Author: Wanggo Gallaga

‘Top Gun: Maverick’ is peak action filmmaking but its mission feels hollow

I’m naturally wary of reboots, remakes, and what is now called “legacy sequels,” a term coined by box office analysts Gower Street Analytics. The term refers to a “belated sequel” of a very popular film made several decades ago. All of this was discussed in a Guardian article by Andrew Pulver, saying that a very “risk-averse Hollywood” is pouring money into “legacy films” like ‘Top Gun,’ ‘Ghostbusters,’ ‘Jurassic Park,’ and the upcoming ‘Avatar’ sequel to varying results. I’m wary about this because this appeal for nostalgia and fan service truly treats films like products and not creative productions. There’s a checklist that you have ticked off before you can even start working on the film as a creative output.

So I had mixed feelings coming into ‘Top Gun: Maverick.’ I am not a legacy fan. I was seven years old when the first film came out and it wasn’t my cup of tea. But I’m a fan of Tom Cruise and one of the sequel’s screenwriters, Christopher McQuarrie (who writes alongside Ehren Kruger and Eric Warren Singer). Was this just going to be a cash grab? Or was Tom Cruise not going to disappoint me by working his magic and making sure this was going to be an experience?

In terms of it being a cinematic experience, ‘Top Gun: Maverick’ is bar none one of the most thrilling action films I’ve seen in a long while. It’s well-known how the film boasts of having no CGI whatsoever. All the aerial stunts and the acting of the crew in the cockpits of their fighter jets are all shot in real-world situations. The human eye can really spot the difference between what is real and what is CGI in a film and this perception of reality on screen adds to the excitement and energy that is happening on screen.

The film, running at 131 minutes, is full of high-octane aerial stunts and fight scenes. From the training sessions of the new pilots under the tutelage of Tom Cruise’s Maverick to the actual mission, even a person like myself who is indifferent to the appeal of fighter jets and instruments of war, I held my breath and was very much invested in the outcome of these aerial battles.

Director Joseph Kosinski managed to show us the stakes, impress upon us what it takes for our protagonists to succeed, and then give us a dazzling display of explosive, high-energy action scenes that really just gets under your skin. The sound design and mix really helped amplify the tension of these scenes.

For that alone, the film succeeds on such a high level.

^{Photo: Top Gun Movie on Facebook}

And then there’s the fan service that comes in, which doesn’t take away from the movie (fortunately) and adds a certain kind of old-school charm to the film. Val Kilmer returns from the first film for a short cameo that is packed with emotion and meaning. Even suffering from throat cancer, he manages an affecting scene with Cruise that helps reinforce an ongoing theme of the film, which is letting go.

And while the film introduces new characters – and includes Jennifer Connely, who is a character only mentioned but never seen in the original, and Miles Teller, who plays the older version of a character seen in the first film – this is really Maverick’s movie as he must come to terms with being a relic in a world that has moved on from the crazy bravado of the 80s.

^{Photo: Top Gun Movie on Facebook}

Interestingly though, the film manages to find a point of intersection between the past and the future. Maverick may be a relic but he has the skills and the experience that will allow them to succeed in an extremely challenging mission made complicated by technology. Somehow, the film manages to gently nudge the older guard to move on and let the younger set take over; but it still celebrates and values the skills and experience of the veterans and reconciles that they still have something to share and contribute.

My only gripe is that as thrilling and exciting as the film is, and how poignant the lessons it hopes to dramatize through Maverick’s interactions with Connelly’s Penny and Teller’s Rooster, the film gently skirts over the mission parameters and treats it as a generic quest. The mission involves destroying a plutonium cache in an unnamed mountainous country. The geopolitics of this film is completely swept under the rug. NATO approves this attack, they must do it to protect the world from an unnamed nuclear threat. Really, it is just an excuse for the planes to go on air and for some amazing aerial stunts but by doing so it detaches itself from reality.

^{Photo: Top Gun Movie on Facebook}

This film is really just a fantasy. It makes no justification for its act of war and plays neutral by creating an enemy that is neither recognizable nor familiar. And this would have been fine 15 years ago when there was relative peace in the world (or we were all unaware of how bad things were). But the world is torn apart by populist regimes and is still reeling from the war in Ukraine.

The lack of identifiable politics in the film detracts from the realism of the film as it ends up becoming nothing more than a legacy sequel out there to entertain. That doesn’t have to be a bad thing. It’s still so enjoyable, especially in IMAX where everything is just set to scale. But, ‘Top Gun: Maverick’ is also a war movie but with no clear enemy. So what does the movie end up standing up for if not just war for the sake of it?

My Rating:

––

‘Top Gun: Maverick’ opens in Phillippine cinemas on Wednesday, May 25. Buy your tickets here.

ALSO READ:
Tom Cruise Returns to the Skies in the Long-Awaited Sequel ‘Top Gun: Maverick’
First Reactions to ‘Top Gun: Maverick’ Describe it as the “Perfect Blockbuster”

May 24, 2022
The End of an Era: a Review of ‘Downton Abbey: A New Era’

I have been an avid fan of the series ‘Downton Abbey‘ since it first came out back in 2010. I have seen all six seasons (the series is available on Netflix) when they came out and even caught the movie that was released in 2019. So watching a new ‘Downton Abbey’ movie has the same feeling as that of coming home. I’ve lived (and loved) these characters for over 20 years now. It has been three years since the last film and I don’t remember much about it. But just after ten or fifteen minutes into the sequel, ‘Downton Abbey: A New Era,’ everything just came rushing back.

For those who have loved these characters, it’s really like having a family reunion.

While series creator Julianne Fellowes is still the scriptwriter and Gareth Neame and Liz Trubridge producing, Simon Curtis takes over the directing helm. Even with a new director, the movie still feels like the series. Curtis seems very much aware of the little details of each character and their dynamics with each other that he manages to capture it in such a seamless manner.

After all, even with its soap opera-ish narratives, the true joy of watching any ‘Downton Abbey’ content, whether it’s the series or the movies, is its dignity and elegance and the deep relationships of these characters. A lot of the stories in the show are familiar and universal. What makes these characters so endearing is their interactions with each other.

The whole cast has returned and they fit back into their roles effortlessly. The slight changes are evident – Lady Mary (Michelle Dockery) has come to fully accept her role as the head of Downton Abbey despite the absence of her adventurous husband; Edith (Laura Carmichael) is happier and more confident; Tom Branson (Allen Leech) feels most at ease now with the family having found someone of his own through Lucy (Tuppence Middleton); Carson (Jim Carter) is struggling with retirement while Barrow (Robert James-Collier) has come into his own as Downton Abbey’s new butler, and the like – and we just pick up from where we left off in the last film.

^{Photo: Universal Pictures}

At a hundred and twenty-five minutes, ‘Downton Abbey: A New Era” begins like just any other episode of the series but as the story unfolds, it starts to become clear that there seems to be a finality to all of this. The story happens in two parts working simultaneously.

The first story is set in a villa in the south of France, which Lady Violet (Maggie Smith) inherited from an old suitor over 50 years ago who has just passed away. Lady Violet has given the villa to Sybil, Tom’s daughter. Invited by the suitor’s son and wife, the family must uncover the mystery of such an expensive inheritance from a suitor Lady Violet had only met for just a week.

The second story is set in Downton Abbey when a film production wants to use the manor as a set for a movie. While the idea is considered “crass” and too lowly for such a distinguished house, the payment for rent would greatly help to maintain the expensive manor and Lady Mary agrees. The arrival of film stars into the manor turns everything upside-down, including another potential suitor for Lady Mary, who is questioning whether her husband truly loves her or not.

^{Photo: Universal Pictures}

When Downton Abbey first came out in 2010, it was deemed as a study between class divisions – the lives and troubles of the people “upstairs” (the upper class) and those “downstairs” (the lower class) – it was a way to peer into, dissect, and criticize the complex class system of Britain.

As the seasons of the show progressed, it became clear that series creator Julian Fellowes was showing how unnecessary and even backward this idea of such a class system is. There is just as much goodness and nobility in the people downstairs and just as much prejudice and untoward behavior from the people upstairs. I have always felt that Fellowes has been criticizing this class system but he also treats it with such love and reverence.

In ‘Downton Abbey: A New Era,’ he once again brings in more elements that question this system. The “crass movie people” that have come into Downton Abbey juxtaposes the changes in the film industry from silent film to film with sound (the ‘talkies’) with that of the class system; it is a sign that the world is moving forward. On the other hand, the story in the South of France puts into light the question of dynasties when the secret behind the relationship of Lady Violet and her suitor puts Lord Grantham’s (Hugh Bonneville) whole life into question.

^{Photo: Universal Pictures}

While the film (and the whole series) can serve as a study and criticism of this British elitist class system, the way it treats its characters of high rank and status with so much care and love is now a little uncomfortable for me as I am now older and more aware of these systems of inequality. What saves ‘Downton Abbey: A New Era’ is how wonderfully familiar these characters have become and that at the very center of this movie – and the whole series, for that matter – is the warm and tender heart at its core. There is elegance, grace, dignity, and goodness in all the stories of ‘Downton Abbey.’

In this current world that seems so crazy and messy and chaotic, ‘Downton Abbey’ becomes a breath of fresh air. It is a pleasant watch that brings you back to the days when everything felt more civil, more polite. And for that, I will always treasure this show and its movies.

My Rating:

––

‘Downton Abbey: A New Era’ opens in Phillippine cinemas on Wednesday, May 18, released exclusively at selected Ayala Malls Cinemas. Buy your tickets here.

ALSO READ:
Film Facts: Five Things to Know About ‘Downton Abbey: A New Era’

May 17, 2022
Sam Raimi and the Endless Cinematic Possibilities: A review of ‘Doctor Strange in the Multiverse of Madness’

After seeing ‘WandaVision,’ I was so very stoked to watch ‘Doctor Strange in the Multiverse of Madness.’ It’s no secret that Wanda Maximoff is my favorite character in the MCU and her appearance in the film made it a must-see movie for me. The MCU has been quite successful, in my opinion, in translating the joy of reading comics and graphic novels into the film medium. It satisfies my childhood need to see superheroes in action, facing insurmountable odds, and (more often than not) dealing with the gray areas of the good versus bad/right versus wrong dynamics in the world in a bombastic cinematic experience.

But the MCU has a particular type. There’s a certain look and feel to each MCU despite its variety of directors and scriptwriters. The only two films in the MCU that feel different and have the mark of its individual directors were Taika Waititi’s ‘Thor: Ragnarok’ and Chloe Zhao’s ‘Eternals.’

But now Sam Raimi’s ‘Doctor Strange in the Multiverse of Madness’ joins the ranks.

As much as this is an MCU movie, ‘Doctor Strange in the Multiverse of Madness’ is a Sam Raimi film. As much as Benedict Cumberbatch is the star as Doctor Strange, the spotlight of this film has to be Sam Raimi and his pitch perfect direction. He’s turned this story into a playground for his indelible style.

Under Sam Raimi’s exceptional and out-of-the-box vision, the movie is playful and unexpected. It has twists and turns – some you see coming, others surprise you along the way and keeps you on your toes – and it’s done with such stylistic flair that makes it feel so new and refreshing and, as a cinematic product, makes full use of the medium.

Raimi’s transitions between scenes are clever and visually arresting. He peppers the film with jump scares and hauntingly loud horror music by Danny Elfman. It has a lot of trademark Sam Raimi (who is famous for the first three ‘Spider-man’ films with Tobey Maguire, ‘Drag Me to Hell,’ and the cult series ‘The Evil Dead’ and ‘Army of Darkness’). There are surprising extreme close-ups, camera angles in the point-of-view of either the object or a hidden character, the aforementioned jump scares, and so on.

Photo: Marvel.com

The story of ‘Doctor Strange in the Multiverse of Madness’ involves the titular character facing a powerful enemy to protect a young girl, America Chavez (played with great confidence by Xochitl Gomez), whose powers has made her a target for the said-powerful adversary. Her ability – to be able to traverse the different universes – would be too powerful and damaging in the wrong hands. In an effort to save her, he is thrown into various universes, alternate realities that are similar to the one we’ve been following in the MCU but with variations.

So Sam Raimi’s direction even gives the feeling that we are watching an alternate type of MCU movie. The effect is dazzling. What also makes it enjoyable is that scriptwriter Michael Waldron manages to forego traditional narrative forms to really put Dr. Strange, America Chavez, and Wanda as the leads without taking away from Doctor Strange that this is his movie. Each character has something to face within themselves but since we’ve really explored so much of Doctor Strange and Wanda in previous MCU installments whether on TV or film, he doesn’t bow down to too much character development.

Photo: Marvel.com

He doesn’t have to. Instead, the film really gives us endless possibilities by exploring the many different worlds and realities in the MCU. This gives the film a lot of chances to do fan service moments without major repercussions to the main reality while giving its main characters a big enough impetus to change.

I’m a little short on details because, in an effort to keep this review spoiler-free, I have to paint this critique in generalizations and broad strokes. This film is centered on the cinematic experience – any spoilers may ruin the audience’s involvement – but there’s also a lot happening that I am inclined to watch again; and in 3D, if possible, because the visuals are just amazing.

Benedict Cumberbatch and Elizabeth Olsen must have had an enjoyable time being able to play with these characters and their different iterations in the realities offered. As actors, this must have been fun for them and you can see it in their performances. Benedict Wong manages to keep Wong as a solid character that can ground Doctor Strange, and Rachel McAdams is not relegated as an accessory to the cast. There’s enough meat for her character to play within this film.

Photo: Marvel.com

This is a perfect MCU movie, up there with ‘Captain America: Civil War’ and ‘Avengers: End Game,’ wherein the film is aware of the audience’s expectations and plays with them in fun and surprising ways. And with the added touch of Sam Raimi’s direction, it is elevated into a wonderfully delightful experience that is surprising, refreshing, and makes you want more. While I was completely satisfied with the two hours and six-minute run time of the film, I wanted more of it.

So, I guess, I’ll just have to go to the cinema again to take it all in. But this time, I want to see it in 3D.

My Rating:

––

Doctor Strange in The Multiverse of Madness is now showing in Philippine cinemas. Buy your tickets here.

ALSO READ:
IN PHOTOS: Marvel Studios’ ‘Doctor Strange in the Multiverse of Madness’ World Premiere
Film Facts: 5 Things to Know About ‘Doctor Strange in the Multiverse of Madness’

May 5, 2022
The Good, The Bad, and the Enjoyable: a review of ‘The Bad Guys’

First off, I wasn’t impressed by the trailer of Dreamworks’ new animated full-length, ‘The Bad Guys.’ There was something so literal about it. A bunch of villains pretending to be good and, I’m guessing, they become good in the process. It came across as quite one-dimensional.

When I got to see the film, I was completely blown away. First off, the animation is splendid. It has the sheen and gloss of a painting that moves. The texture and colors of the images are quite beautiful to watch. But even if it is almost painting-like in its execution, it doesn’t stop director Pierre Perifel to do some really frenetic action that will be super enjoyable to both kids and adults alike.

What also drew me into the film is the intricate characterization of the cast. From the lead character, The Wolf, the charismatic leader of the criminal gang called The Bad Guys, to Mr. Snake, Webs, Shark, and Piranha. Each character is distinct, adorable, and unforgettable. It helps that the voice acting is really good. Sam Rockwell is slick and charming as The Wolf and Marc Maron plays off Rockwell extremely well as Mr. Snake. The cast also includes Awkwafina (Webs), Craig Robinson (Shark), Anthony Ramos (Piranha), Zazie Beets (as Governor Foxington), and Richard Ayoade (as the guinea pig narcissistic philanthropist Professor Marmalade).

It’s a straight-up caper film with hilarious gags that are funny and unexpected. Some of the gags include Mr. Shark being so excellent at disguise that it leads to hilarious effects, aside from the fact that he is visually a shark in a disguise. Piranha is a crazy, hot head, and he’s not the smartest fish in the sea. Adding to the hilarity of the film is the idea that some animals can talk and act like humans while some animals are merely animals. And they all live in a world primarily populated by humans. Even the governor is a literal fox!

The highly unrealistic world creates a space for some amazing visual setups for the rather complicated capers The Bad Guys pull, some energetic car chases, and some cool action sequences. This world is so left-of-center and out-of-the-box that it allows you to empathize with the lead characters despite them being criminals. But the movie is also nuanced enough to take note that The Wolf and Mr. Snake would pay their bill at a diner right before they rob a bank.

But further into the story, the movie pushes its nuances further and explores this idea about second chances and how dangerous stereotypes can be. It’s mentioned quite a few times in the film that you should never judge a book by its cover and the film manages to dramatize this wonderfully through its narrative and even choice of characters.

The Bad Guys – a wolf, a snake, a shark, a tarantula, and a piranha – all have bad reputations (as carnivores) but this is all a metaphor for something even bigger. The distorted reality of the setting allows for an interesting space to discuss the dangers of stereotyping and how we could easily force people into doing “bad things” just because that’s how the world perceives them.

What’s great about ‘The Bad Guys’ is that it manages to do this in a series of narrative twists and turns that keep you at your seat and manage to surprise you at every turn without sacrificing any of the enjoyment. It manages to stay fast-paced and funny while still going deep into society’s judgmental attitudes. The added bonus? It works well for both kids and adults alike.

Rumors have it that ‘The Bad Guys,’ based on the books of the same name by Aaron Blabey, will be a franchise IP. That means there will be more stories about these characters (even though the film ends with a clear resolution). I actually love the idea because I’d love to see these characters again and see what else is in store for these ‘bad guys.’

My Rating:

––

‘The Bad Guys‘ opens in Philippine cinemas on April 27, 2022. Buy your tickets here.

ALSO READ:
Dreamworks Animation’s ‘The Bad Guys’ Brings Best-Selling Children’s Book Series to Life
Awkwafina’s Voice Gives Life to Tech-Savvy Spidey in ‘The Bad Guys’

April 26, 2022
Revisiting a classic genre, ‘The Lost City’ is an enjoyable break from superhero movies in the cinema

Back in the 80s, the success of the 1984 film ‘Romancing the Stone’ with Michael Douglas and Kathleen Turner, started a fun genre known as the adventure/romance genre. It was an enjoyable movie that had all the genre conventions of both kinds of movies and appealed to women. It had the thrills and spills of the action genre, a heavy dose of comedy, and a love story grounding the film at the center. That film is also about a romance novelist, who ends up on an adventure much like her own books, and meets a dashing smuggler, who helps her through her quest. I actually saw the movie and its sequel and it was a lot of fun.

‘The Lost City’ takes a generous amount of story elements from the 1984 film but ramps up the comedy for an enjoyable revisit to this classic genre that I didn’t realize was sorely missed. The film exchanges the original film’s dashing bird smuggler for the romance novelist’s cover model and hilarity ensues. While the premise of ‘Romancing the Stone’ is steeped in real danger and real issues (her sister is kidnapped, people are killed), ‘The Lost City’ leans on the hyper-real and is unafraid to be goofy and wacky.

The genre covers a lot of bases – romance, action, and comedy – which makes it perfect for a date or for watching movies with your close friends. It’s the kind of light, feel-good and enjoyable time in the theater that has been lacking in recent years with either films loaded with special effects or award-bait movies that can leave you in a spiral of heavy thoughts.

While the first five or eight minutes of ‘The Lost City’ have some tired and expected jokes – involving Channing Tatum’s cover model being not very bright and Sandra Bullock’s reclusive, grieving author being forced out of her comfort zones to promote her latest book – the film really starts to take flight when Bullock’s Loretta Sage is kidnapped by billionaire Abigail Fairfax (played by Daniel Radcliffe) as her background in archeology and ancient languages may help find the missing resting place of a priestess and her treasure. The same priestess who is written about in Loretta Sage’s books.

Witnessing the kidnapping, Alan, the cover model, insists on trying to save her because he wants her to see him as more than just a pretty face.

‘The Lost City’ is unafraid to be over the top and unrealistic. As seen in the trailer, Fairfax takes her on an airplane landing on the top floor of a building, a fantastic scene that feels a little too much so quickly. But this is the charm of the film. It doesn’t take itself so seriously so you can really just sit back and relax and just have fun with all the hilarious gags.

Because this is exactly in Bullock and Tatum’s wheelhouse. They get to do physical comedy (both have impeccable timing), Bullock gets to show off her wit and eloquence while Tatum gets to make fun of himself but still find the beating heart and warmth of his character that makes him so endearing. There’s also a healthy dose of Tatum showing off his amazing body so that’s always a plus.

Radcliffe is having a ball playing the billionaire with manners who gets more and more unhinged as the film unfolds. It’s the steady build up from elegant and posh to diabolically evil. It’s just so much fun. And the Brad Pitt cameo is as funny in the movie as it is in the trailer.

In a cinematic landscape that is heavily populated by big event movies, comic book fare, or serious, heavy dramas that are gunning for awards, it’s so refreshing to have a film that is just all about having a good time. It hints at some criticism against corporate takeovers of smaller countries – Abigail Fairfax buys half an island in search of the actual lost city of D – and the sort of destruction they do to the natural surroundings but it never hits too hard or makes any real statement against it.

It’s not that kind of film. And after the 112-minute running time of the film, I realized that that was okay too. ‘The Lost City’ is not going to change my life or the way I see the world but for almost two hours, I got lost in the laughs and the fun chemistry between Bullock and Tatum. I forgot that movies can be like this in the cinema too. It’s not just for streaming and I’m glad that it’s doing well at the box office. It’s nice to just have fun again in the theater.

My Rating:

ALSO READ:
Film Facts: 5 Things to Know About ‘The Lost City’
LOOTBOX: Click here for your chance to win limited edition goodies from The Lost City!

––

‘The Lost City‘ is now in cinemas nationwide. Find a cinema near you and book your tickets here.

April 25, 2022
Heavily plot-driven, ‘Fantastic Beasts: The Secrets of Dumbledore’ is an exclusive cinematic experience made just for fans

As I sat in my seat in the special screening of ‘Fantastic Beasts: The Secrets of Dumbledore’, while surrounded by excited fans in their house robes and carrying wands, I came to the realisation that, while it had only been four years since the release of the previous film ‘Fantastic Beasts: The Crimes of Grindelwald,’ I didn’t have any recollection about the earlier film at all.

Of course, I remember that Eddie Redmayne played Newt Scamander and that it was a period film in the Harry Potter universe. But none of the plotlines of the previous film had stuck with me except those of Queenie (played by Alison Sudol). Queenie was the only character that had left an imprint on me in the whole series.

I couldn’t remember what the crimes of Grindelwald were and what all of this had to do with the fantastic beasts. I had hoped that the opening of the film would help me catch up to the events of the last film but instead, it opens in medias res with Albus Dumbledore (played by Jude Law) having tea with Grindelwald (played by Mads Mikkelsen) talking about things I wasn’t sure of and a revelation that we were all aware of (though the audience around me still reacted as if it was new information).

And then it goes to the opening credits and a rather dark scene (was the scene just unbelievably dark or does the SM Aura Premiere theater need to clean its lens?) of Newt observing another one of the fantastic beasts.

A lot of plot happens before we shift to Jacob (played by Dan Fogler) and his life without Queenie. We are introduced to a new character, Lally (played by Jessica Hicks), and then we are thrust into the main plot of the film.

The movie plays out like this throughout its 142-minute runtime. Reintroduces us to old characters (Ezra Miller as Credence, Callum Turner as Theseus) while opening a new plotline involving Grindelwald as some rising name in the wizarding world for his populist views of eradicating the non-magical humans (called muggles) as they pose a threat to the wizarding world.

There’s an election that’s happening and in the middle of it, Dumbledore sends Newt and his friends to a quest to stop Grindelwald from swaying the public to take his war seriously.

‘Fantastic Beasts: The Secrets of Dumbledore’ is a movie that is all plot. Our heroes are sent on a quest and it’s one challenge after the other while Grindelwald gathers his forces and Dumbledore has his own little side adventures to follow. The movie jumps from Newt and Theseus to Jacob, then Grindelwald, and then to Credence, and then to Queenie in such a flurry of story that it doesn’t quite feel cohesive or whole.

There are lots of magical moments in the film that make you wonder why exactly is Grindelwald so afraid of the muggles? When wizards can do such amazing things with a wave of their wand, what chance do ordinary beings have against them? Never does the film ever take the time to impress upon us the danger of Grindelwald’s philosophy. The stakes are made to feel big – Dumbledore and other characters say it all the time – but never does the film ever show us what exactly those stakes are.

And this is my biggest issue with this film. While the fans around me were ooh-ing and ahh-ing at the mention of a character’s name or a mystical effect a character does or an antic made by one of the cute fantastic beasts of Newt, the film never feels grounded in anything tangible or concrete. There’s imagery used to compare Grindelwald to any bigoted populist president in contemporary society – a fantastical Hitler, so to speak – but there’s no danger present in the scenes other than the dangerous rhetoric.

Albus is merely good because he is against Grindelwald, but there’s no real scene that ever shows us his goodness. Newt’s moral center has been established in the earlier films but he undergoes no internal struggle that allows me to invest in his character.

The only real character whose internal struggle feels developed and whole in the movie is of Queenie but she has to share her screen time with all the other characters and the busyness of the plot.

From the way the audience was reacting, ‘Fantastic Beasts: The Secrets of Dumbledore’ comes off to me as an exclusive cinematic event that caters only to fans and those invested in the lore. As someone with no real attachments to the franchise, it was incredibly difficult to feel included in this journey. While it had a lot to say about populist statements that lead to bigotry and war, it never makes any of it feel palpable or real. Instead, it is more dead set on highlighting how magical the wizarding world is.

But they’ve already done that in the Harry Potter series. What else do they have to offer?

My Rating:

––

‘Fantastic Beasts: The Secrets of Dumbledore’ is now in cinemas nationwide. Find a cinema near you and book your tickets here.

April 19, 2022
Beneath the Horrors: A Review of PETA’s ‘A Game of Trolls’

To celebrate PETA’s 55th year anniversary, the theater company is streaming a recording of its 2017 musical ‘A Game of Trolls.’ It’s a production that was necessitated by events back in 2017, the continued return to prominence of the late dictator’s family, and the proliferation of fake news and misinformation about the Martial Law era. Five years later, the show’s message still rings loud and clear, the impetus to screen this show is as timely as ever, with the upcoming elections and all.

View this post on Instagram

A post shared by PETA THEATER (@petatheater)

Written by Liza Magtoto, directed by Maribel Legarda, and with songs composed by Vincent De Jesus, ‘A Game of Trolls’ takes on a more in-your-face approach to narrative, using the play as a platform to give voice to the people who have suffered under the horrors of the Martial Law era. It’s the story of Hector, an operator on a troll farm, who must come to terms with his mother, who was absent for most of his life due to her activist endeavors. The catalyst for this confrontation comes in a supernatural form, as he uploads photos of Martial Law victims into his computer’s cloud and they come to visit to recount their stories of suffering, loss, and pain.

In a way, it takes a similar narrative frame as Charles Dickens’ ‘A Christmas Carol,’ where voices of the dead come to tell their stories to change the present and, hopefully, to steer the future into something better.

Using this narrative framework allows the play to take a didactic approach to storytelling. Hector must fend off the ghost and their stories as he defends his work as a troll and justifies his estranged relations with his mother.

At the front and center of this play are the real-life stories that are interwoven into this narrative and while this gives the show its weight, it comes at the price of the story of Hector, his mother, and his friends. While the recounting of the atrocities during the dictatorship is important, it overshadows and sublimates the plotline and undercuts the learning of the main characters.

Hector has to change because of the sheer force of the hauntings of the past rather than an action he takes on his own. Later on, he suffers a backlash for the work he does as a troll but this feels like a subplot. Again, the stories of the horrors of Martial Law completely overshadow the narrative. The aspect of Hector being a troll isn’t fully explored and the resolution that unfolds between his strained relationship with his mother comes too easy.

It doesn’t help that this is not Vincent de Jesus’ most affecting work. Unlike his work in ‘Himala: the musical’ or ‘Changing Partners,’ there are only two songs that have really captivating melodies.

The recording is also not the best in terms of coverage of this production. There are only two angles and the sound blows up on my speakers. Hopefully, subtitles will be added to future releases. Because of the limited coverage, it’s hard to see the full stagecraft at work. This is a very busy play, with lots of stage movement as the cast manipulates the blocks after each scene to create a new formation to mark the change in location. There is a video wall that is constantly screening old footage of the Philippines in the 70s and 80s, newspaper headlines, and graphics that align with what’s happening on stage.

I feel that this show would have such a powerful effect when seen live. Myke Solomon is always captivating on stage and Gold Villar Lim seems to hit every beat in her portrayal of Cons, Hector’s socially aware roommate, and his adversary online as a troll. But the distance of the coverage doesn’t always pick up what is probably amazing in a live performance.

It’s when the play actually gets down to the humanity of Hector – like his everyday interactions with Cons – that the show’s potential rises. The person behind the troll, outside of all this discussion about the history and the past, is what can ground the play into something palpable. Because the large motherhood statements about freedom and democracy and the complexities of the relationship of a child who feels abandoned by his activist mother can only be felt and understood through the person underneath. I was hoping for more of that. It gets swallowed by the play’s thrust to ensure that the stories are not forgotten.

But I’m not the audience of this play. This production seems hell-bent on ensuring that misinformation and fake news doesn’t erase the voices of the victims. It takes a clear and defiant stand on what must be remembered and what we must resist. This play is for all the youth who may be victims of propaganda and revisionism. It’s for people who need ammunition when engaging with people who spread lies.

For that, I can see its importance. For that, I completely understand PETA’s release of this play on streaming just months before the elections and on its 55th anniversary. Theater has always addressed the needs of its community, and ‘A Game of Trolls’ answers that call.

My Rating:

––

A Game of Trolls is streaming via ktx.ph for P150 (Video On Demand with 24-hour access) on April 8, 22, and 23, 2022.

April 8, 2022
‘Turning Red’ Revels in the Ordinary of the Extraordinary

Set in Toronto in 2002, ‘Turning Red’ is an unapologetic, no-holds-barred exploration into the world of a Chinese Canadian 13-year-old named Mei Lee. The narrative leans into the familiar characteristics of her demographic: Mei has a tiger mom, who only wants the best for her, and so Mei is an overachiever with the best grades and full of extra-curricular activities. But she’s also 13, so she and her friends – Miriam, Priya, and Abby – are also infatuated with the boyband 4*Town. At the onset, it looks like every other coming-of-age story of four teens who may be outsiders of the school hierarchy (but not as severe as this is Canada and not America) and have to navigate this awkward part of life. But the story interweaves Asian mysticism and spirituality into the mix for incredible results.

Because Mei’s family, through her mother’s line, has a mystical gift (or curse) that transforms the women of the family into giant red pandas when feeling strong emotions. This becomes the source of all the character growth and comedy for the story.

The story, written and directed by Domee Shi and co-written Julia Cho and Sarah Streicher, is not even coy about how this supernatural transformation is a metaphor for puberty that is centered on the female experience. The mood swings, the rebelliousness, and even the color red are indicators of this apparent symbolism.

And so as Mei has to deal with this transformation happening in her body, she’s beginning to explore the facets of her personality that she didn’t know were there.

In the process, the film explores the Chinese cultural bonds of family that can be very familiar to a lot of the Asian audiences — the expectations and high demands, the controlling, the conservatism – and the vast generational gap of first and second (and even third) generation immigrants to Western countries.

So while ‘Turning Red’ is a supernatural story with Mei Lee transforming into a giant red panda at the funniest moments (and also sometimes at very serious events), the film is grounded by very serious issues about family ties and the generational trauma caused by the gap in morals and values between generations.

And as heavy as these topics might be, ‘Turning Red’ manages to do so in hilarious ways. The four friends’ love of the boyband 4*Town is exactly alike to Generation X’s love for the Backstreet Boys and N*Sync or the new generation’s love for Kpop idols and boy groups. The language and verbal quips of the four friends are masterfully written with some hilarious lines while the tonal shifts of the older members of Mei’s family are clearly different. It’s quite amazing.

And the way with which it captures the frenetic energy of the teenage years and the things they obsess over and think about (that seems so trivial to us now that we are older) is so on point. Director Domee Shi is also quite gifted in being able to shift focus, playing around with the images for wonderful visual comedy, highlighting the film’s verbal wit, and giving moments to really define each character and make them unique.

Each friend is marked by an individual personality, but you can see why this group are friends.

So as much fun as it is to watch Mei navigate the rigors of high school as she has to stop herself from getting triggered from transforming into a giant red panda, what we have in this film is a deep exploration of a vivid world of teenage girls at the brink of change. And the ironic thing is that as precise as this film feels in presenting a world set in 2002, a lot of the issues are still prevalent today.

‘Turning Red’ is funny and charming and relatable and surprising at every turn. It makes really good use of excellent storytelling and lavish visuals to tell a really moving story about generational gaps and coming to terms with your identity.

Pixar does it again.

My Rating:

––

Turning Red is now showing in Philippine cinemas. Buy tickets here.

ALSO READ:
WATCH: A Girl Turns Into a Giant Red Panda in the New Pixar Film ‘Turning Red’
WATCH: Disney Releases Teaser Trailer For The Upcoming Animated Film ‘Turning Red’

March 14, 2022
Double Trouble: a review of ‘The Adam Project’

Ryan Reynolds has a type. He really shines as a wise-cracking tough guy that’s hiding a fragile, sensitive heart. He’s got a lot of charisma and great comedic timing. I first caught wind of this in 2004’s ‘Blade: Trinity’ where he was the most enjoyable character in the film (along with Parker Posey, another fantastic actor with great charisma and comedic timing). And while it took a long while for him to be fully appreciated for his talents – it wasn’t until 2016’s ‘Deadpool’ where he finally hit it big – he has had a stable career building this character and turning it into his own.

I mention this because a lot of Netflix’s new Shawn Levy-directed sci-fi adventure ‘The Adam Project‘ is centered on Ryan Reynolds and his particular style of performance. The film’s script, written by Jonathan Tropper, T.S. Nowlin, Jennifer Flackett, and Mark Levin has turned this time-traveling family adventure into a vehicle to showcase more of Reynolds’ trademark cinematic allure.

Reynolds’ Adam is a sarcastic, quick to the hip wise-cracking time traveler on a “classified” mission that leads him to meet up with his 12-year-old self, played by Walker Scobell. The 12-year old Adam is just as sarcastic and biting, throwing quips and verbal jabs at every turn.

I suppose the appeal here is that you get two Ryan Reynolds for the price of one. What’s even better? You put a Ryan Reynolds character against his younger self who is written just as funny and just as acerbic.

If this is your jam, then you’re going to have a fun time. Except, for me, it’s gotten old already. I think it would be great for Ryan Reynolds to do more, spread himself, and explore the range of his charisma and comedic timing. I’ve seen all of this in ‘Deadpool’ and this film is really milking this schtick so much. Every time ‘The Adam Project’ gets really thrilling or properly emotional, it is immediately undercut by a one-liner.

And it’s a shame because, with all the enjoyable fight sequences and the novelty of being able to imagine what it would be like to meet your younger self, there’s a rather lovely story here about coming to terms with your past and unresolved feelings.

Personally, I’m tired of Reynolds’ brand of comedy and it doesn’t help that Walker Scobell has Reynold’s timing but none of his charm. Granted he’s a kid but he doesn’t have the same power that Tom Holland (as a kid in ‘The Impossible’) or Haley Joel Osment (from ‘The Sixth Sense’) had as a young actor.

Instead, the ones who really bring this movie to its full potential are Mark Ruffalo and Jennifer Garner. Garner, as Adam’s mother, can really imbue a scene with so much heart and emotion that I really wanted more of her in this film. Mark Ruffalo can juggle both humor, big-budget setups (and not get swallowed), and empathy in one go. In fact, he turns a crucial scene in the film from the beginning as a comic thing and then turning it into something very emotional and touching. It’s a genius move.

Zoe Saldana and Catherine Keener, on the flipside, shine as they synch into the adventure part of the film. Keener is enjoyable as a straight-up villain while Saldana handles the action woman role expertly, bringing humanity in an otherwise extraordinary role.

The film has great action choreography where you can really see the movements and enjoy them. The film doesn’t do quick cuts or tight close-ups so you can fully appreciate the movements of the action. As a sci-fi film, it doesn’t delve too much into the science but it doesn’t disregard it either, giving important explanations to the physics and the “rules” behind time travel. It isn’t bogged down by the science so that it can focus on Adam, the younger and the older, and how they can reconcile their own brokenness.

It has beautiful moments that are unfortunately undercut by the Ryan Reynolds-ness of the script, favoring the witty comebacks over emotional depth. Everything else feels by the book that doesn’t do anything much to really reinvent the genre. If it focused on the family bond, it might have been more impactful.

Is it great? Probably not. Is it enjoyable? Definitely. Especially if you love Ryan Reynolds and his cinematic persona.

My Rating:

––

The Adam Project debuts on Netflix on March 11, 2022.

March 10, 2022
The Caped Detective: a review of ‘The Batman’

We’ve seen so many iterations of Batman from the whimsical reimagining of Tim Burton and Michael Keaton to Joel Schumacher’s campy run with Val Kilmer in ‘Batman Forever’ and George Clooney in ‘Batman and Robin.’ Christopher Nolan then changed the way we approached superhero movies with his grounded take on the character with Christian Bale, which gave us a defining Joker through Heath Ledger and then Ben Affleck put on the mantle in Zack Snyder’s ‘Justice League.’ And that’s not to mention the animated series, the animated movies, and the appearances on television shows.

So, honestly, what more can be said about the orphan who has taken to fighting crime wearing a suit fashioned like a bat after his billionaire parents were killed in the streets of the tough-as-nails city of Gotham?

Matt Reeves, a director whose work on the prequels to the ‘Planet of the Apes’ franchise is quite impressive, decides to venture into one of Batman’s original modes, which was that of a detective.

What Reeves manages to give us is a completely new and original cinematic imagining of Batman. No more origin story – what for? We all know it – but instead of the confident master of vigilante crime-fighting, we see Bruce Wayne, who has only been Batman for two years. He is not infallible. He gets hit. He makes mistakes. He is making things up as he goes along.

His suit is clunky and heavy, built to withstand punches, knife attacks, and even bullets. In fact, there’s a lo-fi quality to technology in this film (except for some very cool contact lenses that play an important part in the story) that makes this film feel almost like a period film for superhero movies. There’s not even a cellphone in sight.

Photo: Warner Bros. Pictures

And with this setting, we are introduced to a broken Bruce Wayne, played with great sensitivity by Robert Pattinson, who also manages to shift to his Batman persona when he wears the mask. But even that shift is tenuous. After all, he’s new at this.

The world is a neo-noir epic, complete with the protagonist’s introspective narration, a femme fatale in the form of Zoe Kravitz’s Selina Kyle/Catwoman, and a grimy, evil city and the monstrous side of human nature that exists there.

Photo: Warner Bros. Pictures

A lot of The Batman reminds me of David Fincher’s ‘Seven,’ where it is about solving a puzzle posed by Paul Dano’s Riddler. Murders are happening and it’s leading towards a great big reveal that positions this film not so much as a hero versus villain story but as a story about society’s deterioration.

Director Matt Reeves and co-scriptwriter Peter Craig do not shy away from the very contemporary discussion about Wayne’s ability to help people more with his money than as a caped crusader. That’s actually touched upon and handled with the character’s internal logic in place. While crime is perpetrated by the criminally insane, evil is found somewhere deeper and systemic.

It’s that aspect of ‘The Batman’ that feels so refreshing and invigorating. The focus is not on the extraordinary feats of Batman to stop an extraordinary crime but the realisation of what is really needed to combat corruption and social ills.

So while the film is dark (both lighting-wise and tonally) and gritty, it also gives us fantastic imagery, some really good character work by Pattinson, Kravitz, Dano, and John Turturro as the mob boss Carmine Falcone, and a completely new approach to the character.

Photo: Warner Bros. Pictures

My only reservation is the big finale that felt much bigger than it needed to be. The last big action setup felt like it’s from a different film altogether. Throughout the film’s 176-minute runtime, it gives us good old fashion noir with a twist, introspective character development, and dynamic relationships, and then it ends with a large battle sequence that felt more like it belonged in a different movie. It appeared like it was put there to please any comic book movie fans, who may have felt that they didn’t get enough comic book action.

But that’s a matter of taste. All in all, it was a thrilling ride that kept me on my toes. Kravitz is phenomenal and her chemistry with Pattinson was electric. I didn’t even notice how much time had passed.

In a world like ours that needs heroes, it’s good to have movies that give us an escapist fantasy at times just to feel light and good about ourselves. But it’s also good to have an alternative: superhero movies that show us that evil is not just one person with a skewed sense of the world. That the evil is systemic and that punching your way out will not get the job done.

My Rating:

––

The Batman will open in Philippine cinemas on Wednesday, March 2 (two days ahead of the US release date of March 4). Book your tickets here.

March 1, 2022