scrubitt & Bleacher or the Chocolate Cartel will stop our eager, enthusiastic, eccentric confectioner. The Chocolate Cartel is headed by Mr. Slugworth (Paterson Joseph), who pushes the other cartel members into crushing all newcomers. They also bribe the Chief of Police (Keegan-Michael Key) to do their bidding. Joining forces with the other Scrubitt slaves, Wonka works his magic to fulfill his destiny. To do that, he not only needs to take on and take down the chocolate cartel, but also face off against Lofty (Hugh Grant), a bitter Oompah Loompa set on getting justice from the hapless Wonka.

It looks like Willy Wonka's dreams are about to come true, but there is sabotage afoot. Will Willy thwart the Chocolate Cartel's machinations? Will he be able to disable the duplicitous Father Julius (Rowan Atkinson) and his monastery of chocoholic monks to make his dreams come true and keep his promise to his late mother (Sally Hawkins)? 

Willy Wonka and the Chocolate Factory is a beloved film, something that is close to the hearts of many. As such, trying to create something of an origin story for this enigmatic figure is a tough task. I say "something of an origin story" because Wonka does not go into great detail about his past. We start with him arriving on a ship, singing the opening number A Hatful of Dreams. We learn later on that he is driven by a desire to honor his late mother's memory, with his idea that if he succeeds, she would metaphorically if not literally be beside him one last time. He mentions briefly that he first dreamt of being a magician.

However, apart from that, Willy Wonka is still a bit of a mystery. How he came to discover all his fantastical chocolates (let alone make them) or how his top hat can conjure up all sorts of things is left unexplained. I think on the whole this was a good idea in Simon Farnaby and director Paul King's screenplay. We get bits and pieces (particularly his love for his mother as the primary motivation) but yet still have a bit of mystery and whimsy for Willy.

Wonka works hard to be whimsical and colorful, perhaps a bit too hard. Try as it might, there were few moments of genuine wonder. Of particular note is A World of Your Own, one of the few musical moments that does stick with the viewer for a while. Everyone involved both in front of and behind the camera work hard to make A World of Your Own into something close to Willy Wonka and the Chocolate Factory's signature song Pure Imagination (which Wonka echoes, quotes and reinterprets at the beginning and end). 

Yet, despite its best and determined efforts, A World of Your Own does not quite hit the mark. I think it is because the number takes place on what looks like what it is: a film set. It is not a bad set, but like in a lot of Wonka, there seems to be a bit of magic missing. It is not for lack of trying. It is just that there is something a bit mechanical about things.

As a side note, I personally am astonished that A World of Your Own or another song, For a Moment, were not shortlisted for the Best Original Song Academy Award. Those are probably the best songs in Wonka in my view. To think that an original musical will not be so much as nominated is quite a puzzle for me. 

I think a lot of Wonka felt like it was more for the stage than for the screen. Curiously, the first half was top-heavy with musical numbers to where by the time we got around to the fourth song I began to openly wonder if a musical could have too many songs. To be fair, some of Neil Hannon's songs had clever lyrics. In Sweet Tooth, the Chocolate Cartel's ode to bribery, I was impressed on how it made the "conscience nonsense" rhyme work. In a reprise of You Never Had Chocolate Like This, the line "hair repair éclair" struck me as clever. 

A musical rises and falls on its songbook, and Wonka is wonky on that part. It is not that the songs are terrible per se. It is that they are not particularly memorable. For a Moment was moving, and I think A World of Your Own was meant to be the showstopper. It was good but not great. I also did like the opening A Hatful of Dreams, but on the whole I do not know whether they will be embraced in the same way something like Pure Imagination, I've Got a Golden Ticket or The Candy Man from the 1971 film will be.

I am loath to compare the original with a remake, adaptation or prequel. Wonka, however, wants us to not forget its origins. The film starts by quoting Pure Imagination and we get new lyrics of that and Oompa Loompa throughout the film. It is hard to build something original and separate when you keep going back to the more familiar first feature.

I cannot fault the cast. Chalamet dives in with an almost manic glee, embracing the wackiness of Wonka while still finding gentle moments of tenderness when remembering his mother. His voice was fine if not particularly great. I would say it was a bit gentle, but I am willing to cut a little slack on that department. If anything, Chalamet was game for things. 

Lane's Noodle, essentially his costar, was pleasant in her role. I do wish they had not made her so bitter and cynical but instead more willing to embrace wonder and magic. That is more the screenplay's fault than Lane's.

Coleman and Davis embraced the overt camp of Mrs. Scrubitt and Bleacher, though they faded away when no longer necessary to the plot. It does become curious that after being told that they both had sharp eyes on their de facto slaves, they weren't attentive once they were hoodwinked into falling in love. Granted, the plot made clear how that was done, but it did not convince me. Grant was surprisingly delightful as Lofty even if his part was small (no pun intended).

A lot of Wonka had the characters be a bit cartoonish, but given that everyone was aware that things were meant to be exaggerated, I do not find that to be a flaw. From Key's increasingly obese Police Chief to Joseph's grandly silly Slugworth, the actors played the parts as required of them. I can find flaw in Atkinson's corrupt cleric only in that he was underused. 

He did have one of the funniest moments in Wonka however, when a telephone call interrupts his funeral obituary. "Hello, pulpit," he answers, leading to general laughter.

Wonka was to my mind charming and sweet, trying its best to be delightful. I did find it was trying perhaps a bit hard to be overtly charming, sweet and delightful. However, I was pleased enough with the final product to think well enough of it. While I doubt it will match let alone overtake Willy Wonka and the Chocolate Factory in being beloved, Wonka is a pleasant enough companion piece. 

DECISION: B-

Transformers: Rise of the Beasts. A Review

TRANSFORMERS: RISE OF THE BEASTS

The last Transformers film that I saw was Revenge of the Fallen. I knew a nice couple with a newborn back then who had surprisingly invited me to see it with them. They told me this was the third time that they had seen Revenge of the Fallen that opening weekend, with their second time being in 3-D (I went to a 2-D screening). As I watched, I sat absolutely stunned that anyone would willingly subject themselves to seeing Revenge of the Fallen at all, let alone three times in one weekend and even in 3-D. While Rise of the Beasts may not be on that level of horror, it is still a very bad product: loud but dull, pointless and unnecessary.

After an introductory section where we learn that the giant world-swallowing Unicron is thwarted from obtaining a powerful key that is spirited away to Earth, we go back in time to 1994 Brooklyn.

Here, veteran Noah Diaz (Anthony Ramos) is desperate for a job that will pay not only his bills but also for his brother Kris' (Dean Scott Vasquez) medical expenses. In desperation, he agrees to steal a car from a swanky hotel. Little does Noah know that this car is a Transformer, specifically Mirage (voiced by Pete Davison). Mirage and other Transformers have been summoned by Transformers leader Optimus Prime (Peter Cullen) to find this key, a key that might get them back to their home world.

Into all this comes Elena Wallace (Dominque Fishback), a museum intern who has uncovered information related to the key's location. It is somewhere in darkest Peru. With that, Noah, Elena and various Transformers travel there to find the key and keep it away from the Terrorcons who serve as Unicron's henchmen, especially the villainous Scourge (Peter Dinklage). Aiding the Transformers are the Maximals, Transformer-like beings who escaped with the key to Earth. Their leaders are the gorilla-like Optimus Primal (Ron Perlman) and hawk-like Airazor (Michelle Yeoh).

The various bots battle it out for the key, with Noah joining in. While the Transformers turn out to be victorious (and some manage to return from the dead), others do not. Now, Noah has a chance at a job, and to join a mysterious program called G.I. Joe.

I can't say much about Rise of the Beasts because there is little to say. It is loud. It is busy. It is really nothing. It amazes me that the film is only actually a little over two hours long as it feels so much longer. The first twenty minutes or so are taken up by Noah's domestic issues, particularly of his younger brother. That whole section could have been cut altogether, or at the very least summed up in less than five minutes. Instead, we get away from a Transformers story into one about the difficult American healthcare system.

Perhaps the bloat of Rise of the Beasts is due to there being five credited screenwriters (Joby Harold, Darnell Metayer, Josh Peters and Eric and Jon Hoeber, whom I presume are related). We have another case of too many cooks in the kitchen, too many people throwing so much at the audience that it becomes unwieldly. Those are the credited screenwriters, though I suspect there were more hands on this.

Even if one was generous in saying that five screenwriters could make Rise of the Beasts coherent, it does not excuse some awful plotting and lines. At one point, Mirage expresses puzzlement over the state of his relationship with Noah. "Friends? You've been inside me!", the connotation not even worth thinking about. Elena calms herself by singing TLC's Waterfalls (a song that technically was not released as a single until 1995), but what this or talking about her father has to do with giant robots endangering the Earth one can only guess at.

Worse is the film's naked attempts at sympathy. Bumblebee, one of the most popular of the Transformers, is "killed" in a major battle. Stealing from The Search for Spock, his remains are taken to Peru in the hopes of reviving him. Of course, he's being revived, complete with him appearing at the right moment to the first line of LL Cool J's Mama Said Knock You Out. What could be more apropos than having Bumblebee make his triumphant return to "Don't call it a comeback!"?

Truth be told, I was literally waiting for both the resurrection and the use of Mama Said Knock You Out given the predominance of hip-hop and rap in the soundtrack. 

The overblown nature of Rise of the Beasts drowns out the two human actors. Ramos and Fishback had nothing to work with. In the climatic final battle, they were so superfluous one wonders why they were there at all. For all the progressivism of having a Hispanic and black lead, Rise of the Beasts still could not get away from stereotypes. I wondered why Elena could not be already established as a historian versus an intern or Noah is not gainfully employed. Why could they not be coworkers at the museum who stumbled upon this discovery? That everyone, including the human characters, handle something as goofy as Rise of the Beasts with the reverence of D-Day drains what fun the film could have had. 

Rise of the Beasts cannot have fun with itself. Every death of these machines is treated as some kind of immense tragedy, which is silly given that this is both a film based around toys and we know some of them are coming back.

I, to be fair, did not immediately recognize Davison's voice, but he did not give a performance. I cannot say that Michelle Yeoh gave one either, only that I did immediately recognize her voice. 

Finally, trying to attach Transformers to the G.I. Joe universe only makes one reel back at the horror of more expanded universes. 

Transformers: Rise of the Beasts could have been fun. Instead, it is loud, pointless and just there.

DECISION: D-

Minions: The Rise of Gru. A Review (Review #1604)

MINIONS: THE RISE OF GRU

The talking twinkies and their "Mini Boss" are back at it again. Minions: The Rise of Gru is silly, frothy fun, with lots of jokes that parents will appreciate and big, bright colors and silliness that kids will like.

In 1976, 11-year-old aspiring super-villain Gru (Steve Carell) is eager to join the Vicious Six, an international criminal gang. Oddly, the group, headed by groovy super-villain Belle Bottom (Taraji P. Henson) scoffs at the idea of a minor replacing White Knuckles (Alan Arkin), whom the Vicious Six has gotten rid of via nefarious means.

However, you can't keep a good, or bad, child villain down. Gru steals a magical medallion from right under the Vicious Six's noses. Unfortunately, Otto, one of the Minions (Gru's yellow, gibberish-spouting henchmen) trades it in for a pet rock. In the confusion, White Knuckles returns from apparent death and abducts Gru as part of his revenge against the Vicious Six. The main Minions now go to San Francisco to rescue Gru, trained by Master Chow (Michelle Yeoh) in the art of kung-fu, while Otto manages to recover the medallion.

In San Fransisco, it is full-on chaos during Chinese New Year as the Minions, Gru and White Knuckles join forces to battle the Vicious Six in an ultimate showdown involving magic and mischief. With Gru triumphant and his mentor making yet another miraculous resurrection, there is no limit to their wickedness.

I was charmed by Minions: The Rise of Gru. This film does not take itself seriously and coming in at a brisk 88 minutes we still get a lot of Minion mayhem. In their strange language and oddball antics, I think the Minions have grown into quite the delightful symbols of playful anarchy. Their efforts to get to San Francisco will be the highlight for the toddler set with their inability to fly an airplane properly.

There are a lot of sight gags that work to elicit laughter. Of particular note is when via Gru's narration we see how the Minions answered a help wanted ad and convinced Gru to hire them by pulling a fast one over him involving the rain. The Rise of Gru has very funny moments that show it is not above being absurd beyond the point of rationality, but I think it knows its target audiences: small kids and their families.

While kids will enjoy the Minions going about their lunacy, the parents will I think appreciate the various visual shout-outs and puns. The opening credits are clearly a spoof of James Bond openings, and the film is not afraid of almost groan-inducing wordplay. The Vicious Six's criminal gang not only includes a person named "Belle Bottom", but another villain named Nun-chuck, who is a literal nun that swings nun chucks. As The Rise of Gru is set firmly in the 1970s, audiences will get a lot of disco music. 

Somehow, the idea of torturing little Gru in a device dubbed the "Disco Inferno" by having him spin on a giant record to Andrea True Connection's More, More, More is hilarious. Granted, it got that song stuck in my head for about two days, but it was a torture I was willing to live with. The feel for the 70s extended to the film's theme Turn Up the Sunshine, helped by having Diana Ross sing the song. We get nods to Tupperware parties and pogo sticks (which I was unaware were big in the 70s), pet rocks and an oddly moving use of The Carpenters.

If anything, The Rise of Gru understood that there had to be something for adults to latch on to.

Curiously, The Rise of Gru managed to evoke memories of more recent films like Everything Everywhere All at Once and even The Black Phone. However, there is nothing in The Rise of Gru that I think would give offense. One or two moments might be a bit intense for really small kids, but the film quickly establishes that things are ultimately all right.

The Rise of Gru is not perfect. The film did not use the voice cast to the best of its abilities. With a cast that had not just Henson but Lucy Lawless, Jean-Claude Van Damme and Julie Andrews voicing various characters, they did not seem that important. However, on the whole I think Minions: The Rise of Gru will please kids who love the Minions and their parents and grandparents who will like hearing the latest offerings from the Criminal Records store. 

Silly, frothy, short enough to keep small ones amused, The Rise of Gru works well enough to be a nice, cute, delightful romp.

DECISION: B-

Hannibal Rising: A Review (Review #1580)

HANNIBAL RISING

Does evil need to be explained? It apparently is not possible for the most sinister of figures to not have an origin story revealing how said figures came to be the way they became. Hannibal Rising is the origin story of that most monstrous yet fascinating of psychopaths, Hannibal Lecter. It is a terrible shame though, that his origin turns out to be surprisingly boring to dumb.

Little Hannibal Lecter survived the Nazi and Soviet invasions of his native Lithuania, though he lost his whole family. Lithuanian collaborators take refuge in the Lecter hunting lodge, where their leader Grutas (Rhys Ifans) looks on menacingly at Hannibal and his younger sister Misha. Did Grutas and his fellow Nazi collaborators commit a barbaric act of cannibalism to save themselves?

Eight years later, young Hannibal Lecter (Gaspard Ulliel) is now in a Lithuanian orphanage, ironically enough what was once Castle Lecter. After taking murderous revenge on a bully, he finds letters that lead him across the Iron Curtain to an uncle's home. His uncle sadly has died, but his widow, Lady Murasaki (Gong Li) takes him in. She trains him in the way of the samurai, training that comes in handy when a local butcher insults her. Hannibal now has his first kill.

Escaping to Paris where he can train as a doctor, Hannibal and Lady Murasaki now begin their new venture: hunt down those who killed Misha. Slowly, methodically, Hannibal takes bloody revenge on his childhood tormentors, until he leaves for Canada to find the last of them.

Perhaps it was Hannibal Rising screenwriter Thomas Harris' wish to make our murderous cannibal a sad, even sympathetic figure. He should know the most about Lecter: as Harris adapted his own novel and created the character. Having said that, it is a wonder why Harris opted to make Lecter some kind of hero, a Nazi hunter seeking to avenge his beloved little sister.

It is curious that little to nothing suggests that this Hannibal enjoys the taste of human flesh. Granted, as it is his origin story, we can forgive his lack of calculated genius where he is able to escape whatever traps laid for him. However, Hannibal Rising is surprisingly unoriginal in its take on our character. Having him hunt down people gives him an honorable motive, which makes one wonder whether Harris wanted us to see him as less methodical murderer and more wounded soul.

To my mind, having him kill others to avenge his family's killing is almost hackneyed, surprisingly unoriginal and a terrible letdown for someone so charmingly and delightfully wicked. It does not help that none of the previous Hannibal Lecter films hinted at his haunted past. It also does not help that Hannibal Rising does not suggest Lecter would turn out to dine on people. It actually suggests he might turn out to be a good man. As such, if anyone saw Hannibal Rising first then moved on to either Red Dragon/Manhunter or The Silence of the Lambs, he or she might be confused. 

He at first was angry that Grutas suggested to Lecter that he ate and enjoyed his own sister's flesh, but now he likes the taste of it?

Hannibal Rising is also littered with some ghastly performances. Rhys Ifans devoured the scenery to the extent you thought he did literally eat the child actors in the film. It is watchable only in a hilarious kind of watching. It is so over-the-top it almost hypnotizes you, amazed that the bad accent and crazed manner could be considered remotely rational. Kevin McKidd, who plays another Lithuanian cannibal, could not handle the accent any better, though to be fair he did make a decent stab at playing a slightly more sympathetic figure.

One is puzzled about Gong Li, a good actress given little to do. As for the late Ulliel, he did on occasion slip into camp, but I think that was more the script than him. He made a surprisingly charming figure who sought out honorable revenge. Pity that he seemed to be playing in a different movie, one about Nazi hunters than murderous cannibals.

So much about Hannibal Rising is wildly wrong that one feels for the lost opportunity. Unoriginal origin story, mostly bad acting, lousy situations, with little to suggest we are getting the birth of evil. The film plays more like bad fanfiction than it does the genesis of this now-iconic character. Hannibal Lecter had a better origin long after he became an adult, and Hannibal Rising is a poor beginning to this massive figure.

DECISION: D-

HANNIBAL LECTER FILMS

Manhunter

The Silence of the Lambs

Red Dragon

Hannibal 

HANNIBAL LECTER TELEVISION SERIES

Hannibal

Clarice