Terminator 2: Judgement Day. A Review

TERMINATOR 2: JUDGEMENT DAY

The war between humans and machines continues in Terminator 2: Judgement Day. The sequel to The Terminator more than equals its source material. A richer, deeper film with visual effects that still hold up, Terminator 2: Judgment Day is a great thrill ride. 

Narrated in voiceover by Sarah Connor (Linda Hamilton), we learn that the artificial intelligence known as Skynet continues battling the human resistance for control. Skynet sends into the past a new Terminator, the T-1000 (Robert Patrick), which can change shapes and is made out of almost indestructible liquid metal. Having failed to kill John Connor before he was born, Skynet now plans to kill him as a child.

Under the disguise of a police officer, the T-1000 has tracked down John Connor (Edward Furlong). John is making do with his newest foster parents, with Sarah locked up in a mental institution, her stories about the past believed to be deranged ramblings. It looks like the T-1000 will complete his mission. However, the Resistance has its own Terminator. It is a modified T-800 (Arnold Schwarzenegger). John is terrified of both Terminators but eventually learns that the T-800 has been reprogrammed to be John's protector, not murderer.

The T-800 realizes that the T-1000 has already murdered John's foster parents to get to him. John now is determined to rescue his mother, with whom he has a strained relationship, from the mental hospital. He also orders the T-800 to not kill people, which the Terminator is obliged to obey. The rescue works, though coincidentally Sarah had managed to make an escape attempt that very night.

Despite their differences, John and Sarah now go into the desert to acquire weapons and escape into Mexico. She also sees John bonding with the T-800 in a way that he hasn't with anyone. A dream about Judgment Day, when Skynet will unleash a nuclear holocaust, convinces her that Skynet can and should be stopped. She learns that Cyberdyne researcher Miles Dyson (Joe Morton) will have a breakthrough that will start the rise of Skynet. She sneaks off to kill Dyson, with John and the T-800 in hot pursuit. Will she be able to kill someone who technically has done nothing wrong? Will the T-1000 find them? It will be a battle to the bitter end to save humanity, a battle where not everyone survives. 

Terminator 2: Judgment Day is a sequel where I do not think that you need to see the original to follow the plot. James Cameron, who returns to direct the film and who cowrite the screenplay with William Wisher, gives the viewer a bit of a reprise through Sarah's voiceovers. The film was wise to limit these voiceovers and let the story play out. It also was wise in having some of those voiceovers give us Sarah's thoughts. We see Sarah as both despairing and hopeful. Hamilton has a wonderful monologue where the audience sees John interact with the T-800. 

This bit of respite allows us to see that at this moment John is not the great leader of the Resistance. He is a kid, one who wanted a father figure and found one in the most unlikely of beings. Hamilton conveyed Sarah's sanity, intelligence and strength when in the hospital and her escape. We also see the human side when she struggles to kill Miles. 

I think one of Terminator 2's great strengths is that it takes the premise seriously. The film, both in its various action scenes and quieter moments, does not play the situations for straight-out laughs. That is not to say that Terminator 2 does not have a bit of humor. Early in the film, the T-800 walks out of the biker bar where he has acquired what he needs to the song Bad to the Bone. At the film's climax, the T-1000 gently mocks Sarah and John by waving his finger menacingly, almost as if scolding them for trying to defeat him. It is simultaneously amusing and alarming.

An undervalued aspect of Terminator 2 may be the performances. Arnold Schwarzenegger became a star with The Terminator, and here he manages to expand his original role. Granted, he is playing a reprogrammed T-800. However, his deadpan manner when attempting to recreate human responses works. He keeps a balance between robotic and almost more lighthearted. In short, Schwarzenegger brings a touch of humor and even emotion. His use of "Hasta la vista, baby," has become a catchphrase, and the film set that use up brilliantly. I think that few people will not be genuinely moved at the end, when he gives a final thumbs up to the young boy who has grown to love him and a former adversary who has grown to trust him.

That adversary also did remarkably well. Linda Hamilton balanced Sarah Connor's strength with her vulnerability. She is physically strong, able to take down those who fight her. She also, however, manages to show that Sarah genuinely struggles with killing someone who has not harmed her. It is a very strong performance.

More credit should be given to both Cameron and Robert Patrick as the T-1000. It was a wise decision to cast someone who is not physically imposing like Arnold Schwarzenegger is. Patrick is lithe, but that makes the T-1000 more menacing. His physicality is seemingly not threatening, but we see in Patrick's performance a deadly determination. Like his predecessor, this Terminator is relentless, unyielding and highly dangerous. When he has to play human, Patrick does well in his interactions with his other cast members.

Furlong too balanced the youthfulness of John Connor with a jaded, cynical young man. He has wonderful interplay with Schwarzenegger as the father figure he would have wanted. Furlong also has great moments with Hamilton. They were sometimes in conflict, but also with deep love between mother and son.

The highlight of Terminator 2 is in its visual effects, one of the four categories where the film was acknowledged with Academy Awards. Even now, almost thirty-five years later, the visual effects not only still stand up well but are quite impressive. Of particular note is the T-1000, this liquid figure that shapes itself and reflects whatever is in front of it. The visual effects heighten the tension and suspense in the film. The escape from the mental hospital with the T-1000 in hot pursuit is thrilling, the visual effects making things more so.

That is not to say that, in retrospect, some of the visual effects are shockingly bad. The brilliant hospital escape is followed by some of the worst rear-screen projections that I have seen. Some of the model work is also a bit weak.

Those are minor points, however. Terminator 2: Judgement Day is probably my favorite action film of all time. I admit to being slightly prejudiced in its favor. I am not unaware of whatever flaws it has. However, I still love the film. I also love the closing song, Guns N' Roses' You Could Be Mine, though I'm not the band's biggest fan.  Terminator 2: Judgement Day is a thrilling action picture with a heart. It is a worthy sequel which I think outdoes the original film. 

Pity that pretty much all that came after never lived up to the first two films. 

DECISION: A-

Mickey 17: A Review

MICKEY 17

Put aside any jokes about not having seen Mickey 1 to Mickey 16. Mickey 17, the newest film from Parasite director Bong Joon Ho, is a long, boring, rambling, confused film that is delusional in its ideas about itself. 

Told mostly in voiceover by Mickey Barnes (Robert Pattinson), we learn that he and his frenemy Timo (Steven Yeun) are in major trouble with loan sharks after their macaron business goes belly-up. In order to escape them, Mickey and Timo get on one of the last ships going to a new planet, Nifleheim. Nifleheim will be ruled by former Congressman Kenneth Marshall (Mark Ruffalo), a total idiot who has a peculiar cadence in his speaking and whose passionate devotees wear red caps.

Make of that what you will.

Timo gets the pretty cushy job of pilot. Mickey, not the brightest of beings, signs up to be an Expendable, someone who will be sent out on dangerous missions and if killed, will be cloned back to do it all over again, his saved memories intact. Despite this drawback, there are benefits in the form of security officer Nasha Berridge (Naomi Ackie), who immediately falls in love with Mickey in all his forms.

Things get complicated when Mickey 17 falls into an icy ravine. Timo gives him up for dead, and the strange slug-like creature that takes Mickey makes it almost certain that he's a goner. To his surprise, the creeper as the humans have dubbed the creature takes Mickey to the surface, where he boards a vehicle that unwittingly takes him back to the spaceship. More surprising is that Mickey 17 discovers that the mad scientists have already made a Mickey 18, who is very displeased at seeing his predecessor very much alive.

This causes all sorts of problems, especially as "Multiples" are to be permanently exterminated, memories and all. As more and more people discover the Multiple Mickeys, it could be curtains for them too. Will Nasha, high off the drug that Timo sells to the other passengers, get a menage a trois with both Mickeys? Will Timo's secret drug running be discovered? Will First Lady Ylfa Marshall (Toni Collette) get the perfect spice? Will the creepers overrun the humans, or will it take Kenneth's fall to save the entire planet?

At the end of the Mickey 17 screening that I attended, one man got up, turned to his companions and said very loudly, "This movie sucked". I think that is a very succinct and accurate description of Mickey 17 to where I should just leave it at that. However, as someone who loves to go on, I'll expand on why this person is right.

One thing that sinks Mickey 17 is in how long the film is. Mickey 17 runs a punishing two hours and seventeen minutes, which is enough of a problem of its own. I do not know why director Bong (who also adapted Edward Ashton's novel Mickey 7), decided that it was best to spend a full forty minutes going from Point A to Point A. We start Mickey 17 with him falling into the icy ravine, then go back four and a third years ago and then go straight to where we started Mickey 17 before continuing the movie. I cannot find any justification for taking forty minutes to give us the background of the Mickeys, Tomi and Nasha only to take us back to where we started.

Efforts for the comedy, such as the loan sharks for a macaron business, fall flat. Efforts at political satire also fall flat. A good parody has to come from a place of, if not affection, at least from amusement at the subject. You cannot make good parody if you hate the subject, because the only thing that you are showing is your almost unhinged hatred. Ruffalo and Bong are not bothering with subtlety or wit in how Kenneth Marshall is meant to be Donald Trump. The red cap-wearing loyalists begging for The Ken's attention. The nonsensical verbiage that Marshall trots out, such as his command that there be no sex on his ship. His dreams to rule over all the inhabitants. Marshall's particular speaking style. Even a wish to make a "pure white planet". Ruffalo and Bong feed their Trump Derangement Syndrome with no sense of humor.

On the last part, one can make the argument that his term "pure white planet" was in reference to the cold snow all around them. However, I think Ruffalo and Bong were not talking about Nifleheim's wintery temperatures.

I'm not big on analogies to fit contemporary situations. However, when you have this Donald Trump in all but name being told what's what by a strong black woman, one wonders if Bong thought he was being funnier and cleverer than he actually was.

I think the Mickey 17 trailer suggested some kind of comedy. I understand that Mickey 17 is thought of as a comedy. However, I didn't laugh once, and the audience did laugh once. The sight gag of a cloned Mickey about to fall out of the printer because no one had bothered to put a table for him was not funny the first time. Why did Bong think it would be funny the second time?

Mickey 17 is such a tonally confused film. Nasha (which I kept hearing as "nauseous") is supposed to be this solid, by the book security officer. All of a sudden, she takes drugs before meeting the two Mickeys and hinting that she would like a threesome. Why would she take substances that she is firmly against?

The film also shifts from a lack of focus. For long stretches we forget about characters. Tomi pops up early on, then is forgotten for so long I had forgotten that he was in the film. Same with Marshall and Ylfa. Another character, Kai (Anamaria Vartolomei) also pops up almost at random. Her big moment is when she and Mickey are invited to have dinner with the Marshalls. After hearing Kenneth's crazed almost eugenic plan, she retorts something along the lines of "I'm not just a uterus". 

There were no performances in Mickey 17. Robert Pattinson's idea of a performance was to adopt a very child-like speaking style as Mickeys 1-17, which we hear in the voiceover narration. Once we get to Mickey 18, however, Pattinson's voice becomes stronger, more confident, his body movement more aggressive and assertive. If we go with what Mickey 17 led us to think, all the past Mickeys have had the same personality and mannerisms. So how did we all of a sudden get a totally new version of the character?

Even this part seems to be illogical. Up to Mickey 17, there had always been a confirmed death (they would throw his corpse down an intergalactic trash disposal). Now, for some reason that perhaps I missed, they opted to clone without official confirmation outside Tomi's statements? Everyone in Mickey 17 was given license to overact and ham it up as if it was going out of style. Pattison was too determined to convince the world that he truly is his generation's Peter O'Toole, which ends making things look more foolish. Ruffalo and Collette were overacting with an almost crazed glee, as if they thought there was no such thing as going over the top. Yeun was in the film too briefly to make anything connected with him good. 

Ackie did her best, but she could never make Nasha anything more than mostly a know-it-all scold.

Mickey 17 also had a score from Jung Jae-il that was too cutesy for its own good. I think it was meant to emphasize the comedic elements in the film. Unfortunately, there were no comedic elements. Finally, Bong opted to move the camera back-and-forth between one character and another, creating a kind of whiplash that did nothing but draw attention to itself.

Mickey 17 is a piece of junk with nothing to recommend it. Confused, poorly structured, wildly and deliberately overacted, I cannot fathom why so many found the film good to great. None of these Mickeys are fine and they won't blow your mind. 

DECISION: F

Jurassic Park III: A Review

JURASSIC PARK III

I suppose that after the success of The Lost World, we were going to get yet another Jurassic Park film. I thought The Lost World was terrible. I was, however, not prepared for how Jurassic Park III would be even worse. Dumb, unexciting and even insulting, Jurassic Park III is almost a desecration of the original film.

Dr. Alan Grant (Sam Neill) makes it clear that he has absolutely no intention of talking about what happened to him on Isla Nublar or what happened in San Diego, which he helpfully reminds audiences that he was not part of. He also says that nothing will get him to Isla Sorna or Site B, which we learned about in the last film.

Famous last words, for Grant reluctantly agrees to merely fly over Isla Sorna in exchange for funding from wealthy couple Paul and Amanda Kirby (William H. Macy and Tea Leoni). Grant thinks that he is going to only point out the various creatures to the Kirbys. In reality, he is essentially kidnapped in order to help them find their son Eric (Trevor Morgan) and Amanda's boyfriend Ben (Mark Herelick), who disappeared while parasailing near the island. 

Amanda's boyfriend? Yes, for Grant and his assistant Billy (Alessandro Nivola) find out that they are actually divorced. Worse, they are not wealthy patrons of the sciences but upper middle class, Paul owning Kirby Paint and Tile Plus hardware store. Now it is on to find and hopefully save Eric once Ben's rotted corpse is found. The pilot and mercenaries that the Kirbys brought face dangers all around. Even after Eric is found, they still find themselves pursued. 

Billy has taken a pair of dinosaur eggs in a misguided effort to use them to gain more funding. Grant knows that the dinosaurs will keep after them to get the eggs back. From there, the survivors must find a way to reach shore. Will they be able to escape Site B? Will Grant's former love, Ellie Sattler (Laura Dern) be able to help them despite being far away in her domestic bliss?

It is curious that Peter Buchman, Jim Taylor and Alexander Payne failed in their Jurassic Park III screenplay the same way that The Lost World failed in its screenplay. By now, we all should know that as soon as a character says that he/she will never go back to XYZ, they are definitely going back to XYZ. Even worse, director Joe Johnson and actor Sam Neill almost seem to openly mock this in how Johnson moved his camera closer to Neill when he overacted that bit of dialogue. It is as if they wanted to draw attention to how Grant was going back to where even Grant knew it beforehand.

As a side note, it is astonishing that Alexander Payne, who brought us the brilliant Election, Sideways, Nebraska and The Holdovers, had a hand in this debacle. 

Jurassic Park III is one of the laziest films that I have seen. It is probably the laziest film in the entire unfortunate franchise. One particularly ghastly moment is when they are trapped in a flooding river with a heavy rainstorm making things worse. As they battle for their lives, they grab onto a found satellite phone. When Grant picks up, he hears a robocall for a time-share offer. I figure those behind the camera thought that this would be a good gag. It just was both idiotic and cut what little tension Jurassic Park III was attempting to build.

Far from being tense and exciting, Jurassic Park III was dumb and laughable. I think Tea Leoni has been singled out for her performance, but as one to ridicule. She did not help herself when she got tangled up in Ben's cord, screaming and going into hysterics that came across as more comic than horrified. I want to say that she did the best that she could with such a badly written character, one who continued to call out Eric's name over a bullhorn despite being told not to by Grant and even Paul. There was little for Leoni to work with, but it does not absolve her from her at times laughable performance.

It is not as if everyone else covered themselves in glory. Neill got a nice paycheck out of this, but he looked totally unenthusiastic about being here. Yes, one can say that it reflected the character. However, in his scenes with Dern or when off the island, he looked as if he figured that it was in his best interest to devour the screen to give him something to do. I think Macy, like Leoni, did the best that he could. He did have that average man quality to Paul, but the scenes of the Kirby domestic drama in the midst of the mayhem did not help. 

To be fair, I did think well of Michael Jeter as Udesky, one of Kirby's mercenaries. It was a break from his usual roles of meek figures, and Jeter was effective as this more rugged figure facing off against these gruesome creatures. 

I genuinely wondered why Nivola's Billy could not have been the new lead, with Grant merely serving as mentor. He was fine, but not great, and for long stretches I genuinely wondered who he was. Morgan was nothing special, neither as clever or amusing as Joseph Mazzello's Tim or as courageous as Ariana Richards' Lex from the first film. How exactly he survived eight whole weeks on the island Lord of the Flies style the film won't say. 

Eight days I could believe. Two months managing to avoid getting eaten by the dinosaurs, scavenging food and water and with no one actually looking for him is a stretch.

As a side note, Jurassic Park III did a poor job of shoehorning Laura Dern.

These are some of the worse dinosaurs that I have seen. Grant at one point called the dinosaurs he encountered at Jurassic Park "genetically engineered theme park monsters", a strange turn from someone who initially had been impressed with the dinosaurs. Granted, he had a horrendous experience with them that might have soured his feelings. However, I found that the dinosaurs here looked like the auto-animatronic figures from a Disney ride. When we are supposed to see dinosaurs, I saw fake imagery.

Jurassic Park III did nothing with what had come before. It did not make the case for itself. I did not even get good dinosaurs or humans. The third time was most definitely not the charm. 

DECISION: F

JURASSIC PARK FILMS

Jurassic Park

The Lost World: Jurassic Park

Jurassic World

Jurassic World: Fallen Kingdom

Jurassic World Dominion

Jurassic World Rebirth

The Lost World: Jurassic Park. A Review

THE LOST WORLD: JURASSIC PARK

The original Jurassic Park became one of the biggest hits of all time. With that, a sequel seemed almost preordained. Thus, The Lost World: Jurassic Park. In a case of "you can't go home again", The Lost World is itself lost in a boring story, poor performances and nothing to justify itself.

Four years after the events on Jurassic Park, scientist Ian Malcolm (Jeff Goldblum) wants nothing to do with anything about the island. Billionaire John Hammond (Richard Attenborough) has other plans, despite having lost control of his company to his nephew Peter Ludlow (Arliss Howard). Hammond wants Malcolm to go to the hereto unknown "Site B", where the Jurassic Park dinosaurs were created and now have free range over. Hammond wants to have Site B or Isla Sonra to be left alone. Peter wants to bring whatever creatures still there to another site in San Diego to compete with other animal parks like the San Diego Zoo and the San Diego Chargers.

Malcolm wants nothing to do with anything with Site B, but he learns that his girlfriend Sarah Harding (Julianne Moore) has eagerly gone to chronicle whatever is on Site B. Determined to rescue Sarah, Malcolm goes to Islan Sonra along with videographer Nick Van Owen (Vince Vaughn) and engineer Eddie Carr (Richard Schiff). Unbeknownst to them, there is a stowaway: Malcolm's daughter Kelly (Vanessa Lee Chester). More unbeknownst to everyone, Ludlow also goes to the island, accompanied by white hunter Roland Tembo (Pete Postlethwaite). Circumstances eventually force them to join together to stay alive when the dinosaurs inevitably go bonkers. Not everyone survives, but despite Malcolm's incessant warnings, Ludlow gets his creature.

Ludlow will not be denied his great discovery to showcase in San Diego. Inevitably things go awry as the dinosaur rampages through San Diego. Will Ian and Sarah be able to save the day?

I think that director Steven Spielberg had, for the longest time, resisted making sequels save for the Indiana Jones series (and I can make the argument that Temple of Doom is a prequel). He famously resisted making an E.T.: The Extra-Terrestrial sequel despite pleas from viewers and studios. Jurassic Park, however, was too good to resist. There could have been a variety of things to take a follow-up to Jurassic Park. The ultimate decision from screenwriter David Koepp (freely adapting the Michael Crichton book) opted to make a film that is dull, lifeless and taking a fascinating premise and doing nothing with it.

There is something irritating about characters who say that they won't do XYZ when we know that they will. It would be nice, for once, if the character said either "Yes, I will go back to try and fix the mess you made" or "I'm not eager to go there, but I will". I think it is because we the audience know that the character will go back. Malcolm's motivation of going to rescue the damsel in distress is not interesting because we do not know who she is.   

Even worse is the character of Malcolm's daughter Kelly. This is the first time we got a mention of Kelly. I leave it to you to decide whether Malcolm's daughter being black needs explanation. It did not matter to me, but one is within their right to wonder. 

It does not help that Chester and Kelly are also awful. Kelly is a terrible character: annoying, whiny and quite dim. At one point, Kelly manages to help Sarah and Ian escape by doing a gymnastic routine to fight the rampaging dinosaurs. You would have to be unconscious to not be laughing uproariously at seeing this moment. I think Kelly had mentioned that she had been on the gymnastics team but if she had, I had pretty much forgotten about it.

Chester gave the worst performance in The Lost World. Robotic delivery and a blank expression throughout, Chester never conveyed any emotion apart from boredom. No one else, however, was all that much better. Goldblum looked equally bored in the film, never trying to do anything new. His expression never changed throughout The Lost World. How and why Julianne Moore is in this film one cannot fathom. Vaughn, I think, tried, but he appeared to overcompensate by being frenetic, at odds with the more sedate manner everyone else had. 

In retrospect, Howard may have been worse than Chester. Carrying a very bad British accent, Howard did not look bored like everyone else in the film. He looked confused. I do not think Howard changed his expression or vocal inflection, as if he was too busy concentrating on having a passable British accent to think about acting. Given how awful that British accent was, he should not have bothered even trying.

The Lost World did not make any sense. How exactly did Kelly manage to stowaway without anyone noticing? When the T. Rex starts rampaging into San Diego, which itself is already bad since the press conference takes place at night, it stomps across a customs office. We see the guards running in terror, but everyone at the customs office never notices this massive monster near them. For long periods of time, no one seems to notice what happened to some of the other characters. 

What sold the first Jurassic Park were the still breathtaking special effects. In The Lost World, they looked, frankly, fake. I was reminded of the Walt Disney World theme ride with the effects being on that level. The green screen looked bad and the animatronic figures equally so.  

As I finished The Lost World: Jurassic Park, I thought that no one had any enthusiasm for anything about it. Sluggish, dull and at times illogical, The Lost World should have remained lost.

DECISION: F

JURASSIC PARK FILMS

Jurassic Park

Jurassic Park III

Jurassic World

Jurassic World: Fallen Kingdom

Jurassic World Dominion

Jurassic World Rebirth

Jurassic Park: A Review (Review #1921)

 

JURASSIC PARK

When Jurassic Park was released, it was seen as a fun, thrilling, exciting film with groundbreaking special effects. Whether anyone imagined it would be the start of a major franchise that would be the first of five sequels as of this writing (with one set for release later in 2025) I cannot say. The first Jurassic Park film, removed from what would come after, holds up extremely well, does not wear out its welcome and gives people what they wanted.

Billionaire John Hammond (Richard Attenborough) has created what he delightfully calls an animal sanctuary. However, after one of the creatures kills a worker, lawyer Donald Gennaro (Martin Ferrero) will not sign off on Hammond's new venture on behalf of the investors. The only way to get Gennaro and the investors off Hammond's back is if independent scientists vouch for Hammond's park. With that, Hammond brings paleontologist Alan Grant (Sam Neill) and paleobotanist Ellie Sattler (Laura Dern) to his island. Gennaro for his part brings mathematician Ian Malcolm (Jeff Goldblum) for that verification.

Why these particular figures? Hammond's new island, which he envisions as a nature/amusement park, has brought back the dinosaurs to life. Intoning with a sense of childish glee, he tells Sattler and Grant, "Welcome to Jurassic Park". Hammond, expecting a positive to enthusiastic response from the three scientists, instead encounters firm opposition to the park's existence from all of them, with Malcolm particularly vocal in his objections. Insisting that they will change their minds, all save Hammond go on a motorized tour, with Hammond's grandchildren Lex (Ariana Richards) and Tim (Joseph Mazzello) joining them. 

Tim in particular is an Alan Grant fan, which cuts no ice with him since Grant dislikes children. The tour is a bust, with the dinosaurs not appearing. However, there is chaos growing internally and externally at the park. A tropical storm is brewing, while park technician Dennis Nedry (Wayne Knight) has shut down the systems. Ostensibly, this is for maintenance, but in reality, he is stealing dinosaur embryos to smuggle to Hammond's business rivals. The two things collide when the dinosaurs become loose in the park and Nedry's elaborate computer security software prevents the others from regaining control. 

Soon, total chaos and dinosaurs break out. People start dying and others are in danger. Who will survive and who will not as the dinosaurs start taking over Jurassic Park?

One of the keys to Jurassic Park's success is in anticipation. Director Steven Spielberg builds up the suspense right at the opening, when we see rustling in the trees. We should know that we are not going to see dinosaurs right from the get-go, but the tension builds while we keep getting hints about what they can do. When, later in the film, we see a cow being dropped into a Tyrannosaurus Rex's holding cage, we do not see the dinosaur, but we see the aftereffects of what it did to the cow. The tension slowly builds here too, when big game hunter and Jurassic Park game warden Robert Muldoon (Bob Peck) coldly informs the group that the T. Rex is both smarter and more dangerous than given credit for.

This element in David Koepp and Michael Crichton's screenplay (adapting Crichton's novel) gives audiences hints of what is to come, keeping our interest going. Even after we initially see dinosaurs for the first time at about twenty minutes into Jurassic Park, we know that there will be more. Once we get the first sight of the Tyrannosaurus in all his glorious rage close to an hour into the film, Jurassic Park never fully stops in what audiences expect: visual spectacle and thrills. 

The anticipation continues when it comes to the characters. We know early on that Grant has a dislike to open hatred of children. Therefore, when we see Lex and Tim, we know that there will be conflict. This is added on by knowing that Tim is a big fan, someone who has read Grant's books and is well-versed in Grant's thinking. Tim would be what we would now call a fanboy, so knowing that Grant dislikes children does add two elements to the film. 

The first is a bit of comedy where we see Grant struggle between cool politeness and open contempt. The second is the evolution of his character into a protector of children. Certainly Grant, even for someone who pretty much hates children, is not going to see kids killed. It is an interesting twist that it is Grant, not Malcolm, who risks his life to distract the T. Rex in order to save Lex and Tim. As the film continues, however, Grant becomes fond of them, even allowing himself a moment of humor when he pretends to be electrocuted. It is a credit to Sam Neill that he made Alan Grant both a humorous figure and a man of courage.

This part of Jurassic Park perhaps has not been given much credit: even with the spectacle and visual power of the visual effects, the film does not skimp on the human characters. You have the gleefully wicked Nedry, wonderfully played by Wayne Knight with malevolent joy. Richard Attenborough shows his mix of arrogance, ego and ultimately humility as Hammond, who realizes too late that he cannot control nature. Dern is a showcase for the strong female character, one who can roll her eyes at Hammond's sexism when lives are in danger. However, we also see that she is not a Mary Sue: she too has fears and at one point breaks down in tears. That does not make her weak. It makes her human. In his mix of flirtation, moral indignation and fear, Goldblum does an exceptional job.

The big draw in Jurassic Park are the visual effects, a blend of computer-generated imagery and practical mechanical figures. Despite the passage of thirty years at the time of this writing, the effects in Jurassic Park look thoroughly realistic and appropriately terrifying. To be fair, the birthing of a new dinosaur may not be as completely impressive as it was in 1993, but that is a minor point.

Jurassic Park is also blessed with John Williams score. Appropriately stirring, thrilling and quiet when needed, Williams' music elevates the scenes when it is needed. Note that when the Tyrannosaurus Rex first attacks, there is no music. The lack of music here equally elevates the scene, allowing the tension to build to a fever pitch.

One of the strongest elements in Jurassic Park is that it takes the premise seriously. The T. Rex attack, for example, is played realistically: the kids panicked and terrified, the adults either stunned or cowardly. Extremely well-acted by Richards and Mazzello, this section is simultaneously thrilling and frightening. Richards and Mazzello carry the film well when they have to face the terrors alone.

Jurassic Park will continue to thrill viewers with its mix of brilliant special effects, moments of horror and humor and John Williams' score. A good popcorn film that works on every level, Jurassic Park will never be short of visitors, even on Coupon Day.

DECISION: A-

JURASSIC PARK FILMS

The Lost World: Jurassic Park

Jurassic Park III

Jurassic World

Jurassic World: Fallen Kingdom

Jurassic World Dominion

Jurassic World Rebirth

Megalopolis: A Review (Review #1875)

MEGALOPOLIS

Megalopolis has been the dream project for its director, legendary filmmaker Francis Ford Coppola, for decades. It has been the subject of discussion and fascination before, during and after its production. Now, it is here. Megalopolis is not for everyone. It is grandiose, at times incoherent, even downright bonkers. Yet, I enjoyed almost every crazy moment in it. 

Subtitled "A Fable", Megalopolis revolves around a mythical place called New Rome (an amalgamation of ancient Rome and modern New York). Here, the ruling families battle it out for control, their competition visions for New Rome clashing. On one side is brilliant architect Cesar Catalina (Adam Driver), who envisions an almost literal shining city on a hill called Megalopolis. It will be a fantastic place, built for the ages, where people can work and pursue grand visions of the future.

On the other is his rival, New Rome Mayor Cicero (Giancarlo Esposito). He would want to take the land Catalina wants to build Megalopolis on and build a government-approved casino which will fund basic services and provide for taxpayers. Cicero and Catalina are bitter rivals stemming from when as District Attorney, Cicero prosecuted Catalina for murder, Catalina's wife dying in mysterious circumstances. 

Things grow more tense when Cicero's daughter Julia (Nathalie Emmanuel) shifts her loyalties. She loves and defends her father dearly. She, however, is also intrigued by this Randian-like genius and they eventually begin an affair. More family intrigue builds when Catalina's mistress, finance reporter Wow Platinum (Aubrey Plaza) marries Catalina's rich, powerful and slightly dotty Uncle Hamilton Crassus (Jon Voight). That is not counting the machinations of Hamilton's son and Catalina's cousin Clodio (Shia LaBeouf), who is pretty crazed, pretty jealous and pretty ambitious. He wants power too, but will his populist revolt get him to push both Cicero and Catalina out? What will the future hold for everyone as they battle for Megalopolis?

Truth be told, I think I gave Megalopolis a more coherent plot summary than the film itself did. Therein lies one of Megalopolis' greatest flaws, one aspect that many reviewers and viewers focus on: how unwieldly the overall structure of the film is. You get so many ideas, so many plot points, so many characters, that it soon becomes muddled. What was the point of either Jason Schwartzman or Dustin Hoffman appearing in Megalopolis? The former is writer/director Francis Ford Coppola's nephew, the latter a veteran actor who I figure was doing a friend a favor. Neither of them, however, needed to be there.

I think Coppola had a vision so vast and grand that he got lost in it. There are several ideas flowing through Megalopolis, but eventually it becomes too much to hold the thing together. At times, Megalopolis becomes more involved in the visuals and the style than in whatever plots it is trying to shape. 

I personally could see shades of the Claus and Sunny von Bulow case best known from Reversal of Fortune with Catalina and his late wife. I saw strong elements of I, Claudius with the wildly dysfunctional Crassus-Catalina family (especially after LaBeouf's Clodio appeared in Romanesque drag, shades of John Hurt's Caligula floating about my head). Things seemed to be borderline incoherent, such as Wow's dramatic end with Jon Voight recreating Who Killed Cock Robin while dressed as some kind of Robin Hood. There is even a bit of Thomas Becket and Henry II when Clodio screams out "Will no one rid me of this f-ing cousin?", harkening the attributed "Will no one rid me of this meddlesome priest?" that led to the murder in the cathedral. 

Therefore, with all the incoherence in Megalopolis, why then do I recommend it when so many seem to despise it? In retrospect, it is because of Coppola's grand vision. I don't think many films nowadays dare to even try to be so big, so heady, so grandiose. They seem satisfied with being simple, rote, predictable. I do not think any of those words can be used to describe Megalopolis.

Stripped of a lot of its craziness, Megalopolis has many parts that are quite good. The movie has some dazzling cinematography, grand imagery unafraid to go all-in. Some sequences, such as the presentation of the Vestal Virgins, is admittedly crazed to baffling. However, visually, it is a tour de force. Other moments, such as when Catalina goes to see his wife, are also visually splendid. The film also has an excellent score by Osvaldo Colijov, which works well in the craziness of the whole thing. The production and costume design also do excellent work in creating the fantastical alternate world.

I think the performances are also quite good. Adam Driver is a skilled actor, and Megalopolis gives him a chance to be if not the sanest person here, at least a chance to create an extraordinary character. While his "Go back to the club" has become a meme, I think his delivery of the line is correct to the character: this vaguely Ayn Rand-like figure whose vision to create something eternal will not be stopped by the concerns of the present. "Don't let the now destroy the forever," he declares when presenting his vision of Megalopolis to the public. Catalina is a blend of The Fountainhead's Howard Roark, New York builder Robert Moses and creator Buckminster Fuller. Driver delivers an excellent performance.

He is matched by Esposito as his rival. Near the end, he did look a little goofy with his military helmet, making me think of Salvador Allende before Augusto Pinochet's forces iced him in the Chilean coup. Nonetheless, his mix of arrogance and love for Julia worked well. I do not know much of Emmanuel as an actress, and while I thought at times, she was a bit weak, I can put part of that on the character. Voight and LaBeouf were all-in on the cray-cray, Plaza less so. Still, I thought the performances on the whole were good.

I see that, on the whole, Megalopolis' ambitions were undone by its overall execution. With that being said, I stand by view that Megalopolis is out of control and crazed but fascinating. 

DECISION: C+

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-

Ghostbusters: Frozen Empire. A Review (Review #1803)

 

GHOSTBUSTERS: FROZEN EMPIRE

One of the great mysteries of film, for me at least, is the continued love if not obsession for Ghostbusters among a group of devotees. Don't misunderstand me: I think well of the first Ghostbusters. It was one of the first films I saw when theaters reopened post-COVID. Oddly, my only takeaway from seeing Ghostbusters that time was how surprised I was over how long the film was. However, I do not understand why for some, Ghostbusters is something to adore if not worship. Men in their forties and fifties insisting on more adventures with our spectral hunters to where we get an entire franchise is something that puzzles me. The first film was fine, but I never saw a need for more. 

Nevertheless, Ghostbusters has spun now three more films and two cartoon series. I do not remember seeing Ghostbusters II. I detested the 2016 reboot. I thought Ghostbusters: Afterlife was serviceable if not particularly good. Now we get Ghostbusters: Frozen Empire. Will this be a triumphant return to a beloved franchise or an abomination that hopefully kills off this franchise? 

The Spengler family: matriarch Callie (Carrie Coon), now-adult Trevor (Finn Wolfhard) and fifteen-year-old girl genius Phoebe (Mckenna Grace) have left Oklahoma and now live at the firehouse where Callie's father, the late Egon Spengler, had the Ghostbusters headquarters. High school teacher Gary Grooberson (Paul Rudd) is also there, though his status among the Spenglers is unclear. The firehouse, however, is not just an old building. It is the former headquarters of the Explorers Club, where in 1904 the members were frozen in fear. Now, a century-plus later, the new Ghostbusters meet challenges old and new. The old is the cantankerous Mayor, Walter Peck (William Atherton), who still hates our spectral fighters. Their newest escapade results in destruction and a forced grounding of Phoebe, which she openly hates and has contempt for.

The only bright spot for our surly teen genius is a growing friendship with Melody (Emily Alyn Lind), who just happens to be a ghost. The original Ghostbusters, meanwhile, are doing their own things. Ray Stantz (Dan Aykroyd) runs a supernatural shop and hosts a seance-type podcast produced by Podcast (Logan Kim), who is yet another Oklahoma exile. Winston Zeddemore (Ernie Hudson) is still bankrolling the Ghostbusters with a new holding center for the various ghosts previously captured. The paranormal center is run by Dr. Pinfield (James Acaster) where Trevor's Oklahoma love interest Lucky (Celeste O'Connor) is also working there. Stantz comes across a mysterious orb brought to him by Nadeem (Kumail Nanjiani), who is interested only in the quick cash his late grandmother's trinkets can bring him.

We find eventually that the orb contains the powerful demon Garraka, who will freeze the world but needs a ghost army to conquer the world. To do so, he uses Melody to con Phoebe into separating her spirit from her body so as to control a human. Nadeem finds he is a Fire Master, able to combat Garraka, even if he is unaware of anything about being a Fire Master. Will old and new Ghostbusters be able to join forces to defeat Garraka and save the world?

Watching Frozen Empire, I cannot help but think that screenwriters Jason Reitman and director Gil Kenan decided that fans of the old series and fans of the new series needed to have something for them. As such, they gave each of them their own movie and sliced both of them into one. It is absolutely astonishing that Frozen Empire felt that we needed thirteen characters, some with extremely tenuous connections to anything. 

Lucky, Podcast, Trevor, Pinfield and Patton Oswalt's Dr. Hubert Wartzki could have been eliminated without any interruptions to the plot. Oswalt was in exactly one scene, which served as infodump and who was not heard from again after he gave the needed information. Worse, the story he told could have been told by Stanz or even in an opening precredit sequence. Frozen Empire is so stuffed with figures that it cannot hold. 

There was no need or reason to have Lucky or Podcast at all in the film as both did nothing to justify their existence. You could have dropped Podcast and given his tasks to Trevor. You could have done likewise with Lucky and given her tasks to Phoebe. It would have allowed them to do more than what especially Trevor did. His whole arc was to fight Slimer, a subplot that could have easily been eliminated. Slimer had to be there because he is a classic Ghostbusters fan favorite, but other than being one more "memberberry", Slimer was irrelevant. 

Trevor, sadly, was equally irrelevant to Frozen Empire. For long stretches, he disappeared from the film, and it says everything about his character that his absence could go unnoticed and not affect anything in the film. Same goes for Lucky, for Podcast, and worse, for the original Ghostbusters cast. Aykroyd and especially Bill Murray also could have been gone. Murray pops in for a quick scene with Nanjiani and then at the climactic battle, not even bothering to take anything other than his paycheck. 

There is a schizophrenic manner to Frozen Empire, as if Reitman and Kenan felt that the mere appearance of Murray's Peter Venkman would be enough to make people cheer. Maybe it did, but why have him there if you won't do anything with him? What you have is, again, two movies jumbled into one, which ultimately short-changed everyone.

It does not help that the character Frozen Empire focuses on is thoroughly unlikeable. Grace's Phoebe starts off as a bratty bitch: obnoxious, belligerent, openly disrespectful and smug. If all that was not bad enough already, Phoebe makes a cacophony of dumb decisions for someone we are repeatedly told by others (and by Phoebe herself) that Phoebe is the brightest person around. The nadir of the "Phoebe is incredibly stupid for someone incredibly bright" comes when she willingly separates her spirit from her body for potential ghost lesbian sex.

As a side note, I never thought to write the phrase "potential ghost lesbian sex", but Frozen Empire hedges its bets on whether or not Phoebe and Melody were or wanted to be more than friends. 

It is never established whether the fifteen-year-old Phoebe and the forever sixteen-year-old Melody were in love, in lust or just friends. Was this relationship going Ghost or going Casper? Given that the body/mind separation would last only two minutes, what on earth did Phoebe think she could accomplish with Melody in such a brief amount of time.

Frozen Empire also attempts to throw in some epic backstory about the Fire Masters, but there was no buildup to it. Instead, it is just thrown in there. Apart from a scene between Aykroyd and Hudson where they talk about needing to move on, there are no performances. Paul Rudd was relying too much on his Paul Rudd persona, affable and slightly diffident. Coon's Callie did what she could but there was no character there. Nanjiani equally did what he could to make this silly character anything worth noting, but all the gags involving Nadeem were obvious. 

Ghostbusters: Frozen Empire is a big ball of nothing. I know many people, especially Ghostbusters fans, absolutely love the film. That is their right, and no number of appeals to logic will dissuade them from the love they see things through. Overstuffed, rambling and split between giving old fans things to squee over and trying to move things forward, Ghostbusters: Frozen Empire left me thoroughly cold.  

DECISION: F

Dune: Part Two. A Review (Review #1800)

 

DUNE: PART TWO

I start by saying that I loved Dune: Part One. I've seen it four times. So far, I have seen Dune: Part Two merely twice. Epic, grand, surprisingly less bogged down with worldbuilding, Dune: Part Two is at the same level as the first part, though perhaps with a less stronger reason to go to a Part Three.

The great houses of the universe, along with the Emperor (Christopher Walken) and his daughter, Princess Irulan (Florence Pugh) believe that House Atreides is extinguished, all the members having died on the desert planet Arrakis, better known as Dune. Unbeknown to them or Atreides sworn enemy, House Harkonnen, there are two survivors of House Atreides. There is now-Duke Paul Atreides (Timothée Chalamet) and his mother, the Lady Jessica (Rebecca Ferguson). They are adapting to the desert world and that of Arrakis' native population, the Fremen.

Paul is now slowly winning the heart of Fremen warrior Chani (Zendaya), while training with Stilgar (Javier Bardem) in the ways of the Fremen. Stilgar comes to believe that Paul is the Mahdi, the long-prophesied Messiah to lead the Fremen to a paradise. Chani is more dubious, as is Paul himself. The Lady Jessica, however, who is now the Reverend Mother to the Northern Fremen, believes that he can be the Messiah. She has surprising support from her unborn daughter, Alia, who has great powers after the Lady Jessica drank from the Water of Life, which transferred the knowledge of the past Reverend Mothers to her.

The Emperor and the Baron Harkonnen (Stellan Skarsgard) become alarmed at the rise of a mysterious Fremen called Muad'Dib. He is leading a rebellion on Arrakis that will interrupt the lucrative and needed spice trade. The Baron sends his psychotic nephew Feyd-Rautha (Austin Butler) to take control of Arrakis. Feyd-Rautha is a potential Kwisatz Haderach, the great being who can be a male Bene Gesserit (the hereto female-only order which has been controlling things behind the scenes). The war between the rebellious Fremen and the Emperor/Harkonnen alliance comes to a climax when Paul, revealed as Muad'Dib and a potential Messiah, battles Feyd-Ratha for not just Arrakis but for the known universe. It is the start of a holy war, one where marriages of convenience and alliances shift like the sands of Dune.

Dune: Part Two is a long film at close to three hours. To the credit of director and cowriter Denis Villeneuve (writing with Jon Spaihts), the film rarely feels sluggish. Things move along remarkably well.

The performances, particularly from the newcomers, are excellent. Butler is the best of the new group, his Feyd-Ratha a menacing, monstrous figure. He dominates with his cruel, psychotic performance. Moreover, Butler does well in capturing what must be the Harkonnen voice, this guttural, whispering voice that is scratchy but dark and cruel. 

Pugh does well as Princess Irulan, though she suffers due to a diminished role. Faring worse is Walken, who is wasted in almost a cameo. While it is more than likely that Walken and especially Pugh have expanded roles in a Dune: Part Three, I think their roles could have been expanded.

Those returning from Dune: Part One also gave stronger, richer performances than their first going. Chalamet grew into this warrior figure, one who still struggles with assuming the mantle of Messiah. Does he believe that he could be the Mahdi? Is he using this prophesy to move on his plans to overthrow the Emperor and assume both power and revenge? Chalamet never lets us fully figure out one way or the other, keeping the mystery intact.

Dune: Part Two does well in balancing out the struggle between faith and doubt with the characters of Stilgar and Chani. Bardem brings the true believer's unquestioning faith that Paul is the Chosen One, even bringing a bit of humor when he insists that Paul saying that he isn't the One is proof that he is. Zendaya counters him with a firm belief that while Paul is a good man, he is using the prophesy to keep the Fremen under his thumb. Ferguson brings an almost terrifying manner to Lady Jessica, a mixture of power-mad with almost fanatical belief in Paul.

The film also has excellent production all around. The sets, the costumes, the cinematography and Hans Zimmer's score all work to create this grand universe so separate from our own. Of particular note is when Paul rides the conqueror worm. The visuals and sound all make this sequence a spectacular sequence, especially when we get Paul's POV. 

Zimmer's music is both grand and intimate, particularly in its love theme. He has this vaguely Arabic style, one that works extraordinarily well with the desert world. Greig Foster's cinematography is also exceptional, going from the vast deserts of Arrakis to the dark world of the Harkonnen planet, Giedi Prime. 

Where I think Dune: Part Two struggles is in its length. Somehow, I think too much time is spent on Arrakis and less on the political machinations of both the Emperor & Harkonnen alliance as well as the works of the malevolent Bene Gesserit order. It is well over an hour before we start getting much about the imperial plots with the Harkonnen. The final confrontation between Feyd-Ratha and Paul Atreides, while visually splendid and well-choreographed, almost feels hurried. The battle between the Fremen and the joint-Imperial/Harkonnen legions does feel rushed, as if it were something to get through versus the culmination of this epic space saga.

Those are minor points. I think even those who were not enamored of Dune: Part One will find much to admire, if not love, in Dune: Part Two. As there is a strong likelihood that there will be a Dune: Part Three, this film will serve as a bridge between them. Whether it should be a bridge or the conclusion is still a subject of debate. Grand, epic, if perhaps longer than it should be, Dune: Part Two will thrill fans without leaving nonbelievers totally frozen out.

DECISION: B+

Poor Things: A Review (Review #1783)

POOR THINGS

The term "acquired taste" is one that Poor Things rightly earns. A film that in my opinion is trying too hard to be eccentric, it just left me cold.

Mad scientist Godwin Baxter (Willem Dafoe) is keeping his newest creation far from the public gaze. She is Bella Baxter (Emma Stone), a woman he literally brought back to life. He found her shortly after she successfully committed suicide, and to his surprise found she was heavily pregnant. He opted to install her unborn child's brain into her head and managed to create a new woman.

Bella stumbles through Baxter's home a bit like an unhinged Helen Keller only with all her senses intact. She says the first thing that pops into her mind to "God" as she calls Godwin. Bella is uncouth in her eating and has motor skill issues, but she has discovered a new hobby: auto-erotic exercises with fruit.

She has also discovered Max McCandles (Ramy Youssef). Max is Godwin's assistant whom he brought to monitor Bella's progress. She is not in love with him as the concept is foreign to her. Somehow, though, Max has fallen for Bella. A marriage is soon planned, as Godwin knows he won't last forever. 

Enter Duncan Wedderburn (Mark Ruffalo). A shady lawyer brought in to draw up the marriage contract, he soon discovers Bella as the ultimate sexual conquest. They run off together, with Max distraught and Godwin merely non-plussed. All their "furious jumping" is too much even for lothario Duncan, who attempts to taper down our nympho. She, however, will not be denied. A sailing journey to get Bella under control fails, especially after she discovers both philosophy and poverty. Eventually, they end up destitute in Paris, where he goes mad and she goes to a brothel.

Bella becomes the queen of whores, yet even her growing knowledge of such things as socialism and lesbianism seems rote. Finally brought back to London by Max to see a dying Godwin, there is one last twist before their nuptials courtesy of Alfie Blessington (Christopher Abbott). Will Bella become her own woman?

Essentially a more lighthearted Frankenstein with a bit of The Island of Doctor Moreau and Freaks, I was not impressed with seeing how many times and in how many ways Emma Stone could get humped. I think it was because sometimes things were a bit too eccentric for me in its efforts to be funny. I get what director Yorgos Lanthimos was going for in his visual style. The film is split into a black-and-white opening section and a color section, bringing color once Bella finds the joys of furious jumping.

I get that this is some kind of steampunk universe, where things are exaggerated and overt. It is just that I did not laugh once. I think it is because I could never shake the idea that Poor Things was trying too hard. Everything from the performances to the visuals to Tony McNamara's screenplay adaptation of Alasdair Gray's novel were too open about their eccentricity for me to accept even this fantasy world.

"Did he lay with you?", a displeased Duncan asks Bella after she wanders off without him to explore the joys of Lisbon. "No, we were against the wall," she replied in her not-quite monotone but more staccato delivery. A lot of what is meant to be funny just did not hit me. At one point, Duncan attempts to literally toss another passenger, Martha (Hanna Schygulla) off the ship for giving Bella endless books to read. Martha seems almost delighted by his unhinged efforts, but as I watched I was not laughing. It was not horror at the sight but my sense that, while I got that all this is supposed to be broad, it did not impress me.

That also goes to the performances. Many have lauded Emma Stone's turn as Bella, our naive nympho. I will grant that her performance is technically skilled. However, that is what I kept seeing: a technically skilled performance as opposed to the character. I never saw "Bella Baxter" but "Emma Stone acting". I do not know if that is a compliment or insult here. Did she give a good performance? Yes. Did she ever convince me she was the character? No.

I would say the same for all the performances. Again, I appreciate that Poor Things is meant to be broad. I just thought it was a bit too broad for me. I could not shake the idea that since everyone was in on the joke, it just did not make it funny for me. Ruffalo and Dafoe each play their part in the same vein, with deliberately mild exaggerations. I confess never believing that Duncan would sacrifice everything for the sake of pleasing Bella, probably because things were played so big that it did not make sense to me for him to be driven mad by her loss. Dafoe was probably the most grounded out of the three, not making Godwin into a crazed mad scientist (even if he was that). 

Poor Things does have a strong aesthetic in its world building. That should be a plus in its favor. Its two-hour-plus runtime was a strong negative though. Maybe the film could have lost a couple of Bella's sexual encounters in the brothel, such as a father bringing his two boys to see him have sex with her to teach them about sex.

Ultimately though, I found less to like than things to hate in Poor Things. I did not hate it, but I could not embrace it. 

DECISION: C-

The Creator (2023): A Review (Review #1755)

 

THE CREATOR

In the beginning, I thought well of The Creator, to where I thought it could slip into my Ten Best of the Year list. As I thought more and more about The Creator, I realized that apart from one element, it is a very dull film that is a pastiche of other, better films. 

Artificial Intelligence at first appeared to be a helpful tool for humanity. That was until AI ended up blowing up Los Angeles in a nuclear explosion. Now the remnants of the United States is at war with New Asia, which believes AI is still a source for good. Into this comes Taylor (John David Washington), an undercover military officer who is close to finding the mysterious Nirmata, the so-called Creator. Taylor is married to Maya (Genna Chan), who may have ties to Nirmata. A botched raid not only blows his cover but kills Maya and their unborn child.

Five years have passed, and Taylor is asked to help find Nirmata and destroy his superweapon, a device that will render all the American technology powerless. He agrees when he learns from Colonel Howell (Allison Janney) that Maya is still alive, and he might save her. However, that mission deep into New Asia also goes wrong, more so when he discovers that the superweapon is in the form of a child. Officially named Alpha-O (Madeleine Yuna Voyles), Taylor cannot kill it. 

Now on the lam, Taylor and "Alphie" go in search of answers. Eventually captured, Taylor learns from his former simulant ally Harun (Ken Watanabe) that the war was caused by human, not AI, error. Harun also informs him that the simulants (robots in mostly human form) and robots only want to live in peace. Eventually, Taylor finds that Maya and Nirmata are one and the same. Maya is in a coma due to the attack, and Alphie is her creation based on what her and Taylor's child might have been. Taylor ends her life and now must face the wrath of his former military. Will he be able to destroy Alphie? Who will win this war?

It is difficult to see The Creator and not see other films popping in. The most obvious parallel is with Blade Runner in that it tackled similar themes: the nature of what makes one human, the dystopian world, a man of law & order possibly in love with a machine. It does not help that in the admittedly well-crafted faux-documentary footage opening, the tagline "More Human Than Human" pops up. I also saw elements of A.I.: Artificial Intelligence, Akira and Platoon rattling around The Creator.

As a side note, it strikes me as curious that people criticizing audiences for not going to The Creator are saying that its box office failure will discourage studios from funding "original properties". The truth is that The Creator is anything but original. Director and cowriter Gareth Edwards (writing with Chris Weitz) may hold that The Creator is original, but it draws too heavily from other properties to make a solid claim to originality. 

The Creator is also plagued by other problems. At the top of them are the performances. Whatever one may think of John David Washington, The Creator is one of his worst performances. He is blank and emotionless throughout the film. To be fair, the script gives few people a chance to show anything other than vaguely mystical mumblings. It also asks us to be emotionally invested in a "sweeping romance" that we never got to know. However, Washington looked almost bored at times in his efforts to move the viewer. 

The same goes for almost every other actor in The Creator. Again, the script gives them little to work with. Jumping ahead a little, the script almost demands people care about the various relationships when in reality we never get to know the characters. The character of Kami (Veronica Ngo), the replicant* girlfriend of Taylor's former military friend, is killed by the New Asia military when searching for Taylor and Alphie. However, it is hard to feel shocked or emotionally invested in a character whose name I did not even know until the credits.

Similarly, Watanabe's Harun keeps calling Taylor "my brother", but their interactions are so limited you wonder where this deep emotional connection came from. 

Only Janney and Voyles as Colonel Howell and Alphie manage good performances. Janney has a bit of a monologue discussing how her son was killed by a replicant who had lured him into a relationship. It is curious that in that brief moment, we got more motivation and better played motivation than anything Washington did. One almost wanted to follow Howell's story rather than Taylor's. I give credit to Voyles, who managed to move the audience on occasion with her blend of innocence and wisdom.

There is a certain pomposity in The Creator, with its ponderous tone and excessive runtime of two hours and thirteen minutes. The sluggish nature of The Creator made those 133 minutes feel even longer. The pomposity extended to its three-act structure of seeing three titles on screen: Nirmata, The Child and The Mother. The filmmakers want to make The Creator into some grand epic rather than letting the film do the work. I will add briefly that I am disturbed at how the film wants me to cheer the fall of man. I wouldn't say there is something sinister in that, but I would say that I cannot celebrate the "enemy" winning. 

The only aspect in The Creator that is worth anything is the visuals. The film has a lower budget than many big Marvel or DC films, yet the visual effects are better and more realistic. Granted, the MCU and DCEU seem set on being more cartoony to silly than The Creator. However, The Creator makes this look like a lived-in world. They may not astonish the viewer, but they serve the story, which is better.

The Creator is what I would call a noble failure. It wants to tackle themes of what makes one human, but I found it slow, slightly boring and terribly pompous. The overall poor performances and grim nature of the film did not help. It is indeed difficult to create, and The Creator proves it.

DECISION: C-

*The actual term in The Creator was "simulant", but to my mind, they were Blade Runner replicant knockoffs.