Yacht Rock: A Dockumentary (2024) ***1/2

 

You have probably heard of yacht rock: soft rock from the 70's exemplified by artists like Michael McDonald and Christopher Cross. There's a Sirius XM channel dedicated to the genre, and there are countless yacht rock tribute acts. It seems in the last decade or so the term is everywhere, but I didn't realize until I watched this documentary that the term “yacht rock” did not exist back when all that music was being made.

As the story goes, a comedian named J.D. Ryznar started reading the album covers from some of his favorite 70s-80s soft rock artists, and noticed that there were certain L.A. based artists of the time who kept cross-pollinating, showing up in the writing and musical credits on each other's albums. The heart of this scene seemed to be Steely Dan, The Doobie Brothers, Toto, Michael McDonald, and Kenny Loggins. For Ryznar, this was the early 2000s, and this music was still just called soft rock or easy listening. Ryznar and some fellow comics created a series of skits about this musical scene and put it on the internet under the name “Yacht Rock.” (Even though almost none of the songs have anything to do with boats.) A genre was born, and for the last 20 years, we've all been talking about yacht rock like we knew about it all along.

“Yacht Rock: A Dockumentary,” streaming on HBO Max, explores the creation of the web series that gave the genre its name and the resurgence in interest in the music that the series sparked. It also does a deep dive into the music. Interviews with the major players give insight into the dynamics between all these artists and really gave me a better appreciation for the musicianship behind all this sweet, smooth music.

You don't have to consider yourself a fan of yacht rock, but this documentary is for people who are at least familiar with the music. If you stopped listening to new music in 1975, or if you don't know any music older than 1985, then this will be wasted on you. For the rest of us, my suggestion is this: first, find the “Yacht Rock” web series on youtube and watch all 12 episodes. The episodes are only 5-10 minutes each, and it's hilarious! Then watch “Yacht Rock: A Dockumentary” on HBOMax, and enjoy a journey to a time when the hair was feathered and the music was smooth. Just don't think that this music is ever going to go away. That's what a fool believes.

3.5 stars out of 5

web series link https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YNTARSM-Fjc&list=PLBEB75B6A1F9C1D01

The Substance (2024) *****

 

In my favorite movie so far this year, Demi Moore plays Elisabeth, an actress whose star is fading. Over 50 now, her main creative outlet is her morning aerobics show, but she loses even that when her producer Harvey (Dennis Quaid) decides it is time to bring in someone younger. Facing irrelevance, Elisabeth is given a mysterious offer to try The Substance, which promises a “better, younger you.” Of course, there is a catch.

“The Substance” is French writer/director Coralie Fargeat's second film, and it signals a great, new talent. She gets outstanding performances from her stars, particularly Demi Moore, who plays some absolutely devastating scenes. One thing about the film, though, it is incredibly gross. I'm talking Stuart Gordon horror film levels of disgusting body-horror. I would view it as gratuitous and a weakness of the film, except that at the end, Fargeat pulls out all the stops and takes the gore so over the top that it becomes comic relief.

There's a lot of food for thought in “The Substance.” You might wonder why Elisabeth, who is still a fit, beautiful woman, would risk using an unknown “substance” to look young again. We never see Elisabeth with any friends or family or pursuing any hobbies. Her apartment and office are filled with giant pictures of herself. Her career is all she has, and it depends on her looking good on screen. While any normal person would look at her and say she has a lot going for her, Elisabeth internalizes the judgment of her industry, which is that she is old and ugly.

I could go on about the film for pages, but I don't want to ruin any of the surprises. Just. Watch. It! “The Substance” is a cutting, visually disturbing satire about how society views women as they age and how cruel we are to ourselves.

5 stars out of 5

What About Bob? (1991) ****1/2

 

Bill Murray's films have generally aged really well, and “What About Bob?” is a great example. I was lukewarm on this movie the first time around, but over the years it has become one of my faves.

Murray plays Bob, a guy with multiple phobias, whose crippling anxiety makes it almost impossible to leave his apartment. His new psychiatrist, Dr Leo Marvin (Richard Dreyfuss), however, is famous, with a best-selling book, and Bob has great hopes for their therapeutic relationship. No sooner do they meet, however, than Leo leaves on an extended vacation. Bob's separation anxiety is so great that it overcomes his other anxieties, driving him to leave the city and follow Leo to the coast, where Bob insidiously and maddeningly insinuates himself into Leo's vacation and his family.

Bob is the classic interloper character, someone who shows up and insinuates himself bit by bit into another character's life, like a cuckoo laying its egg in another bird's nest. The first time I watched the film, I hated Bob. Despite Leo's conceitedness, I felt sorry for him as Bob screws everything up for him and drives him to madness. Over the years and multiple viewings, however, I came to see that the person primarily responsible for Leo's problems, is – you guessed it- Leo. (Don't you think this is probably something Leo would tell his patients?) Yes, Bob is completely inappropriate, but Leo's inability to enforce boundaries, and the fragility of his success are the result of his own greed and inflated ego. We see that even in his family life, Leo insists on maintaining his self-image as a wise, kindly counselor, making his interactions superficial, even with those closest to him. Bob appeals to people because, even as nuts as he is, he is vulnerable and honest, which makes him accessible in a way Leo cannot be.

We also see a difference in these 2 characters in how they manage change. Bob is terrified of everything, but he finds in himself a willingness to be terrified, to be uncomfortable, and thus, to invite change into his life. Leo, the supposed sane one, is completely rigid, so change, when it inevitably comes, drives him over the edge.

“What About Bob” is directed by Frank Oz, who also gave us the delightful "Dirty, Rotten Scoundrels." He gets a lot of help here from a terrific cast. Murray and Dreyfuss are in top form, even if, as rumor has it, they hated each other on set. The supporting cast is great, as well, especially Charlie Korsmo, who plays Leo's son, Siggy. (Korsmo was a talented child actor who gave up acting to get a degree in physics and become a lawyer.)

Within the Bill Murray oeuvre, “What About Bob?” is not quite as perfect as "Groundhog Day"“ or "Lost in Translation"“, but it's still a classic about a couple of men facing their fears. Don't be afraid to watch it.

4.5 stars out of 5

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

The Thomas Crowne Affair (1968) ****

 

In this extremely stylish crime thriller, Steve McQueen plays investment banker Thomas Crowne, a guy for whom making money comes easy. He spices up his life racing cars, flying planes, bedding women, and, as the film begins, planning the perfect bank robbery. Crowne assembles a team of thieves who never meet each other until the robbery begins, and they never see his face or hear his real voice. Crowne doesn't need the money, mind you; pulling off the perfect crime is just another adrenaline rush for him.

For an adventure-seeker like Crowne, things only get better when the bank's insurance company brings in a brilliant, beautiful investigator (Faye Dunaway). Vicki Anderson is the perfect foil, just as stylish and clever as Crowne, and she is immediately onto him. Crowne gets to play a sexy cat-and-mouse game with the investigator, while Vicki winds up having to reconcile her job with the feelings she develops for Crowne.

In Steven Soderbergh's 1998 film "Out of Sight", the George Clooney and Jennifer Lopez characters, a bank robber and a cop respectively, discuss movies, including another Faye Dunaway film “Three Days of the Condor.” It's a clever Easter egg, because the cop/robber sexual tension that develops between Lopez and Clooney is very similar to what happens between Dunaway and McQueen here.

Unlike “Out of Sight,” “The Thomas Crowne Affair” doesn't have an ensemble cast of colorful supporting characters. This movie is all about Steve McQueen and Faye Dunaway, who, fortunately, have enough charm to carry the thing. It's a delightful, sexy story of two beautiful people circling each other in a perfect storm of crime, punishment, and sexual tension.

4 stars out of 5

Out of Sight (1998) ****

 

If we were to rank writers based on how many of their novels have been adapted to film, Elmore Leonard would have to be fairly high on the list. It seems like every time I see a slightly-hard-edged-yet-funny crime movie, it turns out to be based on an Elmore Leonard book. Classic films like “Jackie Brown” and "Get Shorty" come to mind. 1998's “Out of Sight” deserves to be mentioned in the same breath.

George Clooney plays bank robber Jack Foley. During a prison break, Jack kidnaps sexy Federal Marshall Karen Sisco (Jennifer Lopez), and the two hit it off. On the run with his best friend Buddy (Ving Rhames), Jack pursues his next big heist, with Karen and the FBI in hot pursuit. Karen, meanwhile, tries to reconcile her professional obligations with the undeniable chemistry between her and Jack.

During the prison break scene, while Jack and Karen are locked in the trunk of Buddy's car, they talk about movies (I told you they hit it off.) Jack brings up the film “Three Days of the Condor,” and Karen says she thinks it is unrealistic how quickly Faye Dunaway and Robert Redford hook up. It's great foreshadowing for how quickly Jack and Karen fall for each other.

I can't remember if Jennifer Lopez started out as an actress who got into singing or a singer who got into acting. I don't really care, as she isn't that great at either. She's drop-dead gorgeous, though, and she has never been cuter than in “Out of Sight.” The role doesn't really demand much from her, acting-wise, and George Clooney is a good enough actor for both of them.

One thing about an Elmore Leonard story is that there are no placeholder characters. Everybody has a backstory, and everybody brings some sparkle to the tale. The supporting cast here is up to the job, with outstanding actors including Ving Rhames, Don Cheadle, Steve Zahn, Luis Guzman, Catherine Keener, Dennis Farina, and Albert Brooks.

Director Steven Soderbergh puts great source material and a great cast to good use. “Out of Sight” is sexy, funny, gritty, and ultimately satisfying.

4 stars out of 5

Unfrosted (2024) **1/2

 

Jerry Seinfeld is an interesting fellow. For his directorial film debut, the comedian probably could have done anything he wanted. What he chose to do was tell a mildly humorous version of the 1960's battle between cereal giants Kellogg and Post as they raced to develop a toaster pastry. The result of that battle was Pop-tarts, “the greatest pair of rectangles since the 10 Commandments.”

The story is based loosely on the very real rivalry between Kellogg and Post. The companies have always stolen each other's ideas. As a character says in the movie, “We're like Ford and Chevy. We sell the exact same thing; the difference is marketing.” Post really did start out ahead in the pastry race, but timing and marketing are everything, and their Country Squares proved no match for Pop-tarts.

When a guy of Seinfeld's comedic stature calls, people in Hollywood are going to answer, and sure enough, a ridiculously high-octane cast of A-list personae showed up for this farce. The list includes Melissa McCarthy, Hugh Grant, Amy Schumer, Jon Hamm, Peter Dinklage, and way too many B+-listers and character actors to name here. You will spend the whole movie saying, “Hey, that's so-and-so!”

And you will watch the movie, assuming you have Netflix and are of an age to know who Jerry Seinfeld is. There is simply no reason not to watch this silly celebration of breakfast food. There is also no reason to pretend that it is anything more than an amusing vanity project. In the 90's, “Seinfeld” pushed boundaries with episodes like the “master of my domain” one and the one with the wooden Indian. He took risks and ruffled feathers. “Unfrosted” does neither. The movie is one big Dad-joke. It has laughs, but they are gentle, family friendly, even. Like the breakfast pastry that the film celebrates, it is a bunch of empty calories that you will forget about soon after consuming it. (Not that there's anything wrong with that!)

2.5 stars out of 5

No Hard Feelings ***

 

It has been obvious that Jennifer Lawrence is an amazing actress since 2010's "Winter's Bone." The 20-yr-old displayed a range and level of maturity beyond her years in that film, and she has confirmed her genius in follow-ups like "Silver Linings Playbook," "American Hustle," and the "Hunger Games" films. It should come as no surprise, then, that she is able to take a silly, forgettable comedy like “No Hard Feelings” and elevate it above its genre.

Lawrence plays Maddie, an irresponsible, hot mess with limited career prospects who has burned through all the available men in her small town. She responds to an ad from a couple of concerned parents looking for someone to “date” their shy, virginal, adult son. Maddie promises to “date the shit” out of the young man in exchange for a car.

You can pretty much guess the rest of the story. There have been a million of these “nerdy guy dates hot girl” movies. “No Hard Feelings” doesn't really distinguish itself from the other offerings in this genre, but it does manage to be entertaining, largely on the charms of Jennifer Lawrence. She has good comic timing, and with the help of a supporting cast that is at least competent, she turns a hackneyed story into a fun bit of comedy.

3 stars out of 5

The Holdovers (2023) ***

 

From director Alexander Payne and star Paul Giamatti, the team that brought us the brilliant “Sideways,” we now have “The Holdovers,” a thoughtful, funny, sometimes overly-sweet film about a bunch of misfits forming an unlikely family.

Giamatti plays Paul Hunham, a grumpy, cross-eyed antiquities teacher at the toney Barton academy, a New England boarding school for boys. Unpopular with the students, faculty, and administration, Hunham gets stuck with the job of staying at school over the holidays to look after the handful of boys who have nowhere to go over the Christmas break, the “holdovers.” You might think that Hunham wouldn't mind the job that much. He lives on campus, and with no family, he has no travel plans. In fact, Hunham has never really gone anywhere. He went from being a student at Barton (on scholarship) to teaching there, and he seems destined to live out his lonely life being grumpy there.

Hunham sees a bit of himself in one of the boys. Angus (Dominic Sessa) is bright but socially awkward. He is also unpopular at Barton, and his status as a holiday holdover is extra painful because he was dropped at the last minute from his family's beach vacation. The other holdover boys are a mixed bag of various ages and backgrounds. With frigid weather outside, and an unsympathetic Mr. Hunham inside, the boys prepare to spend an unhappy holiday.

Director Alexander Payne is known for his clever, often darkly funny, character studies, including “Citizen Ruth”, “Election”, and “Sideways”. “The Holdovers” is interesting not because exciting things happen, but because of the glimpse it gives you of characters you might not normally pay attention to: the grumpy teacher, the awkward student, and the quiet cook who lost her son to Vietnam (Da'Vine Joy Randolph).

There are people of a certain age for whom “Dead Poets Society” was their favorite movie growing up. Now that they are adults, “The Holdovers” should be their new favorite. Like “Dead Poets”, “The Holdovers” is about a teacher whose integrity gets him into trouble, but who winds up inspiring at least one of his students. “The Holdovers” does not get as melodramatically dark as “Dead Poets”, but its tone throughout is more melancholy, its characters more complex, and its hero harder to warm up to. Like “Dead Poets”, “The Holdovers” crosses the line from emotional to treacly at times.

The film is worth seeing for the excellent performances by Paul Giamatti and young co-star Dominic Sessa, and for the Oscar-winning supporting performance by Da'Vine Joy Randolph. Still, Alexander Payne and Paul Giamatti have done better. If you saw”Sideways,” you know that wine-themed movie was like a fine pinot noir - subtle, complex, something you want to revisit again and again. “The Holdovers” is more like a merlot - pleasant but basic.

3 stars out of 5

Burn After Reading (2008) ***

 

Like every spy story, “Burn After Reading” is convoluted. CIA analyst Osborne Cox (John Malkovich) loses his job and decides to write his memoirs. His shrew of a wife, Katie (Tilda Swinton) accidentally copies his manuscript along with their financial information while secretly preparing to file for divorce. A copy of her files gets left in a gym locker room, where a couple of dim-witted gym employees, Linda (Frances McDormand) and Chad (Brad Pitt) mistake it for actual intelligence data. Linda and Chad figure this stuff must be worth money to someone, and they proceed to try to cash in on their find. Meanwhile, Linda starts dating a married cad named Harry, (George Clooney), who also happens to be Katie's secret lover.

Each character in this black comedy is dumber than the last, and this confederacy of dunces circulate around each other, spinning towards a conclusion that, in Coen brothers tradition, is funny and violent. The thing is, “Burn After Reading” was just a little disappointing. For a Coen brothers movie, it just does not have a lot to it. It's funny, but not nearly as funny as “Fargo” or “The Big Lebowski.” It's a convoluted tale of lies and deceit, but coming from the guys who wrote “Miller's Crossing,” the twists and turns in this story feel pedestrian. The movie is reasonably entertaining and funny, but in the end, this is a massively-talented, A-list cast paired with a legendary writing/ directing duo for a story that just does not amount to much. It's like I ordered a big, juicy, Coen brothers cheeseburger and got served a vegan burger without a bun.

3 stars out of 5

Killer Joe (2011) ***1/2

 

I like a good neo-noir as much as the next guy. And I don't mind them being trashy. John McNaughton's lurid 1998 film “Wild Things” is one of my favorites. It turns out, though, that I have my limits when it comes to trashiness, and as good as it is, the southern gothic “Killer Joe” pushes those limits.

Adele Smith is a thorn in the side of her family. Her kids, Chris (Emile Hirsch) and Dottie (Juno Temple), and her ex-husband, Ansel (Thomas Hayden Church), can't stand her. Her latest transgression is stealing cocaine that Chris was supposed to sell, putting him in serious debt to his supplier. It's the last straw. Chris visits his dad with a plan. He has heard about a dirty cop named Joe Cooper (Matthew McConaughey) who does murder-for-hire. Chris convinces Ansel that they can have Adele killed and have Dottie collect as the beneficiary on her insurance policy. That should give them more than enough to pay Joe's fee and split a nice profit amongst the family.

It's a straitforward plan, except that Joe doesn't take jobs on spec. Dealing with the kind of people he does, it makes sense that he would be more of a cash-up-front operator. Joe takes a shine, however, to Dottie, and agrees to do the job in exchange for her favors. Dottie actually likes Joe, and soon he's like a member of the family, hanging around the trailer, spending nights with Dottie, and preparing to murder Adele. The family's various white-trash entanglements and general stupidity, however, get in the way of a smoothly-running plan.

This is actually a tightly-crafted tale of murder and deception, neo-noir at its best. The Smith clan are a sordid enough bunch that, other than Dottie, it should be hard to feel sorry for any of them. Solid acting on the parts of Hirsh and Church, however, make it possible to feel symathetic towards even these low-lifes. Joe, however, is really creepy. McConaughey plays Joe as a cool, collected killer, but his wooing of the intellectually disabled Dottie has an ick factor that is off the charts. Between Joe's weird, domineering seduction style and the gratuitous violence in the film, this is not something to watch on a full stomach.

At the end of the day, “Killer Joe” is a perfectly-paced black-comedy thriller. It's too lurid by half, but a great narrative and great acting make it required viewing for the neo-noir fan who can stomach it.

3.5 stars out of 5

The Ghost and The Darkness (1996) **

Memory plays tricks on you, some big, and some small. In this case, I could have sworn that the name of this movie was “The Ghost IN the Darkness.” It makes sense. But the title is “The Ghost AND The Darkness,” because the African and Indian workers who were terrorized by a pair of man-eating lions in this tale named one of the lions The Ghost and one of them The Darkness.

The story is set in Kenya, in 1898. British Lt. Col John Henry Patterson (Val Kilmer) is an engineer sent to build a railroad bridge over the Tsavo River. Under his capable command, things go swimmingly until a pair of man-eating lions start killing off his workers. Construction grinds to a halt, and all of Patterson's energies become consumed by trying to kill the lions. The beasts really come to seem evil spirits, as they repeatedly evade Patterson's traps and feed on his workers. Even a famous American hunter (Michael Douglas) is stymied by the lions.

The true story is fascinating, but the movie is a hot mess. Val Kilmer was in the middle of a divorce and fresh off the legendary disaster that was “The Island of Dr. Moreau.” He just looks exhausted, and while that sometimes fits his character, it mostly just leaves us with bad acting of a bad script. Michael Douglas does the best he can with the cringey lines he has to recite, but there is only so much you can do with a horrible script. Screenwriter William Goldman is known for wonderful films like “Butch Cassidy and the Sundance Kid” and “The Princess Bride,” but with “The Ghost and The Darkness,” he takes an amazing true story and mangles it. Even director Stephen Hopkins admitted the film “was a mess... I haven't been able to watch it.”

The historical true story of John Henry Patterson and the lions is one outrageous tale. Those two cats really did manage to stymie the efforts of the British Empire for a brief period. The number of men they killed is unknown. Patterson, in his book “The Man-Eaters of Tsavo,” claims the number was 135. The railroad company only verified 28 deaths. Either way, the terror they created was undeniable, and it remains one of the most notorious examples of man-eating behavior in wild animals. Patterson killed both lions himself, without the help of any fictitious American hunter (sorry, Michael Douglas), and their stuffed remains are on display at Chicago's Field Museum of Natural History. It remains a mystery why these two cats developed such a taste for human flesh. Almost as big a mystery is how a legendary screenwriter and a couple of talented actors turned this amazing true story into such a mess.

2 stars out of 5

Tammy and the T-Rex (1994) ***

 

Before "The Velocipastor," there was “Tammy and the T-Rex,” a goofy, bizarre, and delightful dinosaur-themed movie about teenage love and weird science. A baby-faced Paul Walker (7 years before “The Fast and the Furious”) plays Michael, a high-school football star. A run-in with some hoodlums and a mad scientist leads to Michael's brain being installed in an animatronic T-Rex, and it is up to his girlfriend Tammy (Denise Richards) to save him.

This is a pure cult classic. The story goes that Director Stewart Raffill was approached by a theme park owner who had gotten his hands on an animatronic dinosaur. The T-Rex was scheduled to be shipped to Texas in 2 weeks, and the guy suggested they try to make a movie with it first. In record time, Raffill wrote a script around the beast and filmed a low-budget movie.

Is it good? Well, that depends on your expectations. It's really dumb, but I found it silly, funny, and an unmitigated good time. You may recognize Terry Kiser from “Weekend at Bernie's” as the mad scientist, and he actually classes the film up a bit, as does J. Jay Saunders as the black sheriff, named Sheriff Black. Denise Richards can't act her way out of a wet paper sack, but she sure looks good. Paul Walker is not much of a thespian, either, although he doesn't actually get a lot of screen time. That animatronic dinosaur is amazing, though! It really has a lot of movement and expressions, and may be the best actor in the film.

This is not a must-see like, say “UHF” or “The Adventures of Buckaroo Banzai Across the 8^th Dimension” or even “The Velocipastor,” but if you dig a goofy cult classic, you can put this one on your list.

3 stars out of 5

Oldboy (2003) ****

 

At the juncture of Greek tragedy and “The Count of Monte Cristo” sits “Oldboy”, a classic of Korean cinema. I've been hearing about the film for years, but I was put off by reading that it is the second film in a trilogy by writer/director Park Chan-wook (who also did "The Handmaiden"). I figured I had to watch the first movie before seeing “Oldboy”. That turns out not to be a concern at all. Chan-wook's “Revenge Trilogy” is a trilogy only in the loosest sense of the word, with the films (“Sympathy for Mr. Vengeance”, “Oldboy”, and “Lady Vengeance”) linked only by the theme of revenge. “Oldboy” stands just fine on its own. With that out of the way, I finally got a chance to watch it on Netflix, and it turns out to be much more convoluted and just plain weird than the revenge flick I was expecting.

Oh Dae-su is an ordinary businessman, maybe a bit of a cad and a drunk, who finds himself kidnapped and imprisoned with no explanation. For 15 years he is kept in a solitary room with no explanation of why and no human contact. When he finally gets out, he seeks his revenge. This is the bare outline, and I don't want to give much more plot than that and ruin any of the surprises.

The violence is plentiful in “Oldboy”, but this is much more than a kung-fu movie. Oh Dae-su has to solve the mystery of who imprisoned him and why, and the mystery turns out to be much more twisted than you would expect. There's a love story in there as well. And did I mention the kung-fu? Oh Dae-su spends his years of confinement training, and he kicks some serious ass once he hits the streets. The cinematography is amazing, and the film is especially known for a fighting scene in a corridor that is done in one, long shot. Be warned, though, this is not all lighthearted chopsocky action. There are some very disturbing scenes of torture and mutilation, and the plot takes some really perverse twists.

The story can also be hard to follow at times. As a non-Asian viewer, I sometimes struggled to tell who was who, especially as the story jumps back and forth through the years. It doesn't help that Oh Dae-su's enemy, who is supposed to be his age, is played by a much younger actor. That was an odd casting choice.

“Oldboy” is not for everyone, and I don't think I would re-watch it anytime soon. Once is enough! Even with its flaws, though, I would consider this required viewing for real cinephiles. The writing, cinematography, and mix of violence and humor conspire to make this a genre classic.

4 stars out of 5

Horrible Bosses 2 (2014) ***

 

I resisted watching this sequel when it came out, because, really? “Horrible Bosses” was a delightfully funny movie, but it did not seem to demand a sequel. I figured “Horrible Bosses 2” was a blatant cash grab that was bound to suck. It turns out I was both right and wrong. This sequel is totally gratuitous, but it is more fun than a barrel full of monkeys!

Nick (Jason Bateman), Kurt (Jason Sudeikis), and Dale (Charlie Day), the would-be criminals who tried to kill their horrible bosses in the first film, are trying to become bosses themselves. With an invention called the Shower Buddy, the trio go into business with investors Bert and Rex Hanson (Christoph Waltz and Chris Pine). This father/son duo wind up screwing the boys over, and to get revenge, they decide to leap back into the world of crime by kidnapping Rex for ransom.

Objectively, “Horrible Bosses 2” is not a good movie. It doesn't even have an interesting title. It was a pretty typical studio cash-grab, shamelessly meant to capitalize on the success of the first movie. “Horrible Bosses” director Seth Gordon did not wind up returning for the sequel. He was replaced by Sean Anders, who has a couple of reasonably-respectable writing credits (“We're the Millers” and “Hot Tub Time Machine”), but whose directing filmography includes features like “Daddy's Home” and “Daddy's Home 2”. The original screenwriters were also replaced by Anders and his writing partner John Morris.

The thing is, none of that seems to matter. The first movie was a machine-gun barrage of hit-or-miss jokes. Unbound by any requirements of taste or logic, it was free to just be funny, and it was dumb but highly-entertaining. It's the same with the sequel. I wasn't proud to be laughing out loud at these nitwits, but there I was. It helps that they got the whole gang back together, including Jennifer Aniston, Kevin Spacey, and Jamie Foxx, and Chris Pine is a great new addition. Many critics wrote this off as a massive waste of an A-list cast, but for my money it's an example of a skimpily-written film succeeding on the charms of a talented ensemble.

There is no “Horrible Bosses 3”, and thank goodness. It's hard to imagine this franchise holding up for a third outing. It was hard to imagine it holding up for this sequel, but in its own, sophomoric way, it does. If you want a story with heart and intelligent humor, this is not it. If you just want to giggle yourself silly, “Horrible Bosses 2” may be your jam.

3 stars out of 5

Waterworld (1995) ***

 

There's a collection of movies out there that are known for being bad. This is strange, when you think about it, because, really, there are a LOT of bad movies. Most of them are bad. Most of those simply fade away into obscurity, while a handful are “so bad they are good” and achieve cult status. Another handful get written into history as famously bad films, and 1995's”Waterworld” is one of those.

On a future Earth covered in water due to global warming, Kevin Costner plays a loner, the Mariner, wandering the endless ocean on his sailboat, growing limes in a potted tree, recycling his own urine, and eking out an existence on a planet that is no longer designed for humans. There are other lone wolves out there, and then there are people banded together pathetically on small, floating islands. There are also pirates called Smokers, led by the sadistic Deacon (Dennis Hopper), who have access to gasoline and zip around on motorboats and jet skis, preying on the weak.

The one dream shared by all of these miserable humans is the dream of dry land. The story converges around a young girl (Tina Majorino) whose tattoo may be the key to finding dry land in the vast ocean. Everyone wants the girl, including the Smokers, and the Mariner gets roped into helping her and her adopted mom (Jeanne Tripplehorn).

There is nothing wrong with the story setup or the cast. “Waterworld”'s problems largely center on execution. Costner has been accused of wooden acting, but in fairness, he is playing the Mariner as a loner, isolated from other humans. His reticence makes sense, but it does keep us at arms length from our hero. No one else in the cast is given enough to do to let us live the story through them, so it winds up being hard to get really invested in the story. The film also feels oddly claustrophobic, given that it takes place on an open ocean that covers the entire globe. It's weird that with all that open water, these characters keep running into each other. It's also a LONG movie at 2 hours 15 minutes, and even with all the swashbuckling, it feels long.

Still, “Waterworld” is not without charm. Dennis Hopper chews scenery delightfully as the main villain, and there's plenty of action. This is reasonably-diverting entertainment, better than a lot of action movies. I agree with reviewers who have said that the film deserves to be reassessed. It is not so much legendarily bad, as it was disappointing in its time. “Waterworld”'s bad reputation stems from a combination of a massive budget along with the attendant hype that created expectations that this film simply could not meet.

3 stars out of 5