Bound (1996) ***

In this neo-noir, the first film from the Wachowski brothers (of Matrix fame), Jennifer Tilly plays a gangster's moll, while Nina Gershon plays a handywoman doing renovations on the apartment next door. The two women fall for each other, have some hot, lesbian sex, then hatch a plot to steal the gangster's money.

It's a simple story that manages to transcend the miserable acting of its 2 female leads. These ladies look great naked and sweaty, but they can't act their way out of a wet paper bag. Their delivery is so bad that their clothed scenes are unintentionally funny. “Bound” is known for having realistic lesbian sex, not so much for having realistic dialogue between its 2 stars. Fortunately, Joe Pantoliano, in his first lead role, makes his gangster character funny, menacing, and smart. He basically saves the movie, along with the able direction of the Wachowskis. The film is perfectly paced, and you can't help rooting for these low-lifes as they go through various machinations of deceit and betrayal.

I liked the plot of “Bound” enough that I feel like this movie is ripe for a remake. It's a standard, noir setup, with the twist being that Nina Gershon's interloper is female. With a couple of better actresses, this story is timeless enough to make a great film. Until then, “Bound” is free on Amazon Prime, and it's worth a watch. Come for the sex scenes, and stay for the noir!

3 stars out of 5

Thor: Ragnarok (2017) **1/2

I haven't really kept up with the Thor movies in the Marvel Universe. It just seems like such a dumb concept to throw a bunch of Norse gods in with a bunch of modern superheroes, although I guess mythology and comic books aren't all that different. I did eventually see the first Thor movie, from 2011, and I have to admit, it was more entertaining than it should have been. “Thor: Ragnarok” is on Netflix now, so I decided to give it a chance.

“Ragnarok” finds Thor returning home to Asgard to find Odin missing, with Loki impersonating Odin and sitting the throne. Presumably, this is due to something that happened in “Thor: The Dark World,” which I didn't see. In any event, Thor makes Loki go with him to find their father, Odin, and when they do find him, he is dying. He warns the brothers that with his death, their older sister, Hela, will return. Hela (Cate Blanchett) is the goddess of death, and stronger than both her brothers together. She destroys Thor's hammer and returns to Asgard, determined to turn its power upon the universe and kill all who oppose her.

Thor and Loki do what they can to stop Hela, each in his own way. While Loki cozies up to the wealthy baron of a trash planet, Thor tries to recruit the Hulk and a Valkyrie to his cause.

Without his hammer, Mjolnir, Thor feels powerless, and he must figure out how to summon his strength without the tool he has depended on for so long. Thor is a god, but his sense of loss and diminishment here is something most humans can identify with. There's some good material to reflect on here, but then the “Thor” movies aren't really designed to make you think. They are about humor and action, and “Ragnarok” supplies a steady stream of both, in numbing proportions that almost make you forget that this film just recycles the story line from the original “Thor” movie: Thor loses his hammer and must figure out who he is without it.

Everyone in “Ragnarok” says their lines and hits their marks, but there's a palpable feeling that the franchise has overstayed its welcome. Mark Ruffalo (who plays Bruce Banner) seems a little embarrassed to be here, and even Tom Hiddleston (as Loki) seems like he may be having a long talk with his agent soon. The extras who play the humans living in Ragnarok look absolutely miserable, as their only job is to cower and huddle together. Fortunately, Jeff Goldblum is a good sport and puts some hilarity into his portrayal of the Grandmaster. The other bright spot is the Valkyrie, played by Tessa Thompson. She's super-hot and has a good time with her drunken-warrior role.

I'm one of the few people in the free world who hasn't seen “Avengers: Infinity War” yet, so I don't know if anything from this film winds up being important for the final Avengers movie. If Thor is still hammer-less in “Infinity War”, then “Ragnarok” explains why, but otherwise I think this is one you could easily skip. It's not nearly as good as one of the Captain America or Guardians of the Galaxy movies, although I suppose it holds up fairly well compared to everything else streaming on Netflix right now.

2.5 stars out of 5

Incredibles 2 (2018) ****1/2

Way back in 2004, Pixar introduced us to the Parrs, a nice, suburban family who happened to have super powers. Bob, the former Mr. Incredible, was super-strong. Helen used to be Elastigirl, with the ability to stretch her body almost limitlessly. Kids Violet and Dash had powers, too, but they weren't allowed to showcase them. No one was. Superheroes had been outlawed, so the Parrs lived a secret suburban existence of quiet desperation, until a sinister threat arose that required the whole family to use their powers. “The Incredibles” was a fun, funny story,with an Ayn Randian message about excellence.

It took 14 years, but we finally have a sequel. The story picks up right where the first film left off, with the Parrs preparing to take on a tunneling super-villain called The Underminer. Their battle with The Underminer creates a certain amount of property damage, which does nothing to help the public attitude toward Supers. There's still one member of the public who is pro-Super, however. The billionaire CEO of a telecom company, Winston Deavor (Bob Odenkirk), explains to Bob (Craig T. Nelson), Helen (Holly Hunter), and Frozone (Samuel L. Jackson) that their legal problems are all a matter of perception. He believes that he can change that perception with all his TV stations and with the right Super, who he believes is Elastigirl.

Deavor and his sister, Evelyn (Catherine Keener) wire Elastigirl for sound and video and put her on crime-watch in the big city. Almost immediately, a threat arises in the form of the Screenslaver, a Luddite, terrorist hacker who can hypnotize anyone watching a screen, which means pretty much anyone. Helen repeatedly thwarts the Screenslaver's plans, and her heroics turn the tide of public opinion in favor of supers. You can guess the rest.

That's the one weakness of this sequel: You really can guess the rest. Other than the rather predictable plot, though, I loved it! “Incredibles 2” is hilarious and action-packed, with great voice acting. Writer/director Brad Bird has a particularly good time with baby Jack-Jack's new powers. There's a sequence where Jack-Jack takes on a plundering raccoon that could be its own little, hilarious short film.

The strength of “Incredibles 2”, as with “The Incredibles” and really most Pixar movies, is that it doesn't insult our intelligence. It may be a cartoon, but its characters and plot aren't cartoonish. The movie strives for characters with believable motivations and a plot that is not exactly believable, but is at least sensible. This film has the courage to let its villain, the Screenslaver, make some valid points. People are addicted to their screens. People do consistently sacrifice their privacy for the newest, most convenient internet apps. People do yearn for an easy way out of their problems, which, the Screenslaver points out, is why they are so eager to bring the Supers back.

The great thing about cartoon characters is that they don't age. It's been 14 years since the original “The Incredibles”, but the Parrs don't look a day older. Let's not wait another 14 years, though! Pixar, if you can come up with another compelling story to tell in this universe, let's see it! Maybe they should make a Frozone movie. Now that would be Incredible!

4.5 stars out of 5

Tag (2018) ***1/2

“We don't stop playing because we get old; we get old because we stop playing.” This is the motto of the 5 friends who, since they were kids on the playground, have been playing Tag. Now they are grown men with careers and families, living in different cities, but every year they spend the month of May trying to tag each other. They will sneak up and tag each other on the job, at the gym, at a funeral, wherever. For Chilli (Jake Johnson), Callahan (Jon Hamm), Hoagie (Ed Helms), and Sable (Hannibal Buress), the game is what has kept them close over the years. Jerry (Jeremy Renner) is part of the game, too, but his distinction is that he has never been tagged. He's too fast, too athletic, too smart, and maybe just a little too focused on winning the game. While Tag has kept the other guys close, it has created some distance between Jerry and his friends.

Now, the guys think they have their best chance ever to tag Jerry. He is getting married, which means they have a guaranteed place and time that they know where he will be. He hasn't even invited his friends to the wedding,but they find out about it anyway and converge on their hometown to finally bring down the Tag champion.

“Tag” falls flat when it tries to get serious, but it flies high when it is having fun. The cast is stellar, including supporting actresses Isla Fisher and Leslie Bibb. There's a story in there about friendship over the years, and yada yada yada, but what this movie is really about is hilarious physical comedy. The action is fast and furious, and it made me wonder who did the stunts. The answer in some cases is the actors themselves, which is how Jeremy Renner wound up breaking both arms on the set. All those Avengers movies, and he winds up getting hurt doing a comedy!

So, the thing about “Tag” is that it's based on a true story. The Wall Street Journal ran a story in 2013 about 4 grown men who play tag every February, and the crazy lengths they go to to tag each other. The movie “Tag” includes some footage of these goofballs at the end. They aren't as fit or as handsome as the actors who play them, but they look like they are genuinely having a good time. You will, too, if you watch “Tag.”

3.5 stars out of 5