Tag: Movie Reviews

The documentary ‘Fanny: The Right to Rock” is a big middle finger to sexism, racism, homophobia, and ageism

The band Fanny is marketed as “one of the most important rock bands you’ve never heard of,” and the hour-and-a-half documentary ‘Fanny: The Right to Rock’ by Bobbi Jo Hart manages to trace the all-women rock band’s rise and unfortunate fall into obscurity during the rock music scene of America during the early 70s. Needless to say, in the 60s and 70s, rock music was the territory of men. There were women who fronted bands but there were no rock music groups where all the members were women, playing instruments, and proving they were just as good with their instruments as any man. But Fanny did not just have to come head-to-head with sexism, they had to go against racism and homophobia as well as two members were Filipina Americans and some were lesbians.

But the documentary is not just a historical review of the band’s beginnings and struggles to be taken seriously, it also examines their talents and their impact in the industry – Fanny paved the way for women in rock – through interviews with rock luminaries to contextualise what it was they were able to accomplish amidst all the criticisms and pushback against an all-women rock band.

But writer and director Bobbi Jo Hart doesn’t stop there. The power of this documentary is how the historical review of their struggles to change the industry is used to frame the present-day narrative of how three of the original members have reunited to try and pick up where they left off as women in their 60s.

In a way, the documentary is operating within two timelines – the past and the present – and how both are interacting to underscore that their story as a band has not yet ended. There is still a future that is hinted at through this documentary and it makes for a riveting watch.

For a documentary to really stand out, one needs access; access to the subject of the documentary and the people around them. Hart has this in droves. All the members, past and present, are available for interviews except for one. Industry insiders include musical legends Todd Rundgren, Bonnie Raitt, The B-52s Kate Pierson, The Go Go’s Kathy Valentine, Def Leppard’s Joe Elliot, and David Bowie’s guitarist and bassist, Earl Slick and Gail Ann Dorsey. In fact, though he had passed away already, David Bowie’s presence is strongly felt as he was a champion for Fanny and constantly rallied for their recognition for their artistry. The documentary has various accounts of their beginnings, home footage of their performances in gigs and television shows, and photographs of their lives in LA when they just signed their record deal. Very little is left to the imagination and what is built is an image of a band that could have been, who paved the way for women in an industry that was not forgiving, who were not recognised for their talents and creativity, and how they eventually vanished and erased until recently.

Filled with songs from the five albums they released before they disbanded, it really highlights how good they were and with footage of them aging beautifully and still as sharp and as skilled as ever, it creates an energy and an excitement with this whole idea of them coming back together, recording an album, and adding ageism to the many barriers they’ve taken down in their journey to reclaim what could very well be their destiny.

The documentary manages to highlight how Fanny, and their resurgence in popularity is a testament to this need to battle and fight all forms of erasure, whether it’s sexist, homophobic, racist, or ageist. These women have stood against it and almost overcame it over 40 years ago but just missed out on success as they were on the brink. But this documentary chronicles their second chance and lays the foundation for a new future for the band.

It’s eye-opening and inspiring. It’s funny and daring and touching. It’s a great, good-ol’ rock and roll story and I do hope people get to see it.

My Rating:

—

Fanny: The Right to Rock is now showing in cinemas nationwide. Buy your tickets here.

September 7, 2022
Seeing Is Believing: a review of ‘Nope’ by Jordan Peele

If anything, Jordan Peele’s ‘Nope’ is a love letter to the origins of cinema and how important seeing – and the gaze – is to the experience of life. The film is a contemporary take on the science fiction creature feature. It is a dissection of modern civilization’s fascination and obsession with spectacles and the capitalist instinct to monetize these spectacles, no matter how traumatic they may be for the people involved. Conceptually, it’s not as refined as Peele’s earlier work like ‘Get Out’ or ‘Us’ but ‘Nope’ is executed wonderfully, with breathtaking filmmaking that truly maximizes the medium of cinema for some striking moments of pure movie magic.

Set primarily in a horse ranch and the neighboring Western-themed theme park, the movie follows two siblings, who are struggling to keep their ranch from going bankrupt. Otis Jr. (called OJ and played by Daniel Kaluuya) and his sister Emerald (called Em and played by Keke Palmer) are polar opposites. OJ is stoic, more at home dealing with horses than with people, while the vivacious and exuberant Em is loud and boisterous but she feels less connected to the ranch than her brother. Stalling for time, they sell their horses to Ricky “Jupe” Park (played by Steven Yeun), who runs Star Lasso ranch and is a former child star who has survived a traumatic encounter on a television show in his youth.

All of these narrative pieces come together when OJ and Em have a frightening experience one evening when one of their horses disappears in the dead night in the most frightening way and they suspect it was taken by something that is not of this planet. The pair then get the help of Angel (played by Brandon Perea), a technician at an appliance store, to set up cameras to try and capture the UFO.

What unfolds is a rather terrifying exploration of the unknown. This film works completely at its own pace and rhythm. It opens with a scene of violence, though completely hidden by furniture, and all we get are impressions of the brutality before jumping into an extended first act that establishes all the characters and sets up the lore of this movie. It’s a long exposition that sets up the emotional ties of the characters to the dangers of this extraterrestrial encounter later on and while nothing exciting is happening yet, it’s filmed with so much dread and doom just under the surface. You know something is up but you don’t know what it is exactly.

And then when the first sighting happens, the film’s second act moves into full gear and Jordan Peele gives us a full master class in setting up tension and anxiety through sound design and expert camerawork. By playing with what we can see and a proper establishing shot to understand the geography of each scene, we feel fear because we know something is up but we don’t see anything.

This is best experienced in a barn scene that midway through the film it’s really the highlight of this movie. Peele understands that oftentimes it is what we imagine that is far scarier than seeing anything that is CGI-created or even done through prosthetics.

Seeing is such an important aspect of this movie, both within the narrative and in the filmmaking. Story-wise, the need to capture evidence of this extraterrestrial horse-thief brings the whole idea of cameras, of different kinds, into the narrative. Later, we discover that the ranch is also connected and when that is uncovered and what we get is a commentary on our relationship with our cameras and the media and how we treat these spectacles in our lives. ‘Nope’ opens a discussion on how our society treats these moments captured on film and how almost instinctive it is to monetize this first before even treating them with any sense of consideration or sensitivity.

At the same time, it’s also a love letter to filmmaking, referencing the first-ever motion picture of a man, a black jockey riding a horse, and this imagery is so strong within this film. ‘Nope’ pushes back against the erasure of black people’s contributions to the origins of film by reminding us that the first ever “actor” on film was a black man. In fact, it’s quite striking that the four leads of this film are people of color.

Kaluuya and Palmer are fantastic as the energy of their characters are totally opposite of each other and while Palmer’s exuberance can fill the screen, Kaluuya manages to fill the screen with his silence. Perea is a standout as his Angel balances out OJ’s and Em’s opposing energies with his mix of panic and wonder. Yeun is absolutely oozing with charisma, creating a believable former child actor, who is hiding a history of trauma through his practiced showbiz smile.

Though the film isn’t as conceptually strong as Peele’s first two films, ‘Nope’ is such a thrilling experience in the cinema. If you can, watch it on IMAX, as the film was shot on IMAX cameras and the visuals are stunning in that format. In ‘Get Out’ and ‘Us,’ he really digs in and dwells in the concepts that he proposes in both films whereas ‘Nope’ dramatizes it but doesn’t linger there. More experiential than thought-provoking, this film is a fun ride but won’t really mess with your head as much.

My Rating:

––

Nope is now showing in cinemas nationwide. Buy your tickets here.

ALSO READ:
Film Facts: 5 Things to Know About Jordan Peele’s ‘Nope’
Jordan Peele Rewrites “Nope” Script for Fil-Am Puerto Rican Actor Brandon Perea

August 18, 2022
Cinemalaya 18 Reviews: ‘Blue Room,’ ‘The Baseball Player,’ and opening film ‘Leonor Will Never Die’

Blue Room

Directed by Ma-an Asuncion-Dagnalan
Cast: Elijah Canlas, juan Karlos, Harvey Bautista, Nourijune, Keoni Jin, and Soliman Cruz
My Rating:
BUY TICKETS

Showcasing great direction, a strong and tight screenplay, and fantastic performances, Ma-an Asuncion-Dagnalan’s ‘Blue Room’ feels like the polished work of a filmmaker who is in control of their craft. The film begins with a long introduction of its characters, a band called Rebel Rebel, as they perform at a gig.

This extended introduction revels in the nuances of the band’s interpersonal dynamics and, unapologetically, privileged backgrounds. Majority of these characters are middle class or upper middle class and for a while, the film feels like it’s not about anything but a band right at the precipice of something big.

But after what feels like a good 20 minutes into the film, they get caught making a traffic violation at a police checkpoint and the whole film turns over its head and everything that was established in the first act – including intrusive snapshots of the band interacting with their fans in social media at some indiscriminate time frame – is put to the test in the gripping second and third act.

The first act reeks of privilege and the succeeding acts underscore how none of that matter in the face of corrupt police but at the same time how it can also make all the difference. Elijah Canlas and Soliman Cruz are established actors, who do wonders with their parts but I was also very much impressed by Harvey Bautista’s and Nourijune’s performances that really jump out from the screen.

Asuncion-Dagnalan has a confident hand in her storytelling that the film moves along at a steady pace and brings its audience into a swirl of emotions that had the whole audience at the CCP stunned in silence and then fear and finally into loud cheers. Everything feels in place from the claustrophobic second and third act, the honest performances, the musical score, and the gorgeous songs played in the film.

In terms of its execution, ‘Blue Room’ is an exquisite feast compounded by a strong story that is grounded by characters that feel familiar and authentic and a social issue that we are all afraid of but can’t imagine. ‘Blue Room’ dramatizes a very probable horrific situation for us to experience and the effect is absolutely thrilling.

The Baseball Player

Directed by Carlo Obispo
Cast: Tommy Alejandrino and JM San Jose
My Rating:
BUY TICKETS

Set in the rural backdrop of an unnamed area in Mindanao (though Sultan Kudarat and Cotabato are mentioned in the peripherals), ‘The Baseball Player’ takes us into an almost-idyllic presentation of provincial life except there is a lingering presence of danger at any moment.

Director Carlo Obispo fills the camera with gorgeous scenery of rolling hills, lush greenery, and vibrant springs and takes it time to wrestle with the growing bonds of a young boy, who is taken in by a new family as a survivor of an armed conflict.

Khalid (San Jose) is a young boy who has lost his family through the war in Mindanao. He is taken in by “the closest he’s got to a family” and goes under the wing of Amir, a teenager with dreams of becoming a baseball player but who has to train as a soldier for the Moro rebels. Without digging deep into Khalid’s past, Obispo manages to visualise the trauma that Khalid faces and how the presence of his new “older brother” begins the path to healing.

But there’s always the presence of danger looming right outside the frame.

‘The Baseball Player’ makes a case for artistic restraint, holding back so much in terms of filmmaking and even the story just for the audience to really take in the very lovely countryside and the growing trust and friendship between the two young leads. This quiet, almost slice-of-life story is merely an illusion for the armed conflict that threatens to tear away the lives and hopes, and dreams of the children caught in the crossfire. Using the less-is-more technique in filmmaking, when something does happen it feels explosive and in the first real display of heavy emotions, I found myself crying, not realising I was brought to that emotional space.

As lovely as Pepe Manikan’s musical score is, there are times when I would have preferred for the film to be still and quiet. The music sort of feels counter the subtlety of the other aspects of the filmmaking but the core of this film is Obispo’s handling of the narrative elements and Tommy Alejandrino’s and JM San Jose’s very strong performances. San Jose carries the weight of that character’s trauma with him and never plays for sympathy while Alejandrino is such an intelligent and mature actor that he can convey so much with just the smallest of gestures and the intensity of a look or a smile.

While those who are not a fan of slow cinema may get a bit restless with this film, it hits so hard in its finale that it’s worth every second of your patience.

Leonor Will Never Die

Directed by Martika Escobar
Cast: Sheila Francisco, Bong Cabrera, Rocky Salumbides, Anthony Falcon
My Rating:

Cinemalaya 18 opening film, ‘Leonor Will Never Die’ is a refreshing love letter to Filipino movies, especially the 80s action flicks of Fernando Poe Jr. and Philip Salvador and others of that genre. Quirky and whimsical, director Martika Escobar fills the screen with moments of surprising humanity at the most unsuspecting of moments.

In its 99-minute running time, she manages to pay homage to all the stereotypes and tropes of 80s action films through the acting out of the script of the main character, Leonor, who happens to be an aging director of these action films, everything from the over-the-top acting, the flimsy love stories, the melodramatic plotlines but in the process of these reenactments, we also explore the relationship of Leonor and her two sons.

Nothing is what it seems in this film. It’s so out-of-the-box that the cast includes the ghost of Leonor’s other son, Leonor entering the world of her script, and her living son’s last-ditch attempt to reconnect with his aging mother. It’s funny and surprising. It breaks away from traditional narrative storytelling techniques and at some point, the homage consumes the film entirely and it becomes a chaotic meta-film that adds another layer as it also becomes a movie about making movies and the artistic process.

While ‘Leonor Will Never Die’ often feels untethered, it never loses Escobar’s voice and it’s that vision that connects it to its most surprising finale that comes out of nowhere but feels like it can’t end in any other way. This is counter cinema at its best, showing how crazy and illogical the mainstream films were in the 80s that the film can’t help but follow suit and take it a notch further. There’s a lot of joy and fun within the filmmaking that it infects the audience as well.

—

The Cultural Center of the Philippines and Cinemalaya Foundation Inc. are holding on-site screenings for Cinemalaya 18 from August 5 to 14, 2022.

ALSO READ:
Cinemalaya 2022 Unveils Lineup of Full-Length Films & Short Films
‘Riding the Waves: 15 Years of Cinemalaya’ and More Books to Be Launched During the Film Festival
Award-Winning Documentaries to Close This Year’s Cinemalaya 18

August 9, 2022
Take a Ride on the Crazy Train: a review of ‘Bullet Train’

I’m not exactly sure what I just saw but I sure as hell had a good time watching it. ‘Bullet Train’ is a flippant action comedy that works on a very stylized, hyper-real world of assassins and very self-aware filmmaking. Director David Leitch throws away character development for a zany, ultra-violent madcap caper of five (or was it six? There are so many in this movie!) assassins with different missions aboard one bullet train in Japan, who discover that their missions are all interconnected.

Taking the lead is Brad Pitt as Ladybug, who has just come out of hiatus to do a “simple job” and is trying to find a new approach to life through the help of a therapist. He discusses all of this with his handler, Maria (voiced by Sandra Bullock). It’s interesting that the lead is a mercenary who has come back to the field as he tries to philosophize and rationalize his actions, whether it’s stealing, assaulting, or even killing the various occupants in the train.

Brad Pitt is in fine form here, oozing with charisma and a dazzling display of physical strength and agility (online, it says he did 95% of his own stunts). He gives the audience someone to root for as each new assassin that is introduced just seems crazier than the last one.

Aaron Taylor-Johnson and Brian Tyree Henry are a pair who has to deliver the son of a Russian gangster and some stolen cash to the final destination of the train in Kyoto. They are a verbose duo, who are as ruthless as they are unintentionally funny. Their dialogue can get a bit much and slow things down at the start but as the action begins to build momentum, everything gets used in the end.

Photo: Columbia Pictures

Andrew Koji is a forlorn father, who takes the train to find and kill the man who pushed his son off a building but gets entangled with Joey King’s The Prince, a schoolgirl with a dark past of her own. Koji is an arresting actor and feels under-utilised here, considering the film opens with his story. His character’s struggle would seem one that is likely to bring audiences in but it’s too heavy for the light and comedic tone of the film so it takes a step back as Leitch and screenwriter Zak Olkewicz opts to take the gags and the action.

Also in the film are Bad Bunny, Hiroyuki Sanada, Michael Shannon, Logan Lerman, Zazie Beetz, and some surprising cameos that are fun and just add to the formalist aesthetic of the film. Everyone seems to be having fun here and it makes the whole thing enjoyable even if the film doesn’t take itself too seriously.

Photo: Columbia Pictures

There’s no real character arc that’s happening in the movie. Much like Ladybug’s musings, ruminating about fate and coincidence, the film plays out like a farce with no real-world associations. It’s not a satire or a social commentary. It’s not a battle between good and bad. It’s just bad people doing bad things and in what could be a really fun way depending on what you consider fun in movies.

It’s clever both visually and in its scripting. The film jumps into flashbacks to deepen the history of these characters but only when needed and not set up methodically so as to create a sense of build-up. The scenes cut to the next moment where the tension can rise or when we can get the most laughs.

There are 16 cars in the bullet train but the only way for these characters to move is forward or backward, which means there are no places to run or hide. In this way, all the five groups of killers are going to collide at some point and it just gets crazier and crazier as it goes along; all the way to a grand finish that feels like they threw everything and the kitchen sink at us for full effect.

Photo: Columbia Pictures

And while ‘Bullet Train’ is narratively thin, it’s a hell of a fun ride. At some point, you realise no one is safe, you can’t take anything seriously, pleasantly surprised by the sudden cameos, and so forth. It’s a kind of irreverence that feels at home in a crazy world where nothing really matters. Maybe five years ago it would have been disappointing as I search for some sort of meaning but now, I’m very much welcome to this sort of insanity on screen.

Now I’m really curious about the novel that the film is based on by Kotaro Isaka.

My Rating:

––

Bullet Train opens in cinemas nationwide on August 10, Wednesday.

ALSO READ:
Aaron Taylor-Johnson, Brian Tyree Henry are the Twin Assassins in “Bullet Train”
Former Stunt Double of Brad Pitt Now Directs “Bullet Train”

August 8, 2022
‘The Gray Man’ is fast, big, loud, and oozing with charm

There’s a scene in one of the many Eastern European cities that is used as a location in The Russo Brothers’ ‘The Gray Man’ that is really the pinnacle of what this movie has to offer. It’s a fast-paced action sequence that feels like it plays out for a good 15 minutes.

There’s a shoot-out in a public plaza that escalates into a full-blown war zone that involves a high-speed car chase with a tram, high-powered assault rifles, and a beautiful luxury sports car, while the lead character carries on a gunfight inside the train. It’s a huge setup with explosions and people almost getting run over, cars toppling over and exploding. It’s fast-paced and hard-hitting and the stunt choreography and camera coverage are incredible.

Watching this at the cinema in a special advanced screening makes me wish that people will get to watch this movie in this format rather than on their phones or laptop screens because it’s the kind of blockbuster spectacle that is made for the big screen.

‘The Gray Man’ has an old-school action film vibe, where the bad guys are completely lacking in nuance and the story is thin but the enjoyment comes from all the spills and thrills.

It begins with an introduction to our protagonist, Ryan Gosling’s unnamed character who is recruited by the CIA to become a dispensable killing machine, a Black Ops assassin with no record at all for plausible deniability. He is given the name Six and the film immediately jumps forward in time to his most recent mission, where he discovers that the change of guard in US politics meant the Sierra program that he is part of is being taken down and his life is in danger.

Now, on the run, he has to escape the new bosses at the CIA who are tying up loose ends.

But how do you catch one of the deadliest assassins in the world? By hiring the equally skilled and dangerous (and possibly sociopathic) private contractor Lloyd Hansen, played by Chris Evans. In less than 15 minutes, you have two of Hollywood’s charming and attractive leading men, Gosling and Evans, battling it out over Eastern Europe and it’s a joy to watch.

Gosling’s Six is a quiet, lone wolf type, though he is not above an occasional witty remark. We know how charming he can be from films like ‘Crazy, Stupid, Love’ and ‘La La Land’ but he tones it down for the gruff, silent killer type who grunts as much as he speaks but despite his frighteningly impressive action hero image in this film, there’s a relatability that he brings to Six that attaches himself to audience pretty quickly.

On the other hand, Evans is obviously having a blast playing the villain. He’s as charming as he is brutal and sadistic and cruel. And he’s also unafraid to bring out his excellent comedic timing for some really great comic moments that keep the energy up.

The film runs a little over 2 hours and surprisingly, there’s very little in terms of character development or a story arc. There’s no complicated plot nor any overly ambitious save-the-world narrative involved in this film. It’s a brawl and a gunfight and it’s loud and explosive. Everything from cars, trains, airplanes, and helicopters at some point explode or topple over. Our heroes get punched, kicked, stabbed, and even shot and still manage to carry on and fight.

And it’s this simplicity that gives ‘The Gray Man’ a hollowness to it – no real exploration of the abuse of government power, the effects of geopolitics on this scale, the cost and value of human lives – but it also makes it really easy to watch and really fun to just jump aboard on.

At the same time, directors Joe and Anthony Russo feel like they directed this film specifically for the Netflix viewer – people watching at home on their laptops or phones – and so they push the story down and ramp up the action and fast cuts and pacing so as to not allow the viewers to get distracted at all. Never is there a moment for you to press pause to answer the phone or to take a break to do house chores or online school work.

The film feels like they are aware that the medium this film will be shown, through streaming, means they can put what feels like a 15-minute flashback scene in the middle of the story, as they pivot the narrative towards a different direction.

There’s a freshness to the way this film is made because as big and loud as the film gets (and it constantly peaks) it doesn’t feel like it has to abide by any certain expectations as other films do. Of the many Netflix films I’ve seen in this genre like ‘Extraction’ or ‘The Old Guard,’ this is the one I feel really fits perfectly for streaming.

‘The Gray Man’ may not be deep or even moving, but it’s a whole lot of fun and the whole cast – from Gosling to Evans, to Ana de Armas and Jessica Henwick, to Rege-Jean Page, Alfre Woodard, and Billy Bob Thornton – it’s loaded with charisma and screen presence. I hope this becomes a hit because, as it is based on a series of books by Mark Greaney, they plan for this to be a franchise and I love to see more of it.

My Rating:

––

The Gray Man premieres on Netflix this Friday, July 22.

ALSO READ:
Russo Brothers, Ryan Gosling, & Chris Evans Talk About ‘The Gray Man’ Action Scenes & Humorous Lines
MCU’s Russo Brothers Say Netflix’s ‘The Gray Man’ Could Spawn a Spy Thriller Cinematic Universe

July 21, 2022
As fun as it is, ‘Thor: Love and Thunder’ reveals the character’s narrative weakness
When director Taika Waititi took over Thor and gave us the enjoyable ‘Thor: Ragnarok,’ the character had already been established in two solo movies and two Avengers movies. He had a lot to work with: a troubled relationship with his brother Loki, experience working with a team like the Avengers, and so on. In ‘Thor: Ragnarok’ he had carte blanche to change the tone of the movie and infuse Waititi’s own brand of humor, which breathed new life into the character and the franchise. It was carried over into the succeeding Avengers movies such as ‘Avengers: Infinity War’ and ‘Avengers: Endgame.’

But in ‘Thor: Ragnarok’ most of Thor’s storylines were given closure. He had relinquished his throne to Valkyrie and left the remaining Asgardians to start anew on Earth. He had lost his brother and the loss he experienced in ‘Infinity War’ found a sort of resolution by the end of ‘Endgame.’ He had redeemed himself.

Where can the character go now?

And this is where ‘Thor: Love and Thunder’ ends up being a mixed bag for me. The first half of the movie depicts Thor once again as the blonde himbo, whose massive god-like ego is the crux of a lot of the humor. It’s good for a few laughs but it seems that the character is stuck in some cartoonish version of himself. This film is Thor’s eighth appearance in the MCU and while this iteration only really came to the fore in ‘Thor: Ragnarok,’ it feels tired. It is as if the events of the previous movie didn’t have any effect on him and sometimes, he even seems dumber than before. Sure, it’s great for a few laughs but there’s just so much of it.

The first half of the film feels more like a sequence of plot points and funny gags that are interspersed with the actual story of this film. The more important parts of the story – that of the villain, Gorr, the God Butcher, and that of Jane Foster – don’t get as much screen time and that’s what I’m looking for as I come in watching a superhero movie. The jokes and the gags are great but not at the expense of the struggle and tension and the stakes.

Photo: Marvel Studios/Jasin Boland

Taika Waititi can definitely balance out tragedy and comedy in equal measure. ‘Jojo Rabbit’ does this exceptionally well. Even with all the jokes and gags of ‘Thor: Ragnarok,’ we were able to see the bonds between Loki and Thor heal and Thor making the ultimate sacrifice by allowing Asgard to fall to save the Asgardians.

In ‘Thor: Love and Thunder,’ the romantic comedy aspects of the film undermine the pulsing heart at the core of Jane Foster’s story, which could have been a nice space for Thor’s character growth. Instead, Waititi leans deeper into the whimsy, which is unexpected and surprising, but it doesn’t help build up the love story of its two lead characters that when it hits the final act of the film, the resolutions of their character arcs don’t have as much weight as it could.

Because the latter half of the film is definitely far better than how the film starts, it’s only then that Waititi emphasizes the stakes. It doesn’t have the urgency or the drama that the scenes ask for. It’s such a shame because Christian Bale looks like he is having fun playing Gorr, and Natalie Portman nails each dramatic beat. In fact, Jane Foster has such an interesting character arc and shows great agency but the depth of Jane’s situation – taking the mantle of Thor and why – has no time to really build.

Photo: Marvel Studios

‘Thor: Love and Thunder’ has all the components of a proper comic book movie. It has the action and the special effects but they don’t really seem to be at par with ‘Thor: Ragnarok.’ It’s only really impressive and refreshing when Thor, Jane Foster, and Valkyrie take on Gorr. The choreography in those scenes are spectacular.

What ‘Thor: Love and Thunder’ has proven is that Thor doesn’t seem to do too well on his own. As a character, he’s a team player who needs Loki or the other members of the Avengers for him to realize his own narrative potential. It isn’t until he meets Jane that Thor becomes remotely interesting, outside his whimsical, buffoonery. A character this powerful needs something to ground him otherwise there aren’t many places to go narratively.

Photo: Marvel Studios

Interestingly enough, the ending addresses this narrative demand but it didn’t need half of its 119-minute running time to get to that point. It’s fun. I had fun. But it’s not up there amongst the other MCU films.

My Rating:

‘Thor: Love and Thunder‘ is now showing in cinemas nationwide.
ALSO READ
- ‘Thor: Love and Thunder’ Cast and Creator on Thor’s Fourth Solo Film, ’80s Rock Music, and More
- Film Facts: 5 Things to Know About ‘Thor: Love and Thunder’
July 7, 2022
Beautiful Chaos: a review of ‘Everything Everywhere All At Once’

It was exhausting watching ‘Everything Everywhere All At Once.’ Exhausting physically. Exhausting mentally. Exhausting emotionally. And I loved every minute of it.

The film is over two hours of crazy, out-of-this-world action-adventure moments but carefully interwoven into a poignant drama about family (mothers and daughter; husbands and wives, mothers and fathers) and, ultimately, the meaning of life. It is a story about the multiverse, the number of alternate realities that are present and happening simultaneously with ours, and how one character, Evelyn Wang (Michelle Yeoh) must learn to access every possible iteration of her to save the world – every world in every universe, in fact – and save her daughter.

Directors and screenwriters Daniel Kwan and Daniel Scheinert (credited as Daniels, one moniker for both) approach this material with a madcap sense of humor. They are not afraid to get dark (the violence and gore can get pretty intense), not afraid to get vulgar (there are dildos and buttplug jokes that are actually funny), not afraid to get meta (in all the variations of Evelyn’s character, there is quite a number that reference her career), not afraid to get weird, and definitely not afraid to get personal.

The story is already a lot to deal with: an ordinary housewife, while trying to pay her taxes, discovers that in an alternate reality, she discovered the multiverse and found a way to “verse jump.” Verse jumping is accessing the memories and skills and talents of another version of yourself in another universe and little, ordinary housewife, Evelyn must now find a way to learn how to verse jump so she can save the universe from a destructive being called Jobu Topaki.

Photo from Official Movie Website (www.everythingeverywheremovie.com)
Photo Credit: Allyson Riggs

Mixed in with this dense science fiction adventure is a story about a woman in strained relationships with her husband (played by Ke Huy Quan) and daughter (an excellent Stephanie Hsu) and father (James Hong). The film manages to bounce back and forth effortlessly from adventure to family drama while pondering upon the meaning of life.

If that wasn’t enough, Daniels manages to imbue the film with exquisite filmmaking. There are split screens, subtitles that shift and change with the story, and clever cinematography and editing. As Evelyn moves between realities, the tone and style of filmmaking change as well. There are homages to Wong Kar Wai’s ‘In the Mood for Love’ in some realities, others are homages to Jackie Chan period kung fu films. The costume designs are out of this world in some moments. Nothing can be expected and everything will take you by surprise.

It’s chaos but there’s so much sense in all of it. It’s why I say ‘Everything Everywhere All At Once’ is exhausting. You are laughing out loud in one moment and then, in the next, you are marveling at the fight choreography right before it brings you to horror film levels of suspense and dread. The film itself takes on the infinite possibilities of its own story and Daniels is unafraid to go there and mine it for all its thrills, laughs, and tears.

Photo from Official Movie Website (www.everythingeverywheremovie.com)
Photo Credit: Allyson Riggs

The performances are all incredible, Quan makes a fantastic return in front of the camera (he became famous as a child actor in the 80s films ‘The Goonies’ and ‘Indiana Jones and the Temple of Doom’), while Stephanie Hsu shows off her incredible range. Jamie Lee Curtis is incredible and reliable, as always. But at the heart of this movie is Michelle Yeoh. The role is so demanding and she manages to be as mercurial as she is human. She infuses Evelyn with such an ordinariness, a woman who is completely unprepared for this wild journey she is about to enter but can quickly shift to a myriad of different characters. It would be a shame if this performance isn’t recognised at all by any award-giving bodies.

And at the heart of all this beautiful chaos, is a story that really digs deep into what it means to be alive and what it means to be happy in this very crazy world we live in. The craziness of this movie is just an exaggerated reflection of the craziness of the real world of the audience watching it. This two hours and twenty-minutes film manages to encapsulate a lot of this younger generation’s fears and anxieties and triggers and manages to create a dialogue between Evelyn and her husband, daughter, and father that proposes a sort of rationale that can address the underlying nihilism and cynicism that is at the surface of this film.

Photo from Official Movie Website (www.everythingeverywheremovie.com)
Photo Credit: Allyson Riggs

By the end, I was in tears. I was emotionally spent as much as I was mentally overwhelmed and physically drained by the experience. The last time I felt like this was watching Alfonso Cuaron’s ‘Gravity’ in a 3D IMAX cinema, though I don’t remember laughing as much. I’m definitely watching this film again.

My Rating:

––

‘Everything Everywhere All At Once‘ is opening in cinemas nationwide on Wednesday, June 29.

ALSO READ:
WATCH: Michelle Yeoh Goes Across the Multiverse in the A24 Film ‘Everything Everywhere All At Once’
‘Everything Everywhere All At Once’ is Finally Coming to Philippine Cinemas!

June 28, 2022
With nothing really new to say, ‘Jurassic World Dominion’ just feels like a theme park ride

The first three installments of the ‘Jurassic Park’ franchise took to the heart of the Michael Crichton book it was adapted from and really focused on two things: the majesty and wonder of dinosaurs and the hubris of man in using science to play god (and all the destructive consequences that followed).

It wasn’t until I saw ‘Jurassic World Dominion’ that I finally understood what I didn’t like about the last three installments. It takes the central premise predicated by the first three and turns it around. The dinosaurs were no longer these mysterious and majestic creatures. They can be trained and their presence in the films was more like monsters in a creature feature than the products of man’s arrogance.

Steven Spielberg and Joe Johnston (who directed the first two films and the third film, respectively) treated the dinosaurs with child-like wonder when covering them. They took the time to really marvel at the imagery of a dinosaur walking side-by-side with human beings. And when the predatory dinosaurs attacked, it was frightening because they were like animals in the wild, who were just doing things in their nature. When the T-Rex was brought to America in ‘The Lost World: Jurassic Park,’ Spielberg made sure that he was highlighting the mistake of man playing god and the destruction this causes.

But when ‘Jurassic World’ came out, and its succeeding films afterward, the majesty and grandeur of the dinosaurs were taken away when Chris Pratts’ Owen Grady began training the velociraptors and even gave one a name. The dinosaurs were valued more for their potential for action sequences and horror sequences. I suppose this is an evolution (pun intended) of where the series would go, but something gets lost in the process: the magic of it all.

Director Colin Trevorrow, who directed ‘Jurassic World’ and ‘Jurassic World Dominion’ is more inclined to create spectacles than to imbue grand imagery with profound meaning. At least J.A. Bayona, who directed ‘Jurassic World: Fallen Kingdom’ just mined the premise for all its horror possibilities but even that script couldn’t bring back the magic.

Courtesy of Universal Pictures and Amblin Entertainment

The lesson was already learned in the first three. There’s nothing that feels new to the whole series to keep it exciting or relevant.

And all this culminates in ‘Jurassic World Dominion,’ which feels like an excuse to just bring back as many characters from the different installments as possible and mix the old and new in new sequences to show dinosaurs being frightening.

At first, the narrative is split into two – that of the old guard, Ellie Sattler (Laura Dern), Alan Grant (Sam Neill), and Ian Malcolm (Jeff Goldblum), and the new characters like Owen, Claire (Bryce Dallas Howard), and Maisie (Isabella Sermon) – and while that of the older characters feel more familiar in tone and feel, the one of Owen and Claire feels a little disconnected and personal.

The personal tone of Owen and Claire’s story feels off, as there’s this attempt at envisioning a world now where dinosaurs have now encroached into human life. Pteranodons are now nesting on the rooftops of buildings and giant long-necked apatosauruses are getting in the way of industry work. It’s these moments, few as they are, where the film holds some magic. But these moments don’t last.

Courtesy of Universal Pictures and Amblin Entertainment

Instead, we are once again brought into a story about an evil corporation run by Dr. Lewis Dodgson (played wonderfully by Campbell Scott), who is using the genetic material now available to wreak new havoc on the world, albeit accidentally. And to make things worse, Maisie is instrumental in all of these machinations and she’s abducted.

In the 146-minute running time, there’s less about the ramifications of all this (it’s said a lot but it is never really felt) and more about complex high-octane chase sequences with trained killer velociraptors in the streets of Malta, a battle of three different giant predators in a valley in Italy, and several more attacks from various dinosaurs in different situations.

Courtesy of Universal Pictures and Amblin Entertainment

‘Jurassic World Dominion’ barely stops to take a breath and keeps throwing us one action sequence after another (and often time, they aren’t covered properly: the scenes are too dark, editing is off that you don’t understand what’s going on) that it barely has time to breathe and when it does, it’s just so that the old and new characters can mix and trade platitudes and witty barbs.

I think I now know what Martin Scorsese meant when he called MCU films a “theme park ride.” At least Laura Dern was there. She’s great in everything.

My Rating:

––

Jurassic World Dominion is now showing in cinemas nationwide. Buy your tickets here.

ALSO READ:
Film Facts: 5 Things to Know About ‘Jurassic World Dominion’
See it in Cinemas: ‘Jurassic World Dominion’ to Take You Into a Pulse-Racing Adventure as Jurassic Era Ends
‘Jurassic World Dominion’ Mounts Life-Size Dinos on Display at SM North EDSA

June 8, 2022
‘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