I have written about "Jurassic Park" on many previous posts. (Here, Here, and Here), so there is plenty of content on the site to cover the film I saw again on the big screen last weekend.
Instead of elaborating ore on a film you all know, I want to take this opportunity to vent. I am frustrated to no end by a decision made by one of my beloved movie chains.
Alamo Drafthouse popularized the idea of theater dining and drinking. Those have never been my favorite part of going to an Alamo Presentation, but the experience has been less intrusive than I feared when the whole thing began. (Disclosure: The first in theater Dining Experience I had was at an AMC) The idea of waiters delivering food and taking orders while a movie was playing seems antithetical to me. The process is disruptive to the viewing experience.
Alamo had managed it as well as could be expected, but they have suddenly stepped into their own trap. For years, the thing that was unique about the Alamo Drafthouse Experience was the forcefulness of their no phone policy.
Last year they introduced an option to use your phone before the movie, as a way to order. This year, it has become mandatory. If you want any concession, food order or assistance, you have to use your phone. This was our first time under the new exclusive ordering system, and it was not a pleasant experience. Everyone in our row was grouching about the idea that to get concession items, you have to violate the long time "No Phones" policy. When the No Phone Slide shows up on screen before the film starts, it has a disclaimer now, excluding their own app. You could hear derisive laughter throughout the theater.
As long as this new policy stays in place, I will be resisting it the best way that I can. The Alamo Experience had two things going for it, They have the best programming and they had the no phones policy. To me, the food and drink service was always secondary at best. We did often order food and we enjoyed it, but it is not special enough to continue if this intrusive Phone approach is going to stay in place. So, AMC and Cinemark, you will see me more often. I'm not canceling my Alamo Movie Pass, I'm just not going to order anything when I go to a film that I can only find at the Drafthouse. Local eating establishments will be getting my business if I am hungry. #sneekinginmyjuniormints.
The movie is largely disappearing, so my motivation to write something unique is low. Most of my thoughts on the film can be found in the LAMBcast Episode devoted to it. Above is the Illustrated podcast.
Gore Verbinski has created a lot of films that I've enjoyed , most of which have a strange twist or odd angle to them. One of my favorites is Rango, the animated film that earned him a very deserved Academy Award, because let's face it no one is going to give him an award for overseeing the chaos that is the Pirates of the Caribbean franchise, regardless of how much he managed to make sense of it all.
In anticipating “Good Luck Have Fun Don't Die”, I was expecting the usual degree of visual insanity and quirky characters that have characterized much of his previous work. To be honest a lot of it is here, but somewhere the funny got lost and instead of having a light touch with a serious subject, this movie feels as if it has a heavy thumb on the scale of sadness.
I can't fault Sam Rockwell as the star of the film because he does exactly what he's supposed to be doing. He is maniacal, controlling, and at the center of all of the chaos. It's just that the chaos doesn't feel quite as chaotic as it should, and even though the premise is off center, it just doesn't feel off center enough. To me, the best section of the film is the opening where his character shows up and appears to be recruiting a team from the patrons of the diner that he's in. We are led to believe that he's done this over 100 times before and is simply looking for the right combination of customers to get into his desired objective. The way in which he rejects or demands participation is truly amusing. Unfortunately once they escape the diner, what follows is a rather mundane Quest picture where the quest is just not as interesting as it should be.
The last half hour of the film does attempt to reinvigorate the crazy sensibility of the story. The fact that it is so dominated by visual effects that probably use the same kind of computer technology that the story is ultimately about, feels like it is undercutting the goal. I appreciate the characters of the company that Rockwell takes on his mission, and as we lose a couple on the way I was sad because they provided some of the best moments of the film.
It's hard to understand what's going on from the very beginning, but as we get closer to the climax we do get a sense of what it all means. I'm not going to spoil it for you, but there is another twist at the end, and although I could see it coming, that doesn't mean that I thought it was appropriate. Let's just say if we take the film at face value we are only watching a single chapter in a book that is not going to be completed. If there was hope that this could be a continuing series that has probably been dashed by the lack of box office, not to mention the less than enthusiastic reviews.
I'm glad I saw the movie, and I would certainly recommend it to fans of Sam Rockwell, because after all everything is better because he's in it. Since his failure with the Lone Ranger a dozen years ago, Verbenski has not been able to get a movie made on the scale of his previous dozen years. I'm afraid this movie is not going to change his situation. He has a great visual eye, but his storytelling chops seem to be muted at least for the moment. So let me finish by saying good luck, trying to figure out how this all works, have fun, watching the Clockwork Orange turn, and don't die from your bloated expectations.
I have no doubt that this will trigger some of my friends and readers. If there is a more toxic subject on line these days than Trump, I don't know what it is. Implicitly, this movie is likely to be seen as Trump Propaganda, and there is certainly reason to believe that based on some of the content. I think however, that someone capable of critical thinking should be able to separate the political boosterism, from the informational context that is being presented. Those of you who can only see evil in anything related to Trump should probably skip this just out of habit. If you stick with it, I hope you will find an accounting of the film as I saw it.
There are three aspects of the First Lady's movie that I think I would like to talk about, her fashion sense and design background, her goals and role as first lady, and the process of the Inauguration itself, including all the social accoutrements that go along with it. There is some political talk in the film, but it is relatively minor and not the subject that brought me to the film in the first place. One cannot deny that the reason any of this matters is because of her marriage, but that side of the political discussion is out of bounds on this site.
Melania Trump may be the most enigmatic First Lady of my lifetime. Her background seems alien to most of us to begin with. She is not from the political class and she is not from humble beginnings as a girl growing up in an American neighborhood, she is an immigrant who comes from a family steeped in the fashion and design ecosystem. She has been a model and a fashionista from the earliest moments of her life, but her exposure to Americans as that person has been superficial. This film attempts to show her in a more engaged light. I don't pretend to have any sense of fashion or class elegance, but I can appreciate that there is a reason that state functions are not held on picnic tables with paper plates and Solo cups. I am reminded by that moment in "The Untouchables" when in the depths of despair after the murder of his colleague, Elliot Ness gets off the phone with his wife, he shakes his head in wonderment that somewhere in the world, someone cares about the color of the walls in the kitchen. Melania Trump clearly does.
The opening section of the film follows FLOTUS as she inspects, and approves of various elegant touches related to the Inauguration process. Plates and dinnerware need to be judged. The invitations have to be elegantly presented, the flower arrangements must reflect the dignity of an event. Most of us don't care much about those things, but brides at their own weddings do, diplomats at state functions do, and political powerbrokers care about them as well. So Melania turns her fashion forward eyes to these little things, including her own wardrobe for the Inaugural balls and the ceremony itself. The width of a hat brim and the accompanying band, must be just right. Her confidence in this realm of her position seems unassailable if pretentions.
In regard to her position as FLOTUS, we learn of her charities and the way she has reached out to the world, in a manner that is sometimes invisible. A Facetime chat with the First Lady of France shows us some of the social functions that go along with politics. These behind the scene moments are the reasons that anyone interested might want to overcome their revulsion of Trump and get some inside skinny. The segment with Aviva Siegel, a Gaza War hostage, talking about the trauma of being held and the fear for her husband who was still in captivity at the time of filming, would certainly be seen by jaded political observers as propaganda, but I saw it as a reflection of true human concern, and a story that was not fleshed out by the media, but gets some sympathetic ears from Melania.
The time frame for the film is from the first of the year to Inauguration Day on January 20th. There are meetings and public events that all lead up to the start of the new term. We are given an insiders view of some of those moments. The security measures that are required are outlined without revealing anything top secret, and the planned outdoor event got scrapped by the inclement weather in D.C. in January 2025. I was fascinated by the process of moving out the Biden's and moving in the Trumps at the White House. It was interesting to see up close some of the posturing that went on from each side as the tension in the moment is being assiduously avoided.
I'm sure MAGA fans will find more to love about this film, and those who hate Trump will find plenty of fuel for their fire as well. As a documentary on the subject it claims to be about, it was generally satisfying. There is not a hard nosed point of view or axe to grind, this was the kind of film one might have seen on Biography or the Discovery channel once upon a time. Because the political factions are so hot right now, it gets turned into a litmus test for idealogues on both sides. I found it to be as innocuous as any other portrait of a First Family might be. Jackie Kennedy giving a tour of the White House, Ladybird Johnson advocating to Keep America Beautiful, Laura Bush promoting reading, Michelle Obama suggesting health exercise, they are all part of the same tradition. The most difficult thing most people these days seem to be incapable of, is digesting an normal tradition as simply being normal. This movie is not a sign of the Apocalypse, and it will end up in a documentary queue on Amazon, with all the other vanilla flavored First Lady documentaries, so relax.
Director Sam Rami has been a favorite of mine since the Evil Dead movies of the late '80s. In fact I recently wrote about two of his films that I saw in theaters this year, “Darkman” and “The Quick and the Dead”. It's been a while since he's had a film out that was clearly something that he was built for. He did the best he could to mold “Doctor Strange and the Multiverse of Madness" into a Sam Rami film, but it still had to be a Marvel product.
With “Send Help", he returns to the horror genre at least peripherally. While not a straight horror film, “Send Help" does have several horror elements to it, and a couple of good jump scares, one of which is clearly horror motivated. It is the scenario set up by the story that makes this more of an adventure drama, but the way Rami directs it, you will feel tension and revulsion as if you were watching a horror film.
One of the things that is unique about this movie, is that it will make us feel sympathetic to someone who commits some atrocious acts. Rachel McAdams stars as the put-upon data analyst and accounting specialist, Linda Liddle, who is passed over for a promotion by someone who is younger, less experienced and of a different gender. This is done largely because the new head of the firm, the son of the firm's founder, is buddies with the guy and it's an old school approach to business.
After having been demeaned and ridiculed by her coworkers and boss, Linda gains the upper hand when their private jet crashes and she and her boss are stranded on an island, with a little chance of rescue. What follows is a series of events where the two characters fight, bond, fight some more, and deal with ambiguous relational issues. You never however get the feeling that all is going to be right. The boss, Bradley, played by Dylan O’Brien, continues to be a person whose lack of power drives him to do things to gain the upper hand. McAdams on the other hand, relishes her situation so much that she ignores some potential opportunities to escape the situation. It may be a trope in these revenge horror type films, that we sympathize with a dangerous character. I remember seeing Willard back in 1971, and knowing that even though he was a little deranged and murderous, I wanted him to get the best of his tormentors.
Surprisingly there are times when we can sympathize with the boss as well. Every time however, that he seems to be more human and someone who can work with his employee, he slips back into the habit of trying to one up his partner in the situation. Sam Rami lights us up with dangerous situations, sudden animal attacks, and a variety of injuries and poisons that make life on this island feel very tentative and risky.
As usual there are a couple of twists in the story, and when the final ones are revealed I think you will discover that the film is a very satisfying two hours of entertainment. That is if you enjoy Sam Rami’s camera style and dark sense of humor. In case you haven't guessed I do.
So on my birthday 2 weeks ago I got a chance to revisit a film from 2000. It was very entertaining but was largely ignored at the time it was released. A little over a year ago I had a chance to attend a screening that was largely a party at the Paramount Theater celebrating Josie and the Pussycats. As it is, I was just celebrating my birthday with the Pussycats this time.
I've said it before, this film was way too clever for its own good. People misread it as a simple teen comedy, which it is to some degree, but it is also a sharp satire on the music industry, the media, and even the movie industry and its obsession with product placement. It is witty and sharp and full of jokes that will pass you by if you're not paying close attention. The opening of the film is loaded with shots at the commercialization of filmmaking because everything is branded.
The deeper pleasure in Josie and the Pussycats however is the music. The songs by this faux band are so upbeat, clever and tuneful that it's hard for me to understand how they weren't all hits, much less how they were ignored at the Academy Awards that year for best song which they were certainly more deserving of than what really won.
I posted on this movie before and you can read about that here. and here. I just want to celebrate one more time the fact that this movie exists, and that it evokes good memories from 25 years ago. I went to see it with my daughter and she was just a tween when we saw it the first time. She's now a grown woman and she made the effort to secure tickets for us so that we had something special to do on my birthday, thanks hon.
I make no secret of the fact that this is my favorite Sam rami film, yes even ahead of "Evil Dead 2" and "Army of Darkness" and all the Spider-Man movies. The reasons are apparent when you look at the trailer: it is a western, it stars Gene Hackman, and it features a badass woman with a gun. That is a formula that is hard to screw up, and when you add in Sam Rami's directing style and Sharon Stone as the Lady, it is perfect. (Which I said back in 2013).
We saw this as part of an Alamo series of films, saluting Gene Hackman and David Lynch and others. Those of you here for the first time will learn that Gene Hackman is my favorite actor and this is one of his great villain performances. John Herod is an evil prairie scum who has leveraged his way into absolute authority over a border town, and maintains control by holding a quick draw contest each year to preoccupy and identify potential threats. There is always a threat from Leo DiCaprio who may be Herod's illegitimate son. There are rival gunslingers who show up to challenge the undisputed dictator of the town of Redemption, and there is a mysterious woman who challenges the expectations of the 19th century Western Frontier, played by the aforementioned Sharon Stone.
The movie is a homage to the spaghetti westerns of Sergio Leone, borrowing heavily from "Once Upon a Time in the West" but also Leone's style. There are sequences where the close ups get closer and they linger for more time than is comfortable. There are beads of perspiration that tell stories all by themselves, and the music while not being epic like Morricone, uses the instruments they way the master would, to set mood and accentuate a scene. Alan Silvestri is a terrific composer of movie scores and his work here is equal to the task.
I listened to a podcast "That's Da Bomb" on this film, and after the BS that starts the show, there is a nice discussion of this movie, although my opinion of the film is far higher than theirs. Even better, I went back and listened to the "Lambcast MOTM from February 2022" where five of us discussed the movie in some detail. Once again, I am an outlier but I am also right. "The Quick and the Dead" rules, and there are just not enough people out there who appreciate to the degree that it deserves.
