A Bonus Episode of the Lambcast: Celebrating 600 Shows

https://www.podomatic.com/podcasts/lambcast/episodes/2021-09-13T11_24_52-07_00

Harry Potter and the Sorcerer's Stone 20th Anniversary

 It's hard for me to believe that Harry Potter and the Sorcerer's Stone is 20 years old. In that time frame we got a total of 10 films in the Harry Potter universe most of which were completed within a 12 year period . There had never been anything attempted  like this before, the MCEU came along later with its three and four phases. Harry Potter however is something that is special for most kids because it's a Gateway film into the fantasy universe. Kids who saw these films growing up have their own version of The Wizard of Oz, the Ten Commandments, and Star Wars. 

The first film in the series had to try and get everything right. Director Christopher Columbus was sometimes accused of going soft on the storytelling but that ignores the fact that this was indeed a children's story to begin with. It's only after the third or fourth film that it really becomes much more a coming-of-age film series and much more dramatic. The Sorcerer's Stone had to work for the audience at this time, in order to set everything else up. The visualization of the story is it strongest component. Privet Drive, Diagon Alley, and Hogwarts are perfectly presented to us in almost exactly the way most of us thought in our Mind's Eye. The casting of the characters was also very successful, especially the young leads, who would have to carry this film series for a decade. The one choice that seemed obvious at the time was Richard Harris as Professor Dumbledore, but it seems to me in retrospect to be the weakest link in the film. Not because Harris was bad or didn't look like the Dumbledore  we wanted but his advanced age ,which was later clear because of his death, made him seem more frail than any of us probably imagined. But Harris's voice and facial expressions do setup the criteria for the character. 

Today I got a chance to see the original film on the big screen and once again it impresses. John William's Charming score featuring The Beautiful Hedwig's theme, set the grounds for the music in the rest of the film series. The CGI only looks clunky in a couple of places and everything of course got much better as the series went along. Most of the things that were essential in the book, got put into the movie ,which may have made the film a little long but probably delighted it's youthful audience, and me too.

Had I known that the movie was playing with  what is billed as Magic Movie Mode, I would have made plans to stay and watch it the second time through. The Magic Movie Mode basically includes inserts of director's commentary,and  bubble screens with details about props and makeup and scenery, as well is having a little bit of a game for kids to follow along ,where they count appearances the golden snitch. But since the film is almost 3 hours to begin with a second 3 hours seemed a little daunting. The problem with watching this film is that I immediately I want to watch the other films in the series right away.

My own kids experienced this film at just the right age they were 13 and 15 when the movie came out and, as such, could easily relate the main characters in the story. The night we first saw this was the last time we also saw our friends Kathy, James, and Rebecca. Something had upset Kathy and much like she had done 6 years earlier she ghosted us and we never figured out what her problem was. I feel a little bad because the two kids were friends with our kids and they were the children of my best friend who had passed away. I have never let the negative experience interfere with my memory of the first time we saw this film. It Still Remains a glorious children's film that sets up an astonishingly mature set of films that follow it. If you get a chance, make some time and remember what it felt like the 20 years younger and anticipating the Wonder.

Shang-Chi and the Legend of the Ten Rings

 

I don't know all the comic book characters in the Marvel comics, because I stopped reading comics in 1969. I have nothing against them, I just developed other interests. Fans of the comics however will be burdened by their expectations with the introduction of each new character in a big screen adaptation of the comic. I both benefit and suffer because of my detachment. I benefit by not having preconceived notions about how a character should be played, what stories to be told and I don't have the artwork from the comics haunting my brain and forcing unfavorable comparisons. I suffer because I miss out on the anticipation of a new character. I don't have a ready data base of knowledge to draw upon when trying to figure out who is who in a new film. So which of these two sides do I prefer? It's simple, I like my ignorance because it fuels my joy of discovery. This week, I got to discover a Comic Book hero that I suspect I will enjoy for a long time. This movie surprised me in all the good ways a movie should.

Moving into Phase Four of Marvel's Cinematic Universe was going to be a challenge for me. Most of the characters I was long familiar with were being retired from active film service. I knew that new storylines and characters were coming, I just was not sure how I would respond to them. When Doctor Strange showed up in the MCU, I did not think I would care much for that type of story. It did not take long for me to take to it with enthusiasm. I felt the same way going into this film. I thought it might be OK, and I would live with being a little underwhelmed. It is so great to say I went the other way. This was a blast, the character has great potential, and the world building in this was not so convoluted that I rejected it out of hand. When taken on it's own out of context, it is pretty darn great. 

There are comic fans who grow weary of origin stories, but I am not one of those. I enjoy discovering the background of a superhero, learning about their human weaknesses as well as their strengths. If you create a rich environment and colorful characters to go with the hero, so much the better. Shang Chi starts in the past, travels to different dimensions, operates in familiar contemporary environments and then takes us back to those magical dimensions that we started off with. This film also manages to accomplish something a lot of comic book movies fail at, creating an interesting climax for the final battle of the movie. We were given enough information to know that we should dread something that is coming, but it was not belabored and when it arrives, there are still surprises for us and some tension as a result. 

I'm not sure I would love a whole comedy show by Awkwafina, but I have been given enough of her in movies the last few years that I appreciate the dose level she is providing at the moment. Whenever she is on screen, expect a little injection of fun. When she gets some opportunity to act she has been solid (The Farewell), and in this movie, she gets to be more than the comic relief. There are a bunch of wonderful actors that I am not familiar with because they appear primarily in television shows or in Asian language films. Tony Chiu-Wai Leung as the powerful and evil Xu Wenwu was appropriately conflicted, he is more tunnel visioned than bad in this story. Simu Liu was great as the lead, he is not simply an iron fisted warrior, but presented as a complete character with a sense of humor and a young man's foolishness. Michelle Yeoh, provides an elegant touch with aging beauty and wisdom to go with her character's stern demeanor and family traditions. 

Because there are some connections to earlier MCU films, it would be a spoiler to reveal too many appearances by other actors. I will say that the presence of one character in particular helps redeem his storyline in an earlier film, and makes this one the sort of fun movie we have expected from Marvel since the first "Iron Man". So even though the earlier MCU films have played out their plots, there are still strings to be tugged on, and doing so has lead not to the unraveling of an intricate piece of knitting, but rather it reveals some hidden gems that we will get to explore more. It's great when a movie is so much more than you expected, "Shang-Chi and the Legend of the Ten Rings" is one of those. 

Free Guy

 

Officially, my favorite phrase from the above preview is "Not Streaming August 13". I know that will not be popular with some people who because of their local restrictions or personal anxiety about Covid-19, are unable/willing to go to a theatrical presentation. I on the other hand want the Cinema platform to survive, and if the studios cannibalize their audience with day and date streaming, that experience will become the horseback riding weekend of the future. You know, people going retro for a few hours but doing so on very rare occasions. My second favorite line was "Fox Firesale" because this was a Fox film that Disney acquired when they purchased Fox and it has a specialty Label, "20th Century Studios" (let's see how long that lasts). 

Repeatedly delayed, not because of quality but in trying to get to a date where the audience will show up, "Free Guy" is an absolute delight and for my money, one of the better pictures this year. I know it will go down like cotton candy or bubblegum flavored ice cream, but there is a little more to it than just the empty calories of CGI action fun and Ryan Reynold's arch humor. There is a moral question that the characters in this story face. It may seem far fetched to think so, but A.I. is all around us , and the future is here. This film is a bit like "Her" , only instead of worrying about the effect of A.I. on the human race, it turns it around and wonders what responsibility humans would have to an A.I. creation. It is much less grim than the Kubrick/Spielberg A.I., but some of those themes are present. At least enough so the movie is not just jokes about video games. "Ready Player One", "The Lego Movie" and "The Truman show, all have similar plot elements that mix reality with fantasy, and this film does it through the portal of  Massive Multiplayer Online Role Playing games like Grand Theft Auto. 

I've said it before, I am not a comic book guy. So imagine how distant I am from the video game industry that now dwarfs my beloved film world. Most kids in the next generation will more quickly recognize characters form "Fortnite" than they will classic film characters. The last video based game I played was "Space Invaders" and that was a arcade version, I know next to nothing about the on-line gaming community, despite having a "Twitch" account. I do however know some of the routines from other mass culture and I did not really have a problem with most of the references. Several people appear on screen who I think are probably YouTube Gamer celebrities, This is another place where I can see my time as a member of the culture is limited.  I am sure there were some things that got by me because I am a newb, but I still enjoyed the film anyway.

Ryan Reynolds has cornered the market on sly, insider humor touched by both naivete and sadistic comic book violence. "Deadpool" is a character that he breathed life into after first sucking it out in an early form of the character.  He has also been the voice of gentle characters in animated movies and a sweet romantic partner in Rom-Coms. His voice and demeanor make the contrasting events feel more outsized without having to exaggerate every thing about the performance (ok, except for Deadpool). He has no writing credit on this film but he is a producer, and the film only moved forward when he got together with director Shawn Levy. The nice guy in the blue shirt is his persona to a tea. Hell, even when Deadpool is being a dick, he still speaks in mostly polite tones. I don't know Jodie Comer but I thought she was just great in the two roles that she plays. Taika Waititi was fun, but not his usual oddball self, I thought this part could have been done by any number of actors, they don't really get the best value out of having him in the film. Lil Rey Howery was funny as heck in "Get Out" and here he is funny with a little bit of heart.  

Because we know from the beginning that we are watching a video game, the elaborate visuals will seem less impressive because they are merely being used as background for the story. It's a good looking movie, but I suspect it would be an above average looking video game, and the drama is lessened al little bit, even though the comedy is ramped up as a result. I will say this was one of the most enjoyable films I have seen in a theatre this year. It was a little deeper than I expected but it was also funnier than I had hoped. It worked out for me, my guess is that it will do the same for you. A completely satisfying dessert that also serves as the main course. 

Pick a Date.

The Suicide Squad (2021)

 

"The" so as not to confuse it with it's predecessor. The Suicide Squad seems to have a much greater division of opinions than the first one. Where it succeeds the most is by incorporating the humor of writer director James Gunn, who is responsible for the two "Guardians of the Galaxy" films in the MCU. This time out, Gunn is operating in the DCEU and he scrapes the bottom of the barrel, purposefully, to dreg up characters with which to play. The reason that this is a good idea is simple, a lot of them are going to die and you don't want to be too attached. This may be a bit of a spoiler, which I always try to limit, but it does come in the first ten minutes of the movie; the team we see being assembled is wiped out and we discover in a do over sequence that a parallel team was deployed on the same mission. 

It's no surprise that Harley Quinn does survive and joins in the second mission. Margot Robie was the breakout star of the previous film and has already had her own starring feature released to the audience. I think her character works best in limited doses and that is what we get here. She certainly has lots to do but is not on screen the whole time. Gunn instead focuses on the strangely matched characters on the second team and the horrible things they do as they try to accomplish the same mission. When you have a character called "King Shark" and he is basically a shark on legs, you can imagine very easily the kind of mayhem that will follow. That character is also the strongest of the squad and he is capable of ripping a human being in half with is hands, which he does. The powers that some of these characters have are a little silly, until you see them in action. Ratcatcher 2 and Polka Dot man were the standouts from my perspective. 

Sometimes it feels like Gunn is just going for the most grotesque image or idea he can think of that will shock and delight us at the same time. It does get a little tiresome at times and there is some repetition. On the other hand, there are plenty of surprise visuals that are simply silly fun and I think would get lost if he pulled in the reins too much. So it is a bit of a double edged sword. Speaking of silly fun, I again don't want to spoil anything but the ultimate big bad in the story is why they changed the ending of "Watchmen". The tone would just not have worked in that film the way it does here.

As a movie onto itself, "The Suicide Squad" can function pretty well. I don't think it would fit in to have any of the DC mainstream heroes cross paths with this group. In the 2016 film, "Batman" had a small role. There is a passing reference to "Superman" in this film, but that is the extent of the connection. My suggestion to the makers of the DC films, is to refrain from doing all the team up Justice League type stories and stick to the stand alone films for a while. They seem to work better and you won't have to worry about timelines or multiverses or any of the other strategies that the MCU is now having to deploy. 

There are a few surprises about the characters who survive at the end. Expect TV series follow ups and insertion into other films for these villain/hero types. I will say that I enjoyed immensely, the shot to the face that one of the first team characters takes. The actor is not someone I care for much and his character was reprehensible enough that you may find yourself cheering for the wrong side at times. There is a great moment for Viola Davis to shine in her part as the cold blooded architect of the Suicide Squad concept, and then there is a comeuppance from an unlikely source that seems to have delighted everyone. Her character, Amanda Waller, has been the true  villain in both films, so that moment felt earned.  

The Green Knight

 

What appears to be a fantasy adventure from the trailer above, is actually a slow moving meditative visual poem. That seems like it would be appropriate given the source material, but a theatrical film requires a few things to meet an audiences expectations. "The Green Knight" lacks those essential ingredients. That does not mean it is a worthless enterprise, but it will test the patience of most viewers and it will still frustrate those who are committed to experiencing it as it is meant by the director. 

David Lowery has made three films I have reviewed on this site before: "Pete's Dragon", "A Ghost Story" and "The Old Man and the Gun". I found value in all three but not much entertainment in one of them, "A Ghost Story", unfortunately, that is the film in Lowery's catalogue that feels the most like "The Green Knight". Pacing is a legitamate tool for story telling. A slow burn toward an action scene or a pause for the irony of a joke to set in can make a film better. However, when the pace feels like a slog, and the audience begins to notice that the story is not moving so much as lumbering, pacing may defeat the film's ability to hold an audience's attention. I think that is the case here. 

There are several scenes that are beautifully shot, but you start to notice the shot more than the story. One sequence in particular stood out for me. As Sir Gawain, Dev Patel's central character, encounters a group of giants, the film seems to stop merely to acknowledge the fact that we are seeing giants. They do not advance the plot and in fact, there is a moment of confusion as the only other character who accompanies Gawain on his whole journey, dissuades him from following up with the giants. We never discover why, and it is just another incident but not an event that happens on the journey to confront the Green Knight.

Patel is an interesting choice for the part of Gawain. I'm sure that somewhere there is a diversity driven audience that is pleased to see a person of color in this kind of film. There may have been a time when that seemed to be a breakthrough, but for me that time is long passed. The color of a character may be important in some stories, but in this and so many other films, why should it matter? To me, the question is whetehre the actor has the characteristics to sell us on the part they are playing. Patel is brash when he needs to be and subdued when it feels appropriate. The quality of humbleness, which is a characteristic of a knight is tested by the script rather than Patel's performance. It is easy to project onto his face the fear, confusion and dread that the audience must go through. The problems with the film have to do with things other than the casting and work of the actors.

Although the story has the components of a narrative heroes journey, it never feels that way. Each incident or event feels independent of the next. There are some call backs toward the end of the piece which try to tie some components of the story together, but it does not really succeed at doing so. There are several instances where the audience point of view is that of the protagonist, and then the perspective shifts and we get an outside view of events. This could also potentially be a time loop film since we are told the same story in two completely different ways on more than one occasion. Does Gawain need to die to meet his expectations? Is he a good man or a fallen one? How best confront your own doubts? The fact that the film asks the questions and then provides multiple answers instead of suggesting a single vision is infuriating at the end. 

We had a good discussion of this film on the Lambcast and you can listen to it here:

Old

 

You know the routine by now. If we are getting a horror thriller from M. Night Shyamalan, there will be a slow build up, a series of crisis moments, and then a twist reveal to finish things off. Sometimes it works great, and other times it is a disaster. This one falls a little bit in the middle of the bottom half of his work. The twist you can see coming from ten minutes in, so there is not really a great surprise, the part of the movie that works is the emotional component, not the shocks and horror. 

At a luxury resort, several guests find themselves on a secluded private beach that they cannot escape from and that seems to be aging them at a rapid pace. Now if you are paying attention in that first ten minutes, you will notice something about the guests, and that is where the twist gets spoiled. Shyamalan has been better at hiding the reveal in plain sight in the past but this one is not subtle enough to escape our attention. By the end of the film, everything will be revealed and suddenly you will have a lot more questions. 

The characters in the movie are fine. Those of you who worry about stories focusing on kids in movies, don't fret. The children here are not annoying, in fact we get just enough of them to appreciate them as people before the horror elements start. Obviously, the location produces the opposite of a fountain of youth. Accelerated aging creates conundrums for the group of people on the beach, most of which will become clear as time marches on. Being on the short side of sixty, I was most frightened by the impact that the process had on a persons mental capacity. Children turning into adults over the course of a few hours is disturbing, but watching someone lose themselves and any sense of control was another. Rufus Sewell spends half the film trying to remember the name of a movie. OMG how may times have I struggled with something like that in the last couple of years? That is scary. 

One thing I do appreciate about M.Night and his movies is that he does not overdo the gore element. There is death, and it is not pretty in any way, but we are spared witnessing up close, the deaths that might be the most physically traumatic. There is one sequence near the end where that is not the case, and it was likely done for shock effect because in a horror film, most people are not going to be satisfied watching someone lay down and simply not get up again. Gael García Bernal is a little stiff as the father of the main family. Perhaps it is because he is acting in a language that is not his first. That would be the case with others in the film as well but they come across a lot more naturally in the end. Vicki Krieps is his wife and although her part is written in a self conscious manner, she never comes across that way, unlike Nikki Amuka-Bird, who is written as a parody of her profession. The kids , since they go through the greatest physical changes, are played by four actors each and the casting team did a good job matching up looks and other physical characteristics. 

So, the film is an extended episode of "The Twilight Zone", but instead of it being filled out with special effects and gore, we get psychobabble and make up. If you are looking for a heartwarming horror movie, this might be your cup of tea. Apparently nothing addresses martial discord like having to face your own mortality. I think the rules of the story are a little inconsistent and that we get some scenes that are probably not necessary. The characters don't seem to act the way you might expect them to, and maybe that is a good thing. Ken Leung's character does an exposition dump every time he is on screen, but the real weakness of the storytelling is the Deus ex Machina conclusion of the film. The little touches that connect earlier parts of the movie to the exit are fine, but the resolution for some of the characters does seem a little arbitrary. If "the Happening" and "Lady in the Water" are Shyamalan's worst, then this is closer to "The Village". It is an interesting premise that doesn't go very far in the direction of horror, or any other dramatic destination either. You can think about it, but don't spend too much time doing so, the time you lose is probably move valuable elsewhere.