From Beyond (1986) ** or ****

 

Fresh off the success of “Re-Animator,” director Stuart Gordon reunited some of the cast from that film for another low-budget H.P. Lovecraft movie. Based very loosely on Lovecraft's story, “From Beyond” is a tale of scientific obsession gone wrong.

When physicist Edward Pretorius (Ted Sorel) dies horribly in his laboratory, the police blame his assistant, Crawford Tillinghast (Jeffrey Combs), whose stories of monsters from another dimension suggest criminal insanity. Psychiatrist Katherine McMichaels (Barbara Crampton) is intrigued by his story of a resonator that activates the pineal gland, and when his CT scan shows enlargement of that gland, she insists on seeing the resonator for herself. The visions it gives her lead to an obsession that puts their lives and sanity at risk.

Gordon shot “From Beyond” in Italy to save money, on a reported budget of $2.5 million, which was cheap even for 1986. The film feels like a cheap, B-movie, but it succeeds on the strength of its excellent cast. Sorel, Combs, and the gorgeous Barbara Crampton bring a level of commitment that makes “From Beyond” a delight, with some comic relief from supporting actor Ken Foree.

You have to appreciate “From Beyond” as a study in excess. This is not a movie that leaves anything to the imagination. The special effects look like someone took the goriest scenes from John Carpenter's “The Thing” and stretched them out for several minutes. I honestly got tired of these extended body-horror segments. Stuart Gordon is definitely not one of the “less-is-more” directors. When it comes to gory, slimy, screaming special effects, his attitude is “more-is-more.” Don't watch this is if you don't like slime and gore. Don't watch if you only like to watch “good” movies. Don't watch if you don't want to see Barbara Crampton's titties (but only briefly, which is my one real criticism of the film). If you are a Lovecraft-loving, cult-classic grooving horror fan, this is a must-see.

2 stars out of 5 on the regular scale, 4 stars on the cult-classic scale

Challengers (2014) ****

 

I have to admit to an old-fashioned prejudice against people with only one name. It seems presumptuous to me that, for example, Cherilyn Sarkisian has staked out a position that no other celebrity can ever use the first name “Cher.” Any performer who adopts the solo-name affectation starts out with negative points in my book. I gotta say, though, that in her latest film, Zendaya won me over.

In “Challengers,” Zendaya plays Tashi Duncan. (See, even though she only has one name, she can play a normal, two-named character! That's how good an actress she is!) Tashi, the most promising upcoming tennis star on the women's circuit, meets Art (Mike Faist) and Patrick (Josh O'Connor). Best friends since childhood, Art and Patrick go after Tashi together, and she winds up dating Patrick. Art bides his time, and after Tashi suffers a career-ending injury, she becomes Art's coach and then his wife. Tashi coaches Art to stardom, while Patrick floats around on the lower tennis circuits and in a lower level of Tashi's heart. This love triangle comes to a point when Art and Patrick wind up playing each other for the first time in years.

“Challengers” is a sometimes-funny, sometimes-dark, rather sexy exploration of love, friendship, and ambition. Mike Faist and Josh O'Connor are excellent in their roles, but it is Zendaya who steals the show with her nuanced portrayal of Tashi. As the story jumps back and forth through time, we come to realize that Tashi doesn't love either of these guys nearly as much as she loved being a champion. Her marriage to Art is really just a way for her to live out her ambition through him.

4 stars out of 5

Ender's Game (2013) **

 

Orson Scott Card's Ender's Game is one of the classics of science fiction. Much like Frank Herbert's Dune, the sequels become less and less satisfying, but the first novel is perfection. The movie is an example of how difficult it is to make a film out of such a great novel.

Asa Butterfield plays the titular character, Ender Wiggin. Ender lives on a near-future Earth facing an alien menace. Insectoid creatures from space have already invaded Earth once, and their superior firepower almost overwhelmed us. Only the brilliant heroics of a pilot named Mazer Rackham (Ben Kingsley) saved the day. Now, Earth's energies are focused on producing the next generation of space fighters, hoping to find the next Mazer Rackham before the bugs attack again.

Ender Wiggin represents that hope. His older brother and sister were promising students, but his brother Peter is a cruel bully, and his sister Valentine lacked the killer instinct to be a soldier. Ender's parents were allowed to do something very few couples in this future Earth are allowed, which is to have a third child. The payoff is Ender, a brilliant kid with the right balance of empathy and aggression to be a future commander.

Colonel Graff (Harrison Ford) and Major Anderson (Viola Davis) recruit Ender for Battle School. They take him to a space training station in orbit, where he and other child recruits engage in increasingly complex war games in preparation for the real battle ahead. Ender is an ace at the games, but navigating the social scene as the youngest, and smartest, kid there, is his real challenge.

Orson Scott Card's novel is a beautifully-written story, full of empathy for even its most hate-able characters. Much of the action takes place in the characters' heads, which was bound to make it difficult to translate the story onto screen. Screenwriter/director Gavin Hood does not have what it takes to pull it off. This is a book that probably should have either been a mini-series or been split into two films, as Denis Villeneuve did with "Dune."  For a fan of the novel, this film feels superficial, with a hurried pace, as Hood ticks off major plot points and skips a few entirely. For someone who hasn't read the book, I imagine this just looks like a star-studded dud, without much of a point.

2 stars out of 5

American Fiction (2023) *****

 

In Radha Blank's 2020 film “The Forty-Year-Old Version,” Radha raps about “poverty porn.”

“Yo, it’s poverty porn,

you regular Blacks are just such a yawn.

If I want

to get on,

better write me some poverty porn.”

She was talking about ghetto stories of drug abuse, crime, single mothers, and cop shootings, turned into a sort of pornography for middle-class America to gawk at and feel smug for feeling pity. Her character in the film, a frustrated playwright, finds that poverty porn is what the white people around her- her agent, her producer, and her audience- seem to want and expect from a black artist.

Blank isn't the first black artist to express frustration at being pushed to make poverty porn. Percival Everett's 2001 novel Erasure explores the same theme, and now screenwriter/director Cord Jefferson has brought that book to film with “American Fiction”. Jeffrey Wright plays Monk Ellison, an English professor whose white students pitch self-righteous fits when he assigns them books that contain the N-word. He is also a writer struggling to get his latest novel published. Ellison writes about universal themes, but because he is black, his books tend to get filed in the African-American Studies section, and publishers hint that they would be quicker to publish something more “relevant to the black experience.” Poverty porn, in other words.

Ellison looks around and sees another black writer, Sintara Golden (Issa Rae) having great success with her book “We's Lives in da Ghetto.” Golden's book, written in inner city vernacular, is straight poverty porn, and white liberals are lapping it up. Out of frustration, Ellison sits down and writes his own poverty porn story. He sends the book out under a pseudonym, assuming that publishers will recognize it as a joke. Instead, publishers embrace the book as a genuine depiction of the black experience, and Ellison finds himself with a best-seller on his hands.

Meanwhile, Ellison's life is falling apart. His professor job is in jeopardy due to those sensitive, white students. His upper-middle-class family is struggling with his mother's new-onset dementia, and his siblings, both doctors, are not able to help as much as they should. The reclusive Monk is forced to become a caregiver while coming to terms with his estranged siblings and dealing with his late father's legacy of infidelity.

“American Fiction” is a very sneaky movie. Ellison's family drama is actually the kind of Oscar-bait story that we see all the time in film, but almost always featuring a white family. Being black, Hollywood would typically depict Ellison's family as poor, and someone would end up getting shot by the police. Director Cord Jefferson's big trick is that in the middle of a sharp, funny satire about black artists and poverty porn, he gets us to watch a universal drama about a family that is struggling despite their wealth and education, who just happen to be black.

5 stars out of 5

Fargo (1996) *****

 

Writer/director Ethan Coen this year released the movie “Drive-Away Dolls,” his first project, as far as I know, without the help of his usual writing, directing, and producing partner, Joel Coen. The event reminded me how much I love so many Coen Brothers films, and it seemed like a good time to re-watch one of their best.

William H. Macy plays Jerry Lundegaard, a sad-sack car salesman who needs some cash. His attempts to get the money from his wealthy father-in-law are rebuffed, so he hires a couple of criminals, Carl (Steve Buscemi) and Gaear (Peter Stormare) to kidnap his wife. Jerry plans to split the ransom money, which he figures will come from his father-in-law, with the “kidnappers,” and he'll get the cash he needs with no harm to anyone. Naturally, the plan goes awry, and these scoundrels wind up with pregnant small-town police chief Marge Gunderson (Frances McDormand) on their tail.

“Fargo” is just a masterpiece! This is what happens when you get the right combination of writer, director, and cast. William H. Macy's portrayal of Jerry is fascinating to watch, as his expressive, hound-dog face shifts seamlessly from vulnerability to deceitfulness and back again. His pleading eyes seem to be saying, “Please believe my lies. They are all I have.” We don't get a lot of back-story on Jerry, but the essence of the character is that he is a man with no power. He lacks the character to do hard things, so in every situation, whatever power he has is taken from him. This happens with his father-in-law, and it happens with Carl and Gaear, who immediately sense his weakness. Jerry should be leading a quiet, dull life, but he lacks the character to settle for what is his due, and he has just enough imagination to get himself into trouble trying to get more.

“Fargo” is a story about 2 different worlds: One world in which decent people paint bird pictures to be put on stamps, and another world in which people think nothing of kidnapping and murder. It's a story about how easily one of those worlds can intrude on the other. Carl and Gaear represent the banality of evil. They don't enter Jerry's life at random. He invites them. They can enter your life, too. All you have to do is ask.

5 stars out of 5

Hit Man (2023) ****

 

For over a decade, a college professor named Gary Johnson worked for the Houston police department. He didn't advise them on points of law or forensics. Gary would put on a wire and pretend to be a killer for hire. He would meet with people who had reached out looking for a hit man, and his recordings would provide the evidence to arrest and jail them.

Gary's story was the basis for a 2001 TexasMonthly article, which director Richard Linklater and actor Glen Powell turned into a screenplay, in which they take the bones of Gary's story and then veer wildly into fantasy. Powell plays Gary, a nerdy professor whose other job is doing tech support for police sting operations. When the cop who usually does the pretend-hit-man thing gets suspended, Gary gets thrust into the role. He seems an unlikely undercover operative, but he turns out to be a natural. In sting after sting, Gary adopts different personae to make his targets comfortable enough to say out loud that they want him to murder someone.

Then Gary meets Madison (Adria Arjona), who is looking to have her abusive husband killed. Maybe it's because she is super-hot, or maybe it's because she seems genuinely scared and desperate, but Gary feels that Madison is different from his usual targets. He abandons the sting and convinces Madison to seek a divorce instead of a murder-for-hire. Naturally, that's not the last he sees of her. Gary, or actually his alter-ego Ron, winds up in a steamy relationship with Madison, who still thinks he is a hitman, and soon we are forced to reconsider who is fooling whom here.

Richard Linklater has expressed that he thinks films these days should have more sex, and he does his part here to bring sex back to cinema. “Hit Man” is downright steamy. Even when Powell and Arjona have their clothes on, they have great chemistry. It helps that Linklater moved the story from Houston to New Orleans, which is an inherently sexy city.

“Hit Man” borrows its superficial themes from classic noir films like “Double Indemnity,” but its lighter tone makes it more a dark, screwball comedy rather than a true noir. The real theme of the film is the question of whether it's possible to change your life and/or your personality, and what would you be willing to do to make that happen.

This is a delightful movie, and a joy to watch. Powell and Arjona are very easy on the eyes, and both give great performances. The supporting cast is tight, too. Other than a couple of questionable plot points, it is almost a perfect film. They should make more like it!

4 stars out of 5

Fury (2014) ***1/2

 

There will probably come a day when we are not so obsessed with World War II, but that day has not arrived. Almost 80 years after WWII ended, we are still living in the world that war created, the political themes behind the war are still relevant, and storytellers are still mining it for material.

One aspect of WWII that I never knew much about was tank warfare. Of course, everyone has heard of General Rommel, the German tank commander known as “the Desert Fox.” I was vaguely aware that German tanks were better armored and more powerful than allied tanks, but I never really knew the specifics of how tanks are used on the battlefield or what it looks like for a couple of tanks to battle it out. “Fury” is a fascinating deep dive into tank warfare, taking us inside an American Sherman tank near the end of the war, when the Germans were putting up their desperate and deadly last stand.

Brad Pitt plays tank commander Don Collier, a grisled veteran well-versed in fighting the better-armored German tanks. His crew are absolutely loyal to him, and they are naturally suspicious of a new, green recruit sent to replace a dead comrade. Private Ellison (Logan Lerman) is trained as a clerk and hasn't handled a gun since basic training, but the need for more men at the front lands him in one of the most dangerous jobs of the war.

“Fury” has incredible action. The film takes us inside the cramped confines of the tank, showing us what battle looks like to the men inside. Protected from regular rifle fire, the men inside have nowhere to run when anti-tank weapons are brought to bear, and they become a very easy target. In one gripping sequence, a single German Tiger tank ambushes four American tanks, and Collier must use all of his knowledge of tank fighting to survive.

While the action is amazing, the characters are not very well-written, and some of the scenes are downright confounding and annoying. The movie is also long, at 2h 14m. It doesn't feel that long during the battle sequences, but it drags during some of the interpersonal scenes. Still, this view of the war from the inside of a tank is a perspective I have not seen before, and “Fury” presents it with respect for the history and technical details. If you like war movies, it's worth buckling up for the ride.

3.5 stars out of 5

Ricky Stanicky (2024) ***

 

When I was a certain age, a hot topic of conversation was, “Is wrasslin' real?” Early on, I was in the “Wrasslin' is fake” camp, but I realize now that I was wrong. Professional wrestling isn't exactly fake; it's staged. Sure, all that stuff about good guys and bad guys is scripted, but those dudes and gals really are jumping off the top rope, doing flips and such. You shouldn't call it “fake” any more than you would call a production of Shakespeare fake. Pro wrestlers are actors who do their own stunts, which is why it should be no surprise that so many of them succeed in Hollywood. John Cena is the latest wrestler to break into movies, and I gotta say, the guy is entertaining, with good comic timing.

In “Ricky Stanicky,” Cena plays a fictional character come to life. Dean (Zac Efron),Wes (Jermaine Fowler), and JT (Andrew Santino) are childhood friends who get into a scrape. To deflect the blame, they invent a fictional kid whom they name Ricky Stanicky. As silly as the rapidly-contrived name is, the scheme works, and the kids proceed to grow up and go through life using Ricky as a go-to excuse. As adults, Ricky and his fictitious fight with cancer serve as an excuse to miss baby showers and other family obligations, until they almost get caught in the lie and are obliged to produce this mysterious friend. Desperate, the guys hire a down-on-his-luck Las Vegas performer (Cena) to portray Ricky and meet their wives and families. You can pretty much figure out the rest from there.

This is not a memorable film. It's a silly movie with only two points in its favor: 1) a fun name and 2) John Cena. Everyone else in the film, including Zac Efron, is forgettable, but Cena exudes enough charm to carry the movie. As Ricky, he worms his way into his new friends' lives in ways they didn't anticipate, inviting us and them to re-consider what is real and what is fake.

3 stars out of 5

Dune: Part 2 (2024) ***** Warning – Contains Spoilers for “Dune: Part 1”

 

It's kind of hard to believe that there was ever any question that Denis Villeneuve would get to complete his film adaptation of Frank Herbert's classic novel Dune. But that's how it was. Legendary Pictures and Warner Brothers committed enough money for Villeneuve to make Part 1, and part 2 was contingent on how that went. I suppose it's understandable, considering how some previous attempts at a Dune adaptation have gone. Fortunately, Villeneuve's “Dune”, released in 2021, was a masterpiece and a critical and commercial success.

“Part 2” picks up right where the first film left off. Paul and his mother Jessica have joined the Fremen in the desert. The Harkonnens have retaken Arrakis and control of spice production. Paul and the Fremen become guerrilla fighters, sabotaging the spice harvesters at every opportunity.

Where "Dune: Part 1" was slow-moving, spending a lot of time world-building, introducing us to the Bene Gesserit, the Great Families, the Fremen, and so forth, “Part 2” allows us to revel in that world. There is more action, and the story builds rapidly. We see romance bud between Paul and Chani. We also eventually see Paul morph from the hero into more of an anti-hero, as he gains his full prescient skills and begins to seek revenge, power, and even godhood. “Part 2” takes us through the end of Herbert's first novel.

Dune, the novel, is an amazing book, but as Herbert's series continues, the books start to become less and less compelling. I think the reason is that as Paul becomes a less and less sympathetic character, Herbert fails to give us another character to identify with. Director Denis Villeneuve seems to be angling to do something different with his series, giving Chani a more substantial role than she has in the book. Perhaps he hopes to give her a bigger role in a sequel.

Whether Villeneuve gets to make another Dune movie or not, he has done something special here, finally giving the first and best Dune novel the film adaptation it deserves.

5 stars out of 5

Poor Things (2023) *****

 

Based on the 1992 novel by Alasdair Gray, “Poor Things” is a remarkable exploration of feminism and social mores through the conceit of a sort of Frankenstein's monster named Bella (Emma Stone). Willem Dafoe plays Dr. Godwin Baxter, who calls himself God for short. He has perfected Victorian-era surgical techniques to the point where he has grafted the head of a duck onto the body of a dog and created other hybrid creatures reminiscent of “The Island of Dr. Moreau.” Godwin gets access to the body of a young, pregnant woman who has just died by suicide. In a ruthlessly amoral experiment, he takes the brain of her unborn child and implants it into her body, which he re-animates, naming the result “Bella.”

We meet Bella as a mental toddler, uncoordinated and without speech. In a grown body, however, her brain matures rapidly. She soon develops sexual feelings, and is delighted to discover the ability to “make happy when I want.” An unethical rake of a lawyer (Mark Ruffalo) discovers Bella, and, enticed by such unrestrained sexuality in the body of a beautiful woman, whisks her off to the continent for a few weeks of sexual debauchery. As Bella matures through the stages of adolescence and young adulthood, however, she proves too much for the lawyer.

Bella moves beyond her obsession with sex to develop an interest in philosophy and books, hoping to improve herself and the world. That's a big theme of the story, whether someone can intentionally make themselves a better person. We eventually learn that Bella's mother had been married to a cruel man and was not a great person, herself. Indeed, Bella displays cruel tendencies in her youth, but she finds in herself a desire for self-improvement.

The story really isn't about Bella, it is about all of us. With her unique circumstance, growing up in an unconventional household and doing so very quickly, Bella is a person untainted by social expectations and conventions. Whether she is whoring herself out, experimenting with lesbianism, or simply rejecting the efforts of all the men in her life to control her, Bella does everything with a refreshing innocence. She was never taught that she had to submit to others or be ashamed of her body, and she reaches mental maturity so quickly that no one has the chance to pound those ideas into her brain.

The title, “Poor Things,” might refer to Bella, Godwin, and their bizarre household. It might refer to the poor underclass whom Bella discovers and wishes to help. Or, it might refer to all of us, hung up as we are on sexual shame and social niceties, wishing we could be free like Bella.

5 stars out of 5