Inception (2010) ****1/2

“Inception” won a bunch of awards a few years ago, but somehow I never got around to seeing it. I think I got the idea that it was all special effects, and no story. I guess compared to the typical Oscar movie, it doesn't quite fit in. No one is gay, no one is sexually abused, and it isn't about the Holocaust. It turns out to be a crackin' heist movie, though, and I'm glad I finally watched it.

Leonardo DiCaprio plays Cobb, a peculiar kind of thief. He and his team hijack the dreams of their victims in order to steal secrets. It's complicated just getting access, as they have to be physically wired to the sleeper during the dream. They typically co-opt something like a dental anesthesia, or else they have to slip sedatives into the victim's drink, then hustle them off somewhere the team can get some alone time. Once in the dream, they manipulate things to get people to reveal their secrets. The highest-value, corporate targets are prepared to defend against dream assaults, so getting their secrets requires elaborate, dream-within-a-dream scenarios.

This can be heady stuff. The process of repeatedly waking up, only to discover that one is still dreaming, can be hard on the psyche. Cobb has spent a lot of time in dreamland, and he carries some demons that make his job even harder.

Despite his demons, Cobb and his team are the best at stealing secrets, what they call doing extractions. Then, they are hired to do an infinitely harder job, an inception. Businessman Saito wants Cobb to plant an idea in his competitor's head that will lead the man to break up his empire. Cobb and his team (including Joseph Gordon-Levitt, Tom Hardy, and Ellen Page) craft a multi-layered psychic attack to achieve the toughest task of their careers.

What follows is one heck of a heist film, with car chases and gun-fights, sprinkled with head-trippy questions about dreams and reality. You do have to pay attention, or you'll miss details, like the nature of dream-time, which are necessary for things to make sense. In truth, it may not all quite make sense, but it comes close enough to be one damned enjoyable action movie. It'll haunt your dreams.

4.5 stars out of 5

Ocean's 8 (2018) **

So first, I'll have to admit that while I've seen the original “Ocean's Eleven,” starring Frank Sinatra and his Rat Pack friends, I've never seen the 2001 remake, starring George Clooney, nor any of its many sequels. So why did I watch this spin-off sequel, starring Sandra Bullock as Danny Ocean's shady sister, Debbie? My wife wanted to watch it.

Fresh out of prison, Debbie has a big heist in mind, so she assembles an all-star cast of crooks, including Cate Blanchett, Anne Hathaway, Mindy Kaling, Sarah Paulson, Rihanna, Helena Bonham Carter, and Awkwafina. The plan is to steal a priceless, Tiffany necklace full of massive diamonds right off the neck of a movie star (Anne Hathaway) at the Met Gala.

Sounds like fun, right? Well, it is some fun, but not nearly as much as it should be. With this kind of star power, and the standard heist movie playbook to follow, it should be easy to make a decent, entertaining movie. Apparently easy wasn't easy enough for writer/director Gary Ross, who presents the laziest, most half-baked crime story I've seen in a while (which is kind of inexplicable when you consider Ross is known for movies like “Big” and “The Hunger Games.”) These excellent actresses do their best with the material, but there really isn't much to work with. Necklace or no necklace, what Debbie Ocean really steals is a couple of hours of your life.

2 stars out of 5

Touch of Evil (1958, re-release 1998) ****1/2

Orson Welles's last major-studio film, “Touch of Evil”, is known as much for its back-story as for the material itself. Welles is considered a genius today, but in the 50's, he was on the outs in Hollywood. Stubborn and temperamental, he was considered hard to work with and, worse, a bad investment. As revered as Welles is now, and was then among artists, none of his movies turned a profit at the box office. After a decade in Europe, Welles returned to Hollywood to re-write, direct, and act in this film, based on the noir novel Badge of Evil, by Whit Masterson. He was proud of the work,but the studio hacked it up, cutting some scenes and getting another director to re-shoot and re-arrange others. Welles sent them a long letter, detailing the changes he thought should be made, but the film was released as the studio wanted it. Years later, Welles's letter was used to re-cut the film,making it as close as possible to his vision. I loved it when it was released in 1998, and it's now streaming on Netflix.

Charlton Heston plays Miguel “Mike” Vargas, a police officer in what is essentially the Mexican DEA. He frequently works with American cops across the border, and he has just married an American woman, Susan (Janet Leigh). On their honeymoon, Mike and Susan witness a car-bombing on the border. The American police detective sent to investigate, Hank Quinlan (Welles), is a law enforcement legend. He has a long string of solved cases, and while he is fat, decrepit, and racist, he still has a sharp mind. Like many movie cops, he also has a tendency to play fast and loose with the law. In “Touch of Evil,” this isn't presented as a strength, but as the corrupt short-cut that it is, and when Mike Vargas witnesses Quinlan planting evidence on a suspect, he vows to expose him, giving one of the greatest lines in movie history, “A policeman's job is only easy in a police state.”

Mike understands the costs of corruption; his country is rife with it. He does the best he can to see justice done, and one of his big drug busts is coming to trial. The accused drug lord's brother, “Uncle Joe” Grandi, has a plan to discredit Mike, using his pretty, new wife. Desperate to avoid exposure, Quinlan joins in Grandi's plot, crossing a line he has never crossed before.

It's a sordid, twisted plot that doesn't always make much sense, but shot with such style that it doesn't matter. The cinematography is so remarkable that you could watch with the sound off, although you'd miss some great lines from Welles and Heston, not to mention Marlene Dietrich in a small, but pivotal role as a Mexican madame. Janet Leigh's acting isn't impressive, but she's an alluring damsel-in-distress in her pointy bras. Actually, the acting in general isn't what you would call good, but it's stylish as hell.

“Touch of Evil” is a classic, and in the end, it's about what every other noir movie is about. You can't just be a little bit evil. Once you dip your toes into the muck, you get dirty all over.

For some truly great reflections on the film, check out Roger Ebert's review. 

4.5 stars out of 5

Avengers: Infinity War (2018) ***

Well, it's all come down to this. After 10 years of Avengers and Avengers-related Marvel comics films, this is the big showdown. At least, that's how it was billed. If you are one of the handful of people in the free world who haven't seen “Avengers: Infinity War” yet, I think you deserve to come into it knowing that the story does not get resolved in this film. It ends in a cliffhanger, making this just the first part of the final story, with the second half, “Endgame” slated to come out this spring.

So if you've watched any of the Marvel Comic Universe (MCU) films over the years, you know that many of them feature some sort of shiny object, like the Tesseract or that green amulet Dr. Strange wears. It turns out these are called Infinity Stones. They were formed during the Big Bang, and they are incredibly powerful. A giant, bodybuilder of an alien, named Thanos, is collecting the stones so he can carry out his plan to cull the population of the universe by half. Up til now, Thanos and his army have had to go planet by planet, slaughtering half the population at random. With the combined, godlike power of the stones, he would be able to achieve his goal all at once, just by thinking it.

Big stakes. Big enough to bring (almost) all the MCU heroes together? You betcha, and there's some fun to be had in that, although most of them had already met in previous films. All that was really left was to bring Dr. Strange and the Guardians of the Galaxy into the fold and have them butt heads a little with the other Avengers.

Then the fighting starts, and we run into a problem of over-powered villains. Thanos and his minions are so ridiculously powerful, even without the stones, that it seems unlikely the Avengers could defeat them. Once he begins filling that gantlet with powerful stones, it becomes apparent that only the smartest, most coordinated effort by the Avengers could succeed. Unfortunately, the Avengers make one dumb decision after another, basically handing the stones over to Thanos.

Speaking of that gantlet, it sort of symbolizes my complaints about this film, which is just full of wasted potential. They spent hundreds of millions of dollars on the movie, but this cheesy, stone-covered gantlet looks like something a high-school theater troupe made using a hot-glue gun. The film, itself is full of good actors, but they are forced to make their characters do the stupidest things in order to make the plot of this mess lurch along to where it needs to go.

Now for the good stuff. The acting is actually good. The MCU characters have always been played by a relatively high-talent group, and these actors do the best they can with the material. My man, Peter Dinklage, even has a surprise role.  There's also some decent humor sprinkled through this thing. The best thing about this film, I think, is the villain. Thanos's plan is more evil and destructive than anything the Avengers have faced, but Thanos, himself actually has some humanity (or whatever, since he's not human). His concerns about overpopulation are based on his home planet's decline, and he genuinely believes that his culling makes life better for the people who remain.

The biggest thing to know about “Infinity War” is that it's just Part 1 of the final story. We'll have to wait until spring to find out how they unravel this conundrum, whether all those seemingly dumb Avenger decisions will lead somewhere good. As for the rest of it, it doesn't really matter what I or anyone says about these MCU movies. Some of us are simply compelled to watch them, the same way you are compelled to munch on chips and dip at a party. Sometimes it leaves you feeling bloated and disgusted with yourself, but you know that, come the next party, you'll eventually find yourself at the snack table, shoveling it in.

3 stars out of 5

New Jack City (1991) ****

I recently re-watched this classic, and I have to say that I would consider it one of the essential gangster movies.

Wesley Snipes plays Nino Brown, a street-level, Harlem drug dealer whose friend and partner, Gee Money (Allen Payne) introduces their business to the possibilities of a new form of cocaine, crack. The drug sells like, well, like crack, and soon their gang, the Cash Money Brothers, are taking over a housing project, manufacturing their own rock, and making millions. It's a classic rise-and-fall gangster story, in the tradition of Greek tragedy, a tale of hubris and greed.

It's amazing how much star power this low-budget ($8 million) production brings together, and how many careers it launched. Mario Van Peebles acts and directs (his debut as a film director). Judd Nelson plays a cop with attitude, actually pretty much the same character as his famous thug in “The Breakfast Club.” Snipes is magnetic as Nino, borrowing a bit from Pacino's Scarface and De Niro's Capone, but grounding his character in the streets of Harlem.

Ice-T is now known for his acting, after years of movies and TV cop shows, but in 1991 he was a gangsta rapper. His infamous song “Cop Killer” hadn't come out yet, but he definitely wasn't anyone's idea of a boy in blue. Casting him as an undercover detective was a stroke of genius and a risk. Legend has it that he got the role when Mario Van Peebles overheard him talking shit in a nightclub bathroom, and realized that was the perfect voice and attitude for his movie. He absolutely owns the role, and it's easy to see why his acting career took off after “New Jack City.”

It's Chris Rock, however, who makes the biggest breakthrough in this film. His portrayal of crack addict, Pookie, is chilling and heartbreaking. I imagine his performance kept more kids off crack than a dozen “Just Say No” speeches.

For that matter, this film may have done more than the news media to bring the reality of the crack epidemic home to middle America. I can't vouch for the veracity, but the film hits you in the face with the scope of the problem, while humanizing it.

As a gangster movie, New Jack City is not nearly as tightly-crafted as, say “Miller's Crossing” or “Goodfellas.” The plot frequently dips into the improbable, until finally flirting with self-parody. Significant suspension of disbelief will be required, but it's worth it for this essential film of great performances, great style, and a bangin' hip-hop soundtrack.

4 stars out of 5

La Familia (2017, Venezuela) ***1/2

In this first feature from writer/director Gustavo Rondon Cordova, we see the struggles of desperate people trying to keep their heads above water in a collapsing economy. In Caracas, Venezuela, single-dad Andres hustles several jobs to scrape together money that buys less every day. He returns home exhausted each day to catch a little sleep before going out to hustle some more. He and his 12-year-old son, Pedro, barely cross paths. This leaves Pedro to grow up like a weed on the streets, learning to fight, curse, and harass girls.

As poor as Pedro's family is, the people from the nearby favela are even poorer, and gang violence runs rampant there. One little thug from the favela, a gangster-in-training, tries to rob Pedro. In the ensuing struggle, the gangster boy is killed. When Andres finds out, he immediately realizes that the favela thugs will come looking for revenge, so he and Pedro go on the lam. For a few desperate days, the two hide out in the city while Andres tries to get together enough money for them to flee the city entirely.

This is a very low-budget, handheld camera kind of film. Much of the story resides in what isn't shown on camera, like the murder of Pedro's friend, and what isn't spoken aloud, like Pedro's thoughts as he gets a look at how hard his father works every day. We are never even told what happened to Pedro's mother. Fortunately, the expressive faces of these excellent actors tell us a lot about the inner turmoil they carry. Giovanni Garcia, who plays Andres, is particularly compelling. I never knew there were so many ways to look worried. Reggie Reyes, who plays Pedro, is remarkable in his first role ever. The kid was literally picked from the streets to play the role.

“La Familia” is rough around the edges, and it doesn't have the kind of clear, satisfying narrative arc that makes for a satisfying movie. In theme, it reminds me somewhat of 2009's "Sin Nombre," but it isn't nearly as well-rounded a story as that film. “La Familia” is more of a sketch, very much film-festival fare, but it presents a director and a couple of actors who I think have promise.

3.5 stars out of 5

The Shape of Water (2017) ****

Mexican director Guillermo del Toro tells fairy tales for adults. His credits include 2004's excellent "Hellboy" and 2006's "Pan's Labyrinth", which is a truly beautiful and creepy tale. He has had a few mis-steps (cough-cough- "Pacific Rim"), but fortunately, “The Shape of Water” is not one of these.

Set in the cold-war 1950s, the film tells the tale of Elisa (Sally Hawkins), a mute cleaning lady in a secret, government lab. She lives a quiet, regimented life, with her only friends being her gay next-door-neighbor Giles (Richard Jenkins) and her co-worker Zelda (Octavia Spencer). One day, Elisa's ordered world is turned upside down by the new “asset” brought into the lab. It's a humanoid water-creature (who looks somewhat similar to the fish-man from “Hellboy.”) The scientists and government agents treat the creature like a beast, but Elisa intuits that he has a soul, and soon she is sharing snacks and music with him. Next thing you know, the two have fallen in love, and Elisa recruits her two friends to help him escape.

You have to remember with this movie that it's a fairytale. Let yourself get taken along for the ride, and don't judge the story literally. Enjoy the striking color palate and the beautiful love story. Ignore the somewhat broadly-drawn nature of the characters and just savor what is truly the date-movie of the year.

4 stars out of 5

Wind River (2017) **1/2

“Luck don't live out here.” This is how federal wildlife officer Cory Lambert (Jeremy Renner) describes the cold, brutal, beautiful landscape that is Wyoming. On the Wind River Indian Reservation, while tracking mountain lions, Cory discovers the frozen body of an American Indian girl, a local teenager. She appears to have been raped, and then to have frozen to death while fleeing across the frozen wilds. FBI agent Jane Banner (Elizabeth Olsen) is dispatched from Las Vegas to investigate. Woefully unprepared for the cold and the lack of police resources on the reservation, Jane enlists Cory's help. Together, they mine the underbelly of the reservation to learn the truth.

“Wind River” is written and directed by Taylor Sheridan, who also did "Sicario."  Like “Sicario,” I enjoyed “Wind River” while watching it, but found that it fell apart a bit at the end. The characters start doing things that make no sense. Watching the movie, I was mostly awed by the gorgeous scenery and Jeremy Renner's cool-ass tracker character, but afterwards quickly found myself annoyed by some of the plot holes.

This is a problem I have mentioned with some other films. When a book or movie is truly well-written, the action is character-driven. By that, I mean that the writer creates a set of characters, places them in a situation, and the action that flows is what those characters would naturally do in that situation. When a writer gets lazy, they make their characters do things that make no sense, in order to short-cut the plot where they need it to go. “Wind River”suffers from that, and it ruins what should be a great murder mystery, with great actors in a great location. As it is, the film has some entertainment value, but for me it's just a bit too trite, too outlandish, and, like a guy named Sheridan making a movie about Wyoming, a bit too on-the-nose.

2.5 stars out of 5

Logan's Run (1976) ***

Part “Brave New World,” part “Planet of the Apes,” “Logan's Run” mixes dystopian sci-fi and action, with some titties thrown in to distract us from the low-rent special effects.

In a post-apocalyptic future America, people live in giant domes for protection from the blasted outside landscape. Technology provides them ample energy and food, and they live lives of hedonism and leisure. But every utopia demands a sacrifice. In Logan's world, population and resources are kept in alignment by allowing people to live only to the age of 30. At that point, people are sacrificed in a fiery ritual called Carousel. Theoretically, Carousel can renew you, allowing you to reincarnate, but many citizens instinctively disbelieve this, and when their time comes, they run. Logan (Michael York) is a Sandman, a policeman whose principle job is to catch and kill runners.

Logan and fellow Sandman Frances (Richard Jordan) are happy in their jobs. Then Logan is selected by the city's supercomputer for a special mission: to track down and destroy a rebel stronghold for runners called Sanctuary. In order to go undercover, Logan will have to pose as a runner, so, against Logan's will, the computer speeds up his life clock to make it look like he is turning 30. The computer also lets slip that Carousel is a fraud. Combined with the years of life the computer stole from him, this gives Logan a lot to think about as he embarks on his mission by contacting Jessica (Jenny Agutter), a member of the Sanctuary rebels.

“Logan's Run” feels like someone kidnapped the cast from a hard-core porno set and forced them to act in a soft-core porno, then cut out the juiciest bits. In fairness, I don't think these are exactly bad actors (except for Farrah Fawcett, who really makes the least of her small role), I think they just weren't sure what to do with the ludicrous material they were given. Still, the poorly-written story and uninspired acting manage to elevate the visual effects, which are so low-rent, they make “Dr. Who” look like “Star Wars.”

While we're on the subject, “Star Wars Episode IV: A New Hope” came out only 1 year after “Logan's Run”. On a budget of $11 million, “Star Wars” managed to create a universe of planets, aliens, robots, and spaceships that looked real enough to take you out of your theater seat to a galaxy far, far away. For its $7 million budget, “Logan's Run” manages only to look like a joke. The cityscape is depicted using miniatures that your accountant could have built in his basement on weekends. Other effects look like they were rejected by the original “Star Trek” tv show, including a ludicrous-looking robot named “Box.” Come to think of it, “Star Trek” is one of many sci-fi productions from the 1960's that look better than 1976's “Logan's Run.”

And yet, despite all this, “Logan's Run” has a certain charm. Like that girl who is more confident than her appearance, this movie presents itself so boldly that you find yourself drawn in, wondering if “Logan's Run” is better than you are able to appreciate. Even now, I find myself wondering if I'm the problem. Looking around at reviews of the film, many of which tie themselves in knots trying to praise the schlocky special effects, it strikes me that others are feeling the same effect. You want to like this movie! I say go with it. Give up on the theory that this is actually a good movie and just enjoy the trashy ride. There are explosions, floods, orgies, you-name-it. Michael York and Richard Jordan manage to make bad acting look good, and Jenny Agutter is so adorable in that little, silk kimono that I'd watch her read the phone book!

3 stars out of 5

The Hitchhiker's Guide to the Galaxy (2005) **1/2

“Don't Panic” are the words emblazoned on the cover of the legendary, electronic guide to absolutely everything known as “The Hitchhiker's Guide to the Galaxy.” Good advice for earthling Arthur Dent (Martin Freeman), whose quiet life is moderately upset by the pending demolition of his home to make way for a highway bypass. Arthur doesn't have long to stew over that, however, as he quickly learns that 1) his best friend, Ford Prefect (Mos Def), is actually an alien, and 2) the earth is about to be demolished to make way for an interstellar bypass.

Everyone and everything on earth is destroyed except for the dolphins (who tried to warn us) and Arthur and Ford, who use an electronic “thumb” to hitch a ride off-planet. The two eventually discover that Arthur is not actually the only surviving earthling. His old crush, Tricia (Zooey Deschanel), has been out galaxy-hopping with the incorrigible President of the Galaxy, Zaphod Beeblebrox (Sam Rockwell). The four of them set out to find an ancient computer called Deep Thought, which will give them the ultimate Question to life, the universe, and everything. (Deep Thought has already announced the ultimate Answer, which is 42.) Oh, and Zaphod has 2 heads.

I've given away a lot of plot there, but it's only the tip of the iceberg. I felt like you needed some concept of what you are getting into, assuming you are one of the few who isn't familiar with Douglas Adams's Hitchhiker's Guide series of books. I tend to think that there are two kinds of people: 1) people who have read the books (and most likely have seen this movie) and 2) people who won't like them.

That may be presumptuous, though. Maybe you've heard of the series, but haven't dipped your toe in, yet. Maybe you're a fan of the books, but missed the movie the first time around, and you're wondering if it's worth your time. The answer is, it depends how much you value your time.

This issue here is that even one Douglas Adams book is a lot to try to pack into a movie. The book this is based on is chock full of arch humor and galactic adventure. The movie represents a noble failure to capture all that, rushing from one gonzo scene to the next. Key points, such as the Guide's advice to all galactic hitchhikers to carry a towel, get glossed over, serving as in-jokes at best. The movie also has a more mass-market, romantic ending that is needlessly sappy. Fortunately, the outstanding cast prevents this from being a total failure. The four major players are perfectly suited for their characters, and the story is seasoned with appearances by the likes of John Malkovich and Bill Nighy, with Alan Rickman and Helen Mirren lending their voices to robots.

With all this star-power, the movie has some fun moments. Ultimately, though, this is a telling that can only be fully understood by fans of the book, who will likely be disappointed by it.

2.5 stars out of 5