Hereditary

Whenever something comes to you with a great deal of advance hype, it is my advice to ignore it as much as possible. Inevitably one of two things will happen. First, the movie can live up to the hype which is great, but the experience of surprise is diminished and you feel less like the discoverer of something special, and more like another passenger on the hype train. The second outcome is even less satisfying.You find the film a disappointment and you struggle to reconcile the hype with your dissonant reaction to it. A24 Studio has released some films that I really enjoyed, including my favorite film of 2015. "It Comes At Night" was a horror based film from last year that I really liked. Another film that I saw streaming, that was referenced as a endorsement for this film was "The Witch". I was conflicted, because I hated that film. So where does "Hereditary" come down?

In spite of some excellent visuals and disturbing ideas that are very intriguing, as a movie, "Hereditary " ends up in the disappointment column. I was looking forward to this, it is promoted as being truly frightening, and Toni Collette is being given awards, six months before awards season begins. The performance by our lead actress will deserve some attention for sure, but the rest of the movie is a miss. It is bifurcated into a family drama/trauma story and a supernatural possession film. It works pretty well in the former capacity while having great visuals wasted in the later. Maybe I am being influenced by some recent film experiences too much because this movie reminded me of the incoherence of another movie experience I wrote and talked about a couple of weeks ago. An old horror film from 1971 begins incoherently, but as the film moves along, the ideas become a bit clearer so that you can see a plot thread while watching it. "Hereditary" has the same disjointed style but never coalesces into something tangible. I don't think a movie needs to spell everything out for you along the way, but if you want us to care about characters and dread the coming horror, an audience usually needs to figure out where they stand in regards to the events they are watching. I never could make such an inference.

Toni Collette is Annie, an artist who has recently lost her mother, a woman that she had a unsettled relationship with. Annie specializes in making miniatures of homes, museums, theaters etc. She recreates in detail, scenes from everyday like. She is working on multiple projects, one for a museum that she has done work for before, but also a few personal stories are being shrunk down to scale size often with sad detail. The opening of the film draws us into this story by taking us into a miniature of the house she lives in, only the perspective shifts and it is suddenly the real house and her family that we are seeing.  So from the outset, we have no clear idea if what we are watching is supposed to be real, or if it is a visualization of an idea that bounces between reality and one of the art pieces. At any moment, the story feels as if we are in a dream sequence or an extended vision. At one point Annie reveals that she sleep walks and has visions of events that are not real. There are a couple of dream, within a dream moments,and that is also creating uncertainty in perspective. What is nightmare vs. what is real, this is the basis for almost everything that happens in the story. As a result, the vision we get are like the dioramas she is creating, moments in time that may be part of something bigger or simple visions of something unpleasant. Without the ability to trust anything you are seeing, you will likely become a dispassionate observer rather than an empathetic companion to the characters.

My daughter and I discussed this and the analogy that we both felt reflected the story problem was to an essay being written for a college class. Each paragraph has unique points to it, some of which are frightening or disturbing. Another paragraph comes along with a different scenario, and often a different emotional element. The second paragraph has something to recommend it as well but it feels completely disconnected from the preceding material. As the following paragraphs repeat the process, the narrative feels disjointed. In the last paragraph the student tries to pull it all together so that we can see how everything is connected. Maybe in a paper you can get away with that, but when the whole plot of your movie has to be explained in the last two minutes of the film, that simply seems like bad storytelling. Let me illustrate with two episodes from the film. In one scene, there is a character who panics like a normal person would when an emergency occurs. A sudden unexpected development follows, and the traumatized  character is in shock, so much so that the extent of a horrifying accident is only passed on to others by their accidental discovery of it. That scene plays out beautifully, in a horrifying manner that is in fact disturbing. The follow up on it however feels so unreal as to be scripted from a completely different story line.  A second scene results in our main character revealing a personality quirk with another very disturbing story attached to it. It shows us that the character has a tenuous hold on reality. That hold is supposed to be the point of the story, at least that seems where it was headed, but again, we don't get a firm perspective until the end of the movie. Maybe if the film was structured like "Memento", it would work more, but it is put together like a haunting film, but the supernatural elements seem to show up out of left field after the traumatic sequence takes place. That supernatural element feels about a half hour too late.

Every time we start to build some suspense, the moment is undermined by the uncertainty of the character's reality. There are some images that should frighten us, but they have less impact because it could all be a dream again. When Annie creates a diorama of the tragic event from an objectivity point of view, it is a horrifying moment. When she is given a method to reach out to a loved one in the after life, it feels contrived. The other family members are only perceived from her viewpoint for most of the story. When the viewpoint shifts to the other characters, it seems like the film has suddenly changed. The tone is different and unsatisfying. Without a clearer backstory on the family relationships, it is hard to tell if the dynamics are new, problematic or simply typical. In a film like "The Exorcist" the audience participates and empathizes with as well as anticipating events in the characters lives. With "hereditary", I found myself saying "why?", even as I was looking at something that should be a horrifying moment to bring us into the story.

Lambcast: Modern Animation Draft

It is Official Now, I am Co-Host of the Lambcast. Jay Cluitt doesn't want to be burned out by the time he is 33, so he has asked me, a guy twice his age to spell him on a regular basis. I'll be co-hosting or hosting on my own several times this Summer. You will be seeing more posts like this, linking to the Lambcast Podcast. Please take advantage and listen. We usually have a great time talking movies.

This week however it is a Draft Show and all bets are off. It's a competition, so listen to the show and then go vote for the slate [mine] that you think is the best.



Click below to go vote.

http://www.largeassmovieblogs.com/2018/06/vote-for-the-winner-of-the-modern-animation-draft.html

Forgotten Filmcast Podcast: The Brotherhood of Satan

Todd invited me to be a guest on his show again, and we picked a film that let me get in another post for the Strother Martin Film Project.

Stop by and listen for an hour of Satanic horror.

Solo: A Star Wars Story

So, thirty-five years ago tonight, my best friend and I sat on Hollywood Blvd. for more than sixteen hours, waiting in line to get a ticket to Return of the Jedi. A frat guy from UCLA was holding a place for his fraternity brothers and they all crashed the line a couple of hours before the midnight screening, almost starting a small riot. Our wives met us after work and joined us in line so they had been there for six hours, and they were not happy either. We got bumped from the first show and ended up near the front of the line for the 3 am show. That's right, 3 am. After it let out, Art and Kathy wisely went home, Dee and I went around to the front of the theater, got in line again, and went to the 6 am show. We later met Art and Kathy about 2 pm for a show in West Covina. So Three times on opening day, what a bunch of geeks. The world today is soooo different. Pre-opening ticket sales, reserved seats, a screening well before midnight, where did all the stupid fun go?

Tonight we left the house after ten, there was no line up for our showing of "Solo" because we were in a theater with reserved seats, and the suburban crowd was not as raucous as the crowd at the Egyptian 35 years ago. This time I was joined by my wife and my daughter who will turn 30 next month, yikes I am old. I'm not too old however to not enjoy a "Star Wars" film, which I definitely did. "Solo" is a controversial film because of the production disruption, the casting rumors and for some fans, a fatigue around the development of films in this franchise. Forget all of that, taken on it's own, "Solo" is a solid space action film with a central character that we already know about and some side characters that will make the story even more rewarding.

My two major criticisms of the film are easy to knock off at the start. The set up of the character Han and his relationship with Qi'ra is rushed and a bit murky. We are dropped into an action sequence before we have much opportunity to figure out the lay of the land. It is ultimately fine but I don't think it sets up their relationship as well as it needs to be. That's because there is a case sequence and series of action scenes that are visually strong but don't let their characters play off of each other enough to quite pull us into the relationship as much as is needed. The connection between Han and the band of criminals he ends up running with is developed a lot more effectively later on, and the movie gets that the character and not the action should be driving the story. The second weakness I i felt concerns the music. Without the ear friendly themes of John Williams, the music simply fills in spots rather than heightening them. It's only when a well known motif shows up that the score comes alive. I have loved scores by John Powell before, but this just misses being the ear candy that I crave in these movies.

OK, now for the good stuff. This is a caper film with two elaborate heists driving the story. There is a lot of creativity that was put into the visuals in the film, to make those stories interesting. Traditionally, you would have a planning sequence in a heist film and the audience would be let in on the agenda. That way when things go wrong, we will be reacting to the shifts and bumps with the characters. Here the first plan is just laid out quickly to give some context but we are immediately plunged into the action and that is the locomotive for the plot at this point. This is a train heist with a myriad of complications including a rival band of pirates that attempt to steal from the thieves. The action on a freight train in a hostile world in space was elaborate, visually inventive and it allowed for some character development as well. This was the kind of thing that was necessary but missing in the opening section.

The introduction of iconic characters is the strongest element in the film. Han and Chewbacca get connected in a very appropriate manner and one that sets up a relationship that we will see play out over the original films very effectively. There is some great humor in their sequence and the by play that develops between these characters is almost immediately natural. The one character that everyone will be talking about is Lando Calrissian. Donald Glover sparks the scenes he is in in just the same way that Billy Dee Williams did in the two films from the early 80s. He is debonair and clever, but not always as clever as he thinks he is. Some might call his interactions with Han "fan service" but it is exactly the kind of story seed set up almost 40 years ago that we want to see come to fruition, and it is glorious. 

There are some other characters introduced into the story that that make this film a bit more unique. The aforementioned Qi'ra is both a love interest and a potential femme fatale. Dryden Vos is the Jabba like villain who is in the threatening background of the story until the climax when he is much more at the center. Paul Bettany does not get to do much more than wear some scars until the end of the film. Woody Harrelson's Becket is a cipher. Maybe some good in him, certainly some scoundrel, but not the light hearted scoundrel that is out title character. I especially liked the vocal performance of Phobe Waller-Bridge as the droid L3. Her tone matches the quirky and combative nature of this crew member of the team. The relationship L3 has with Lando is both touching and farcical. Along with K-2SO in "Rogue One" and R2D2 with C3PO in the other stories, it seems like the richest characters in this universe may be the droids.

There was a lot of speculation and rumor about Alden Ehrenreich in the lead role. In some quarters it was suggested that the movie was doomed because of his performance and that maybe the two directors who left the project had not done enough to get a solid performance out of him. I don't know what went on before Ron Howard came on the project, but Ehrenreich is great. He looks the part and he can carry off the attitude in a lot of the scenes where he is called on to be both naive and a bit too clever for his own good. That he can hold himself against the charisma of Glover's Lando is enough to tell you he is solid in the part.

Haters are going to be disappointed because this is not the failure that was predicted. This is an entertaining picture, set in the Star Wars universe, and it meets it's objectives. The characters we want are set up for more adventures and they have the personality to succeed. There are subplots that suggest connections to the larger story but they do not dominate the film. Finally, there is a clear atmosphere of fun that is a lot closer to the original film than we have had in any of the contemporary Star Wars movies. Box office watchers will speculate all they like, "Solo: A Star Wars Story" succeeds as a movie, whether or not it outpaces, lags behind or matches any other Star Wars films or expectations. 

Book Club

I am afraid I have to admit, I am in the demographic this film is targeting. It felt a little odd being in a theater with so many old people, and then I realized, I'm one of them. So often I see myself as an old guy when talking to my students or other bloggers on a podcast. It is entirely possible that if I post this as a Lambscore, there will only be my review. The youngest star in this movie is sixty-five, so the crowd that craves "The Avengers" and "Deadpool", is well under half that age. This kind of film is counter-programming for the summer. Once in a while, the mature audience likes to be thought of as relevant enough to cater do, and movies like this result. It looks like this will be a successful venture for Paramount Studios, which could use a hit. The screening I attended was packed, and I think I may have been the youngest person in the audience.

Book Club focuses on four women who were friends in college and have stayed in touch with one another in large part to their shared club. They have all reached the stage in life where maybe their romantic life might seem behind them, but they don't seem particularly excited to leave sex behind them. Each one of course has a slightly different problem. Eighteen years after a divorce, one character has gone through the longest dry spell, while another is a serial one night stand as a way of seeming to be in charge but not risking abandonment. A third member has lost a husband a year earlier and is being smothered by her adult children, and the fourth is married but her recently retired husband seems content to retire from bedroom duty as well. Into their life drops a little mommy porn, as they select "Fifty Shades of Grey" as the next months book. Awkwardness, romance and comedy ensue.

The laughter this movie delivers is a result of the character of the women. Jane Fonda is the independent loner who has never been married and prefers to be in control, except she still seems to carry a torch for the man who did ask her to marry him.  It is a little odd that Don Johnson plays the long lost love of her life when he is the father of the woman playing the main character in the films made from the Fifty Shades series. The rekindling of their life is the least comedic of the stories, but it seems to have the most heart. Mary Steenburgen is married to Craig T. Nelson again [they were a married couple in The Proposal a few years ago]. Their story has the cheapest gag in the movie, the equivalent of an adult fart joke. Candice Bergen is the woman who is least comfortable dealing with all of this since she thinks her sex life died with the marriage eighteen years earlier. Since it is a modern story, she gets to monkey around on a dating web site, and she ends up with a couple of fairly charming men, Richard Dreyfuss and Wallace Shawn. Neither of the guys get used to their potential, but the story really is focusing on the women. Diane Keaton gets the best of luck, she gets to date her nephew [Andy Garcia and she were in Godfather III]. There are jokes about body parts, physical infirmity and weight throughout the movie. While they are not always tasteful, they sure as hell are not half as crude as anything in "Deadpool 2".

Much like the social comedies of the 30s and 40s, this story is set among the economic elite of the country. Two of the characters are clearly wealthy and the rest are so well set that it never seems as if working is an important part of what they do. At the start of the film they were all given backstory that emphasized their careers but that is almost the last we hear of those jobs except for a few brief scenes at the workplace. The film is a light comedy with just enough drama to off set things so it does not come across as a farce. Don Johnson almost steals every scene from Jane Fonda, which was a little bit of a surprise. Andy Garcia has one bad pick up line but other than that, he oozes charm and glamour, which is just what Diane Keaton needs. Nelson and Steenburgen are the couple that most of the audience is likely to identify with and their arc ends in a cliche, but it is a happy one so what the heck.

If you are under forty, you are not likely to be interested in this movie. If you are over forty, it was made for you and you have to decide whether to follow up on your interest. When I saw the trailer for this back in February [playing with the final Fifty Shades movie} I did not think it looked very promising. It turned out to be a mildly amusing couple of hours with some great actresses who should get a chance to keep working, and this film afforded them that ability. I can't complain about that . 

Deadpool 2

Two years ago, the character of Deadpool was revived from a disastrous turn as a secondary character in a largely reviled X-Men movie. The character in that film was the mercenary named Wade Wilson, and the actor playing him was Ryan Reynolds, but in the most misbegotten script tuning imaginable, the character had his mouth removed permanently. Is there any way you can imagine Deadpool from two years ago and the one in this movie without the mouth that roars: sarcasm, cynicism non-sequesters and insults? It's enough to stage a revolt, which is apparently how Ryan Reynolds managed to wrangle the character back into his hands and become the embodiment of this non-X-men mutant.

"Deadpool" (2016) had so much going for it and it was so fresh, it was inevitable that there would be a sequel.  What is not inevitable is that it would work a second time. The original director was not attached, we've had a series of very successful "Avengers" films filling the void for the last two years, and the surprise of the filthy language, gross visualizations and overall snarkiness is going to be gone. Well never fear my friends, the people who are responsible for this property know what they are doing and they understand the treasure they have in Reynolds. They were very careful not to blow it while at the same time not trying to repeat the whole movie as a simple cash grab. Look there is nothing very deep in the film, it is not creating a universe that we will be seriously invested in, rather it is creating an alternate Marvel Universe, one that is closer to "Thor Ragnarok" than an X-Men movie.

Let me explain how this movie won me over in the very first few minutes. Anyone who has been on this site before will have discovered that I am a James Bond fan. Hell, I'm even an apologist for some of the worst 007 films. I thought I'd seen the perfect parody of the Bond signature title sequence in the comedy film "Spy Hard". It turns out I was wrong. Nothing against Weird Al, but the title sequence from "Deadpool 2" has taken every trope used in the Daniel Craig Bond films and turned them into a perfect visual parody. The song is an Adele knock off that lacks the silliness of Weird Al, but fits the CGI  heavy synchronized graphics of recent Bond films more accurately than the Leslie Nielson joke film. It was a joy to watch and it matched the brilliance of the titles from the first "Deadpool".

After the opening, we settle in for a story of redemption, hardly the thing that you would expect from this film series. Deadpool 2's time altered opening sequence, like the first film, starts us a quarter of the way into the story, then takes us back to the beginning, and climaxes with the events we saw in the opening. OK, so they copied the exact device they used in the first film, but they did make it work anyway. Along the way we are reacquainted with some of the characters from the original film, but a new timeline is introduced as well. This second set of events brings the main story  plot into focus. A futuristic soldier comes back in time to stop a series of events from his time period. Look, if you are going to rip off another story, you might as well go big and do "Terminator". Of course the movie not only acknowledges that it is doing so, it has a lot of fun along the way mocking itself for doing so.

In my review of the first "Deadpool" I suggested that it was not outright parody. I withdraw that statement. This movie is so full of pop culture references and self aware criticisms, that it is a little difficult to take any of it seriously. So don't. Instead, you should luxuriate in the mocking of all comic book movies, regardless of what Cinematic Universe they occupy. I was on a podcast recently where one of the guests suggested that the offensive language in "Midnight Run" might have been done for shock and laughs but that it does not have the same appeal to someone at forty, that it might have had for someone at fifteen.  That may be true, and if you hate the use of the F@#k bomb and the potty mouth antics of smart ass hipsters, then you will be less enamored of this movie. It has enough references to body parts, sex acts and other taboo topics, to fill a couple of Guy Richie films. It also has some great fight choreography that is acknowledged as being ridiculous while at the same time being entertaining. This movie is not just a parody, it is a paradox. It undermines it's very premises while still managing to tell a story that in the end was worth telling.

As is my policy, I have not given away any spoilers, so you are safe to read on. There are several post credit moments that will take you out of the film that you just saw and put you into several other perspectives. You should enjoy them. Along with the title sequence, the end credits serve as the rye bread to the film's sloppy Reuben sandwich. You get the spiced meat, served with sauerkraut plot points and a sweet thousand island dressing that every word from Deadpool himself represents. I don't know if it is a great movie, but I do know it was a great meal.Just sit down and eat it, don't worry about counting the calories. That would be like trying to keep track of all the people killed in the story, a distraction and nearly impossible. 

Lambcast: Midnight Run

The Manny Mota of the Lambcast steps up to the plate with four other dudes to talk about this 80s classic.