Table 19 (2017) **1/2

 

Scrolling through my Netflix options one night, I paused on this film, because I saw it was by Mark and Jay Duplass. Turns out the Duplass brothers did write the screenplay and were meant to direct, but at some point, they were out. The production company brought in a guy named Jeffrey Blitz to rewrite the script and direct.

An ensemble cast including Anna Kendrick, Craig Robinson, Lisa Kudrow, and Stephen Merchant find themselves at a wedding reception seated way in the back at table 19. This turns out to be the table for random guests with minimal connection to the bride and groom, people who, as one character puts it, “Should have known to just RSVP that they weren't coming, after picking out something tasteful from the registry.” If you are guessing that these misfits wind up bonding, working through their issues, and forming an unlikely family – Bingo! It's basically “The Breakfast Club” at a wedding.

I won't ruin the film's few surprises by saying any more about the plot. It's really not that great a movie. Some of the plot elements don't make a lot of sense, and the actual sound mixing is dodgy, making it hard to hear what characters are saying at times. Still, a talented cast makes up for the bad script enough to make “Table 19” reasonably entertaining, and I'm giving it an extra ½ star for being less than an hour and a half long.

I assume there was some controversy at some point about the Duplass brothers leaving this film, but no one is talking about it, as a casual google search did not produce any stories about why there was a change. I wonder if it would have been a better film if the brothers had stuck around.

2.5 stars out of 5

28 Years Later: The Bone Temple (2026) **** --Spoiler Alert--

 

This film picks up where 2025's "28 Years Later" left off, so it really isn't possible to talk about this movie without giving spoilers about the previous film.

“28 Years Later” left Spike (Alfie Williams) having just met some colorful, blond warriors. Well, it turns out they are a murder cult, wandering the British countryside fearlessly killing Infected and torturing and murdering any un-infected that they find. Spike is given no choice but to join them, but he is looking for a way out. Meanwhile, Dr Kelson (Ralph Fiennes) was living in something of a detente with the local Infected. We find him now trying to develop more of a relationship with the Alpha, whom he dubs Sampson.

Up til now, the “28” franchise films have treated the Infected pretty much like every other zombie movie: mindless beasts to be killed en masse, video-game-style. In “The Bone Temple,” we are reminded that the Infected are not zombies. They are not reanimated corpses. They are living people stricken with a virus. Through Dr. Kelson's budding friendship with Sampson, we start to peel back the layers of what is going on in the mind of someone with the Rage Virus.

If the monsters are a little more human in this sequel, the humans are more monstrous than ever. Jack O'Connell (“Sinners”) is menacingly charismatic as cult leader Sir Jimmy Crystal, but his cult's brutality is hard to watch. Even for a zombie movie, this film has scenes that will make you want to wash out your eyeballs.

If you can get past the gore and violence (If you are this far into this film franchise, I suspect you can.), “The Bone Temple” continues this story in a way that, even after 4 films, makes me want to keep watching. 

 

4 stars out of 5 

The Running Man (2025) **1/2

 

A while back, I re-watched the 1987 Arnold Schwarzeneggar movie "The Running Man." Those Schwarzeneggar action movies were big hits with Gen-X when we were teens, but as a grown man, I found “The Running Man” only mildly entertaining. It's too bad, really, as the story concept is a good one. I was excited when I saw that they were rebooting the movie, with Glen Powell starring. Powell (“Hit Man”) has a lot of charisma, and director Edgar Wright has a slew of excellent credits, including “Shaun of the Dead”, “Scott Pilgrim vs the World”, and “Baby Driver.” I had reason to be optimistic.

The essential concept of “The Running Man” remains the same, but Wright updates and changes the details quite a bit, compared to the 1987 film. Powell plays Ben Richards, who this time is not a convict, but a working Joe blacklisted for talking to a union rep. He is one of many desperate, unemployed people in an economy even more K-shaped than the one we have now. Richards and his family live in a shitty, urban desert with limited access to healthcare, while another portion of the populace live in a nice, clean, walled city, with armed guards keeping the poor out. Needing money for his sick daughter, Richards signs up to compete on The Running Man, a game show where a schmo like him tries to go on the run and stay alive for a month while being pursued by professional Hunters, bounty hunters, and the public at large. The show is a massive hit with an American audience that loves watching runners get messily murdered.

So, does Wright improve on the 1987 film? Just barely. I did find this version of the game, with runners being hunted in the world at large rather than on a set, more compelling, and it is apparently more true to Stephen King's 1982 novel. Some might say that the theme of a big corporation essentially running America, controlling the media and polluting the environment while a huge portion of the population struggles to find work and healthcare is very timely. Others might point out that these themes are presented in a hackneyed, puerile, 6th-grade-reading-level manner that does not live up to Edgar Wright's previous work. The film is clearly pitched to the level of young teens and tweens, and I suppose they need movies, too, but I was hoping for more.

2.5 stars out of 5