WIDOWS is just a delight to watch from beginning to end. This is the exact opposite from Steve McQueen’s last film 12 Years A Slave, which was a chore to sit through. This is no Ocean’s 8, this is a hard edged crime/heist thriller with commanding performances from all those involved, especially from our lead, played by Viola Davis. There are twists and turns, there are some real nail biters, there are some laughs, it’s never boring, it’s really everything you could want in a movie. Movies either need to be masterpieces of art, or they need to be masterpieces in entertainment. Anything in between, is not really a movie to me. It might still be a movie, but it’s a forgettable one. This film reminded me of films such as Heat, or Casino, or L.A. Confidential, or Scarface, classics ya’ll (that’s right, I just slipped in a Spring Breakers reference). Widows also has to be one of my favorite films of the year. The movie is over 2 hrs and I felt like I was only in the theater for an hour.

Though it does have a couple of awkward moments, which include awkward make out scene right at the beginning and then about right in the middle of the film, everything else shines so brightly, it’s almost near perfect. The film is about a woman, played by Viola Davis, whose husband, played by Liam Neeson, gets killed along with his crime cohorts in a robbery/heist attempt gone wrong. Neeson’s character had apparently stolen $2 million from a would be politician, but the money was incinerated in the fire that killed all of them. That would be politician, who is really just a gang lord in disguise, gives Viola Davis a month to get him his money back. In her late husband’s safe deposit box, she finds his notebook that details all of his previous jobs, plus most of the one that he was going to do after the one where he ends up getting killed. He contacts the other wives, widows, of Neeson’s crime cohorts, and basically forces them to pull this job with her, so she can pay off the gang lord politician and have a little bit of chunk change for her to keep on living the good life. The movie moves at a rapid fire pace, with an all star cast that includes Viola Davis, Michelle Rodriguez, Cynthia Enviro, Elizabeth Debicki, Brian Tyree Henry, Robert Duvall, Colin Ferrell, Jacki Weaver, Jon Berenthal, Carrie Coon, Garret Dillihunt, and recent Oscar nominee Daniel Kaluuya. All get pretty good screentime (ok, techinically not true, I don’t want to spoil anything, but you know what I mean) and they all act their pants off, so performance wise Widows is very strong.

The film doesn’t go overload on the action either. It is in the parts where it needed to be. The tension is fantastic in the parts where it needed to be. The twists and turns are set up and paid off well and the film thankfully doesn’t have 20 different endings to show where all of these characters ended up in the end. And a lot of it is showing the audience, not just telling us (something The Crimes of Grindelwald really failed at this weekend for me). A couple of tiny characters are left either hanging and we are meant to assume in our own minds what happens of them or short pieces of well placed dialogue fill in the gaps. I loved how this movie didn’t need everything tied up in one big bow and the only dialogue heavy explanation parts are with Colin Farrell talking about his political strides, which is necessary to the film since political jargin can get really complicated on screen if not relayed to the audience correctly.

The only one problem I had in the film is this moment in the middle of the film where these two characters, that just met literally a minute earlier, start making out a little after grief. I thought it was a play by one of them for something to pay off later in the film, but no, it was just a little character moment where everything was very overwhelming so they needed a little emotional release. I’d like to watch the entire movie in that context again to see if the scene works better, but I almost uttered a WTF. Thankfully the scene doesn’t last long and shortly ends after that so it didn’t take me out of the movie as much as I thought it was going to do at first. A couple more awkward moments happen when characters slap each other and there is some awkward silence afterward, but that is a minor nitpick.

Some people (men mostly) are telling me they might not want to see the movie because it looks like a feminist film. It really isn’t one and even if it were, who cares? Go see it. Feminists deserve their films too. However, I don’t think it is that feminist because A. There is a message about power with both sexes in the film, and everything is treated quite evenly. B. This movie isn’t a “all men are bad” type of thing at all (even though at parts it may feel like it, there are some good men in the film, and there are even some shady women). And C. I don’t think a totally feminist film would have any nudity in it at all. One of the main Widows goes nude for nearly 2 minutes with a guy that’s paying her for sex and companionship. But maybe it would still be considered a feminist film because of that message that comes out of that? I don’t know. But again, who cares if you think it’s a feminist film. The point is it’s a great film, don’t be biased on that shit, makes you seem a little odd.

There is really nothing else to say other than if you like crime movies, if you like any of the actors you have read that are in it, seen in the trailer, or read on the poster, if you like heist movies, if you like entertaining movies, if you want to be on the edge of your seat with nail biting tension, then go see Widows. It definitely won’t bore you, unlike another movie that came out today that involves fucking wizards and magic. You’d think it would be the opposite, right?

Out of all the wide releases this weekend, instead of seeing the umpteenth version of the Grinch or a unnecessary reboot of a Dragon Tattoo no one asked for, I decided to see J.J. Abram’s produced OVERLORD, which I think was once billed as being in the Cloverfield universe somehow, but really isn’t…it is it’s own unique picture. This is essentially a B-movie plot you’d find in a SciFi Channel Original or some straight to video schlock in a $5 discount bin, but with an A+ production value. What I’m meaning to say is that I enjoyed it quite a bit, and in parts even found it to be great and masterful. At points it even got to being in the realm of fucking badassdom. If I could compare it to another movie, I’d say look at what From Dusk Till Dawn accomplished. From Dust Till Dawn is essentially two movies. The first half of the film is a story of two criminal brothers on a killing/crime spree, and then at about the half way point, it’s a film about surviving the night by a group of vampires. This film starts out as a World War II gritty man on a mission film, and then about half way through…

Well, if you’ve seen the trailers, it looks like zombies right? Trust me when I saw there is a lot more too it than that and when they who, what, where, when, and how is explained, everything is much more satisfying than all the promotional material led you to believe. Some people are calling this is Tarantino remade Inglourious Basterds into a fucked up Sci-Fi B movie, and they happen to be way off. Tarantino has that edge of not taking his films too seriously (funny tidbit is that he wrote and co-starred in From Dusk Till Dawn), always winking at the camera every five or ten minutes. Overlord takes itself completely seriously. No nods or winks to the camera. No subtle dialogue inferring how ridiculous this all is. Completely serious. The first half of the movie completely works as a small scale yet large consequence little 4 man on a mission movie. The plot? To get to this church run by Nazi’s to take down the communication tower before D-Day. The film just starts you in the shit, with troopers about to jump off the plane right in the middle of chaos. No scenes of exposition before about how everyone got there (thank God), instead we just learn about the characters through their action in the film and through little breathing room bits of dialogue the film has (always a great film technique, exposition scenes should’ve died in the 90s).

Obviously what they find there isn’t all that its been cracked up to be. And that’s where I’ll leave it. Again, if you’ve seen the trailers and stuff, you’ve seen some pretty messed up horrific shit, but story wise you’ve only scratched the surface. And that’s where I in parts loved this film, it defies expectations in some areas. It defies expectations some in who lives and who dies. It defies expectations with Wyatt Russell’s (Kurt Russell’s son) Ford character, several times actually. It defies expectations with the “zombies.” The film does have some problems though, one of them being that the four war boys run into this French young woman that takes them in and hides them from the Germans and reveals that her aunt is very “sick” and to not go into her room. Ultimately, I thought this would have some huge payoff in the end but it doesn’t and is very anti-climatic what happens to her. Sometimes, specifically at the beginning, the film was really dark and it was hard at points to see what was going on. And some of the dialogue is a bit bland and choppy at times. But those are minor complaints with how much entertainment value this film has.

I will go even on the record saying that you might enjoy this even if you don’t like horror movies that much. The film is just a lot of fun even though it is completely taking itself seriously. There are a bunch of great other things in this film too. Wyatt Russell has never been better in a film (he is currently on AMC Lodge 49 and played Channing Tatum’s bromance in 22 Jump Street). With his performance here, I say if they ever want to reboot or do another true sequel to the “Escape From: films, that he could even take over his father’s role as Snake Plissken. The real main lead, played by Joven Adepo, is played with perfect innocence, doing what is morally right, until those situations come up where you just have to fight for your life. The young french woman, played by a newcomer, Mathilde Ollivier, plays that bad ass sassy no damsel in distress role perfectly, and John Magaro and Pilou Asbaek play a great comic relief and main bad guy respectively.

Oh, and the make up/CGI effects in this are just fucking amazing and killer. Wonderful job. I’m glad it wasn’t all CGI and I think it could’ve been distracting, instead it does a near perfect mixture, very nice to look at. The action is good, the last 25 minutes is just one big chase action set piece that was very well well directed. And I loved how the movie doesn’t end on how conventional action/horror movies would end. It’s just a very well made fun/serious film that has a lot of heart and originality. A breath of fresh air in a weekend full of umpteenth tries and reboots that I probably will not see in the theater (I had a ticket for Girl In The Spider’s Web on Friday, but returned it, as scathing reviews and my tiredness led me to choose some shut eye, I have no intention of rescheduling). So yeah, Overlord was pretty damn good. Not a masterpiece by any means, but I can see people discovering it at a later date and watching it over and over again. Check it out now if you can though, especially if you can think of a theater with really good sound.

CAN YOU EVER FORGIVE ME? is a simple little true story criminal tale with career making performances from Melissa McCarthy and Richard E. Grant. I liked it. Go see it. Maybe a nomination or two. The End.

Just kidding. Sometimes simple is a little better and a little refreshing. The movie is based on the true story of autobiographical writer Lee Israel, who’s career was so short lived, she quickly ran out of money, and in the early 90s, decided to make forgeries of letters that were “written” by deceased authors and actors, and sold them for top dollar. When reading up on her she actually had a career before becoming an autobiographical writer, mainly being a freelance journalist for magazines and in 1960s and beyond. But the movie doesn’t touch on that, it focuses right as she decides to make forgeries for money.

The movie is very tight (perfect run time), entertaining, and I was surprised about how well the humor works in this movie. I laughed out loud quite a bit, specifically the parts where she monologues the forgeries she is writing. The film is very formulaic, so if there are any movie buffs out there that can’t stand that anymore and want to see something different, you might not want to check this out. It has the typical rise and fall plot + an epilogue redemption sort of thing. Very simple fare, but I feel that if the film is entertaining to boot and the performances are more than average, then those familiar beats can be forgiven.

And the performances are where it is at. This is easily Melissa McCarthy’s best performance. Ever. Yes, better than Bridesmaids. She is fantastic here and is able to use her comedic ability to her advantage and actually not try to just Adam Sandler up everything this time. She makes Lee Israel somewhat sort of a sympathetic character even though we really should have no sympathy for her. Whether she gets nominated or not Oscar wise just depends on the other performances that have yet to be released. In a saner Hollywood community, Richard E. Grant would be a shoo in for best supporting actor as a old gay, not friend, but aquaintance, that helps her sometimes with selling her forgeries. Their chemistry is wonderful, playing off of each other on screen.

So like this simple little movie, my review will be that simple. If I spoil any of the forgery fun then I should be put in movie jail. I enjoyed this little film and while I wouldn’t buy it, I think if I could it on television or Netflix sometime I would definitely watch it through. Completely recommend this if you are a Melissa McCarthy fan, but I swear if she puts her husband in one more film…yeah yeah it’s cute that they work together on everything, but like Adam Sandler’s friends, it’s starting to get a tad annoying.

Unless Christian Bale blows everyone including me away as Dick Cheney in the film Vice that comes out late December, give the Best Actor Oscar to Rami Malek for BOHEMIAN RHAPSODY. Easily. Within the first five minutes of the movie, I no longer saw Rami Malek, I saw him as Freddie Mercury and couldn’t believe it was someone just playing a role anymore. I was speechless by the end of the film, and could’ve watched a whole different movie with him playing Freddy Mercury for another two hours (we’ll get to that later). The rest of the movie? It’s a standard, very, very fictionalized bio pic of Queen. It does nothing new on screen that you haven’t seen in a musical bio pic before. I’ve heard that a lot of what is on screen, either didn’t really happen, or is a bombastic take on what did really happen. And if you look on Rotten Tomatoes and see the semi-low score from critics, you’ll know that was really their chief complaint. But if you look at the box office, and the audience score on RT, you’ll know that people really didn’t give a shit whether it was fictionalized or not. Me? I’m somewhere in the middle. The movie is never ever boring, they certainly get the music right, and I consider it a privilege seeing Rami Malek’s tremendous work. However, I would now ask that some studio re hire Malek while he is still young looking, and get him to do a more serious bio pic, R-rated, more into the darkness of his life and soul that what I just saw in this.

I think a lot of people would agree with me that if you don’t know Queen, you don’t know music. Several of their songs are stamped into my memory so hard that every so often one of them gets stuck in my head for several days at a time. But if you want their real story, I would suggest watching interviews with the rest of the band, or people that were close to them, heck, maybe even their Wikipedia page, because I believe you will get more truth out of those articles and sound bites than you did in this film. I’m not going to do a full comparison on here, but it’s safe to say that a lot of the ways they came up with songs in the movie, didn’t happen the way you see it in this movie. And yes, I get that with a lot of true stories, filmmakers have to bombastically put fictionalized accounts in the film, because if they didn’t, the studios wouldn’t know how to market the movie, and the movie wouldn’t make any money. Case in point, this movie made $51 million this weekend and is the second highest musical bio pic opening weekend ever. What if a different movie was made, a more down to Earth version, hard Rated R, looking really deeply into Freddie Mercury’s troubled life? Would it have made more or even as much as this one did? I’m very highly doubting it.

What the studio probably should and could do now, but won’t, is have someone write a more personal Freddie Mercury bio pic now, Queen being still in it, but they take a back burner to Freddy Mercury’s homosexuality and AIDS battle, and yet still re cast Rami Malek in the role, and make a much much better thought provoking film than this one. They now have the foundation of the box office success of Bohemian Rhapsody to go on, and Malek’s fantastic performance. That won’t happen though, because the studio won’t want to take a risk with a R-rated more true story pic, and that is sad. That being said, this movie does have re watch value, but that is only because I could watch Rami Malek as Freddie for hours and never be bored, and it is fun listening to all of Queen’s hits over and over and over. How is everybody else’s acting compared to Rami Malek’s? The word I would use is serviceable but completely forgettable. Lucy Boyton (Sing Street) couldn’t been fantastic if she was feature in the film more. The only one memorable role would be that of Mike Myers as a fictional producer that doesn’t want to use Bohemian Rhapsody as Queen’s new featured single on their new album because “it’s too long and nobody will bang their heads to this song.” And the reason why this scene is memorable is just because it is Mike Myers winking to the fact that him and Garth head banged to Bohemian Rhapsody in Wayne’s World back in the early 90s and made the song even more popular than it already was.

The movie is colorful, vibrant, and yes, well directed by Bryan Singer even though the studio is trying to keep his name out of it as much as possible due to his aggressive behavior on set and those gay rape allegations from years ago. Other than Malek’s performance, the Live Aid performance at the very end, and the music, the movie is just standard and adds nothing new to bio pic genre or even film in general. It’s still memorable but on the cusp of being forgettable due to the fact that a lot of things are fictionalized. It does go over Freddie Mercury’s homosexuality and contracting AIDS, but it didn’t do it enough. There is different or another film in there somewhere, 30 minutes longer, with Malek still in the lead role, but more in depth with what was going on with him personally, a film that really got inside its head. This should’ve been that movie, so while I’m a little bit disappointed, I still got something special with Rami Malek. Sometimes you just have to accept the silver lining.

BEAUTIFUL BOY has a strong second act that is unfortunately has a very uneven first act narrative lead in. It’s still a decent film, filled with great performances, especially Timothy Chalamet, who I think will definitely be a name you’ll see as a supporting actor nominee during this year’s Oscar’s. But there are plenty other drug addiction movies that are for more intricate and moving that are more worth your time *coughRequiemForADreamcough* but this isn’t a terrible film by any means, just really, really unfocused.

The problem with the first act/first half of the film is that it jumps around in time almost every two or three minutes, becoming very disjointed and hard to get into the characters or the seriousness of the story. I believe that if the movie started chronologically, and maybe a flashback or two near the very end of the film, the movie could’ve been masterful. Instead, the time jumps stop about half way into the film, and it is too little too late for the movies second half to complete earn the audiences emotional impact it is supposed to have.

The movie is based on memoirs by both a father and his son, that deal with his son’s meth addiction and how it affected not just him but everyone around them. The movie definitely made me want to read the memoirs, hoping that they had more focus and didn’t jump back and forth in time constantly and too much like this one did. I have a feeling their thoughts and feelings were better constructed and actually had a smoother flow in the books than this movie did.

I’m honestly surprised the studio on this film didn’t see the first cut of the film and asked that the director, Felix Van Groeningen, unscramble it all and come up with a better cut. I looked up this director to see if I’ve seen any of his other work, and I haven’t. Unfortunately I don’t know if this guy’s vision on this project will get him anywhere, as I feel that anybody could’ve directed this, as it seemed like just another “point and shoot” affair. Also, and this might be just a side nit pick here, but the musical choices at certain scenes during this film felt highly inappropriate and awful, not even nearly matching the drama unfolding onscreen.

It is the performances that elevate this movie from being just mediocre, to half way decent. Steve Carrell delivers another astonishing performance to his already luxurious career. And even though he has had stronger performances in other films, namely Foxcatcher and Little Miss Sunshine, he still proves that sometime in the future, with the right role, he might be an Oscar winner. It is last year’s Oscar nominee for Call Me By Your Name Timothy Chalamet who completely and utterly steals the show. He is amazing here and every scene he is in, no matter how jumbled up it was, he was utterly captivating. (side note: Amy Ryan play Steve Carrell’s ex wife and mother to Timothy Chalamet’s character, which took me out of the film a little bit, because I started imagining Michael Scott and Holly Flax’s marriage after Dunder Mifflin going extremely wrong)

Anyway, if you need a recent cautionary tale about drug/meth addiction, this is half way decent, and is worth watching just for Carrell’s and Chalamet’s performance. Maybe the first half of the film will not bother everybody. I’ve told all of you many a time again that I look too hard into these things. The jumping constantly back and forth and time and not having a solid narrative structure might be lost on most audiences, and they won’t care. Because if there is one thing to say about this movie, it is never boring, which can’t be said about a lot of the films I have seen in 2018.

If you’ve ever thought to yourself, “Damn, I would love to see Nic Cage go full Nic Cage and have a chainsaw battle with someone!” Then guess, what? This movie is right up your alley. This is a very simple revenge tale that is very complicated and beautiful visually. But be warned, this is a very slow burn movie. It is two hours long and you really don’t get into the thick of it until the last 45 minutes of the movie. But the wait is realistic in nature, and so so worth it. Nicholas Cage is a very interesting actor. The question has been pondered whether he is a genius in his craft, or an outright lunatic that is just lucky, or a giant fraud, or a combination of the three or hell…maybe all of them. I think its Nicholas Cage’s best performance in years, and a nice unique revenge tale in the seas and oceans of all other revenge tales that will float on the surface and not get lost in the deep.

Like I said, the film is simple. A weird, demonic, psychotic, religious cult takes Nicholas Cage, who plays a de-forester named Red, and his wife, Mandy, hostage, and when she refuses the sexual advance of the cult leader, they kill her and leave him for dead. Big mistake. Nicholas Cage then crafts the most bad ass fucking axe/scythe you have ever seen with an awesome crossbow and goes after the motherfuckers. That’s all you need to know. Where the movie distinguishes itself from other revenge tales is all in the visuals. The movie is a visual masterpiece to the eyes. The dark pinks/red/other hues are amazing. And the film even uses some animation in some of its sequences, giving it it’s own stamp of individuality.

The film is a very slow burn, it’s not like everything happens in the first 15 minutes and then you get to see Nic Cage go fucking bat shit nuts for an hour and 45 minutes. The film takes its sweet and deserved time, giving you insane religious monologues from the cultist psychopaths and some excellent Nic Cage one liners while he is talking his plan of revenge with the welcome return of Bill Duke, you know, the guy that gets his head blasted off near the end of the very first Predator movie. But when the movie gets going, it’s a full Nic Cage bloody spectacle. The kills are fucking awesome and brilliant, and I dare you to stop yourself from being transfixed and hypnotized by Cage’s psychotic and vengeful eyes.

That’s all I really have to say. The movie is fucking weird too, so be prepared for that. Some people will be scratching their heads, wondering how in the fuck I could possibly like a movie like this. It’s just one of those films that is pure sadistic art that I can’t keep myself from liking and just really enjoying the ride. Any Nic Cage fans out there, if you miss this, you’re missing everything.

Disclaimer: I have seen Dario Aregento’s original film, so keep that in mind when reading my review. With all the remakes, reboots, re-dos…what have you, it’s honestly starting to get tiring. It’s tiring with all these different reactions from people that have never studied film, or haven’t seen the originals to these, and then coming out of the theater proclaiming, “It’s the best fucking original thing they have ever seen.” And then you chime into the conversation and ask them if they’ve seen one of the other three versions of the film (if you don’t know by now I’m talking about the overrated A Star Is Born, I can’t help you), they are like, “holy shit, this is a remake?” And then they shrug it off. A Star Is Born may be a little different with the songs and music but it is beat by beat the exact same movie has the other three versions. If you still like it even though you’ve seen maybe one or all of the other versions, then congrats, but don’t say it’s original.

The point is, this new SUSPIRIA, I’m going to give a good recommendation, because it actually tries to do something different with the material. It is not the same, beat for beat, of the original. Especially the third act. The third act is likely to make or break you, kind of like earlier this year’s Annihilation, but we’ll get to the third act in a bit and what I thought of it. But this version of Suspiria was new, bold, and unpredictable. There are some really, really great scenes in this, and some of them you will hauntingly never forget. The scene where we really get to see what happens with the first victim in the film where she can’t/refuses to play the part of the ballet protagonist. Extravagantly fantastic and gruesome and scary.

Sort of got ahead of myself, with some of you reading this not even realizing this is a remake and not knowing what it is about. Basically, and I guess *minor spoilers* on this, it’s about a coven of witches that recruit young women with this famous prestigious ballet dance studio. *end of spoilers* That is all I’m going to say because the less you know going into it, the better. But do me a favor and watch the fantastic original before you watch this. It is a very nice companion piece without you having felt like you watched the same thing for 4 hours. Oh, by the way, this movie is wayyy longer than the original. The original I believe is an hour and 40 minutes long, this one was two and a half hours.

Which is where I’m going to get into the problems with this movie that make me exclaim that the original is way better, however, please don’t take my word for it, because some people (especially some famous horror “officionados” have said this is better. So if you are a true and deep fan of the original, please go see this, you will at least appreciate it for what it is trying to do. Like I do. Yes, the movie is too long, there are scenes I can think of now they could’ve completely trimmed out and made a much tighter film. Tilda Swinton plays three parts in this movie, she plays Madame Blanc, one of the head ballet/witch instructors, and she plays the male psychologist that is looking into the disappearance of one of the students there, who is played by Chloe Grace Moretz (who is barely in the film). She also has a third role as well, but I’m not going to reveal who that is, suffice to say you’ll know it when you see it. Tilda Swinton is amazing as the head ballet character, and really god damn awesomely creepy in the secret role, but as the male psychologist, not so much. In fact every time this Dr. Josef Klemperer came out screen, it completely took me out of the movie. The make up effects on her to play him look awful and she couldn’t get her voice deep enough for me to accept this character as male and as a real person. Huge problem as this character has a shit load of screen time and one of the main plots in the film.

Also, the third act, which is bat shit crazy, and which might make or break you, is a little unfocused direction and camera work wise. The ending, writing and story wise, completely works for me. The way it was shot almost ruins it. There are important character arcs that are wrapped up in this finale, and the camera is so far away at times, especially with Mia Goth’s/Sara’s arc, that the great acting that we have seen on screen thus far through, the camera work completely tumbles and doesn’t make the landing stick. Instead of close ups, the camera is far enough to make the viewer see what is going on around the main characters, but we already have seen what is going on that if the film took 20 seconds and did some close ups, the ending would’ve been masterful. I know I went to film school and ended up becoming an accountant of sorts and never really made a film, but even I know that the emotional impact of your ending is important, and sometimes that means some close up shots. But everything is at a distance so you can see the whole room, and to me, it wasn’t the right decision.

And the editing in some parts is a little wonky, but it might’ve been deliberate so ignore me as I’m just being nit picky at this point. Everything else is solid. Dakota Johnson here tries to be more than Mrs. Christian Grey, and it completely works. Tilda Swinton is good in the other two roles I mentioned above even though I didn’t buy her male role at all. The real MVP is Mia Goth, who was in those Lars Von Trier Nymphomanic films and the recent A Cure For Wellness. She knocks it out of the park as Sara, a student who is at first delusional as to what is happening at the ballet school but soon finds that one layer to peel back that reveals the darkness underneath. Her performance is completely convincing, but her arc is sort of ruined in that third act I just talked about. The point of view switches several times from Johnson to her and there is a good reason for that which I won’t spoil here. But I thought the switching of the point of views made the impact of a huge reveal that much more juicy.

The film was directed by Luca Guadaginino, the guy that just got all the praise last year for Call Me By Your Name, and he does a great job here. His vision is definitely different from Argento’s original, as Argento went full colorful, strikingly bright horror, Luca’s vision is bleak and monotone. But each works in it’s own way. So I will definitely recommend this for two kinds of people. Those that have seen the original, and those that are into artsy fartsy horror films. This is the vein of The Witch or It Comes At Night or Hereditary than it does mainstream horror. If you are too into mainstream horror, stay far away from this. But if you really can appreciate film as art, and recognizes it when it is done pretty decently, and appreciate when a remakes does a complete 180 from the original, then see this new Suspiria when you have the time.

I’ll be up front: I didn’t care for MID90s. But that doesn’t mean I thought it was a terrible or poorly made film. Far from it. This is Jonah Hill’s directorial debut and I think he shows great potential in being a fantastic non-actors/actors director, giving us some great debut performances or great performances from those individuals we already know and love. It is just that his narrow view in this film didn’t really resonate with me. Going into this, I thought it would be another great hangout film or film that really defines the times it is trying to portray; For Example: Dazed and Confused, Diner, Can’t Hardly Wait, Clueless, the recent Eighth Grade, Swingers, Everybody Wants Some, Boyhood, and/or American Graffiti. Instead it focused on just the aspect of some skater kids, poor family life, and the notion of acceptance; the poor family life/acceptance aspect I’ve seen done a lot better in a lot of other films, and personally I never resonated with the skater kids because I wasn’t one in the 90s. And this isn’t Jonah Hill’s fault. I personally had nothing to latch onto in the movie.

It’s okay to have narrow views in film, it does work in a lot of them (especially if what is told gives that individual a personal attachment), but for me, with narrow views (especially if the story doesn’t resonate with you), having multiple relatable or sympathetic characters is a must. In this film, I only really liked one character, and it wasn’t even the main protagonist. While everyone did a fantastic job acting, especially considering that, other than Lucas Hedges and Katherine Waterston, everyone else was a complete non-actor/unknown, I couldn’t stand their characters. Stevie, who is the main protagonist trying to find acceptance with a group of shady skater friends because his mom goes through men like clothes in her closet and the brother is a narcissistic asshole, I found to be a complete brat. He doesn’t even win over your sympathy in the end. It doesn’t seem like he learned anything. The film has one scene of Stevie buying a CD for his brother he thinks he doesn’t have, but then he doesn’t respect his brothers wishes by going into his room anyway when he is told not to. Stevie is a huge hypocrite in this film, and I just didn’t feel anything but resentment toward him. The skater friends are basically one dimensional beings. There is a character nicknamed Fourth Grade I thought was the most interesting in the film, because he was kind of socially dumb and just wanted to make movies in his future, but we never really get to know his character other than those two aspects. We learn nothing of his family life or why he acts the way he does, which is why I didn’t end up caring for his character.

Which brings me to while I think Jonah Hill has the potential to be a great director, his writing needs some work. All the characters, except for the main black kid Ray, are very poorly written and narrowly constructed. You could say that most of them or only one or at best two dimensional. I already mentioned the kid nicknamed Fourth Grade, and I already mentioned the protagonist Stevie, so let’s look at the others. All I know about Stevie’s older brother (played well with what he had by Manchester By The Sea’s Lucas Hedges) is that he’s an asshole that likes to hit and bully on his brother a shit ton, talk the talk but not walk the walk, and may or may not be gay. But it is never told or even shown why this is (not saying there needs to be a why in him being gay, talking about the other two things). He looks like he really does maybe care for his brother at the end, but no good reason is given to why he acts the way he does. If the movie wants to try and earn his sympathy at the end, it needs to do more than just show him screaming in one scene because he is frustrated, giving us none of his back story and just handing his kid brother a orange juice at the end of the film. You have this other skater nicknamed FuckShit who just likes to get drunk and fuck bitches…that’s all you get to know about him. You also have a kid that kind of gets Stevie into their group of friends, Reuben, but he ends up being a two dimensional character that does the “cliched” thing and gets jealous of Stevie, and the film tells us that his mom beats him and his sister, but never shows it or any other aspect of his life. Then you have Stevie’s mom, who is in like three and a half short scenes, that basically shows her confront the skater kids trying to be a “concerned” mom, gets onto the older brother for stealing money from her drawer, and then talks briefly how she was pregnant when she turned 18 at the brother’s 18th birthday. And there is a quick scene of a man leaving her room, zipping himself up. But we don’t see anything else or truly get to know her, and her actions don’t make that much sense. Maybe that was the point?

The only truly great character that Jonah Hill wrote was that of Ray, the black teenager that is the leader of this group of skater friends. We get a great scene of him telling Stevie how life is and a deep view of his own life and how a tragedy shook up his world. We get other many scenes of Ray with different layers to his complicated character. Ray doesn’t want to give a shit about life, but starts giving a shit when he feels like he is grasping onto a thin ray of hope that might get himself into a better version of his reality. It is quite a great performance by newcomer Na-kel Smith and in a better film, I think he could’ve even gotten nominated for a supporting actor award. Unfortunately, the film doesn’t measure up to his character or his performance. And I think a problem with all of this is that the film was too short; only 84 minutes and that is including credits. When the film ended, I literally said out loud to myself, “that’s it?” I think if 20 to 25 minutes were added onto the film, giving all the other characters more meat to their roles, with some added individual scenes to people other than Stevie (especially of his brother and mother), this film could’ve been a straight up masterpiece. I could say I don’t think the movie got the 90s right, but I’m not going to, because it might have with a certain small group of people. If you are in that category, please let me know.

Alas, I was very disappointed. And notice how I didn’t complain about there being not much of a story or plot. I would be a hypocrite saying so on this. There are a many great coming of age films, like Dazed and Confused, where there really is no plot, just a bunch of memorable scenes of different, colorful character hanging out. My complaint is that there weren’t all that many different characters, and they certainly weren’t that colorful. And the scenes, other than Ray having a one on one with Stevie, definitely were not memorable. There are going to be many people that completely disagree with me on this film. And that is okay and I understand why. Those people probably got more emotionally and personally invested in its very narrow view. Ultimateily, I completely and totally recommend this film is you are a skater kid, or were a skater kid in the 90s, and I can slightly recommend it for people that always seem to be looking for acceptance. Other than that very limited scope recommendation, if what I said doesn’t interest you or you don’t feel like you could personally connect with a film like this, look elsewhere.

Before I start with my glowing review for the new HALLOWEEN, I think I need to acknowledge something with a disclaimer: Yes, I realize that if you look deep down into this movies soul, it is the horror version of The Force Awakens, where it is a soft reboot of the original film, with certain scenes echoing and rhyming with everything that came before, and characters show up that are now older and wiser. But guess what? A. I think this was not only necessary, but can you really see a Michael Myers slasher film go anywhere outside the box, into weird, yet coherent and effective unfamiliar territory? And B. I really don’t care, because I enjoyed the hell out of this film. It was just the dark, gritty, gory, somewhat depressing horror film that I personally needed it to be. It hit all the right beats and notes, and there were times in the film where it was horrifying what I was watching, and I jumped and almost closed my eyes at parts. If my kid grows up and gets into the horror genre, and wants to know which path to take, I’ll tell him to watch the Original, the Original sequel, and H20, and stop there, completely skip the rest. Or watch the original, and now watch this…however, it remains to be seen if I’ll recommend more of this path, we’ll just have to see if there is anymore tricks up Blumhouse’s sleeve.

This movie completely disregards every single sequel to Halloween, yes, even Halloween II. And it thankfully doesn’t even acknowledge Rob Zombie’s horrible efforts to the franchise either. It is resetting the clock if you will, a new canon of events. Trying its best to seem familiar but also bring something grand and shocking to a new generation of movie goers that weren’t even born when the first one came out in theaters (like me). And I love that they did that, because if you even try to explain to anyone the psychic connections that Myers had with his niece or that III isn’t even really a part of the Myers canon…or dare I say it, Halloween Resurrection, it would make their head spin. Instead, we get a new take/performances on Laurie Strode, having had major 40 year PTSD after the first events of the film, having to have a showdown with Myers one final time, while also protecting her estranged family. Estranged because her daughter was taken away from her when she was 12 because she was loopy about serial killer over protection. I’ve read complaints that there is no way anyone would get that loopy about a individual who almost killed you and has been (until this film) locked up in a criminal psychiatric facility. But I know some real people that will have PTSD for the rest of their lives that don’t necessarily involve being killed by a serial killer, so I can completely see why Danny McBride and David Gordon Green wrote Laurie Strode this way. Not only was it logical and believable, but it was also to give Jamie Lee Curtis some new range in her acting career to play with. Something different. A victim, but a survivor, a very strong and vengeful survivor.

And Jamie Lee Curtis knocks it out of the fucking park. I loved her performance in this film which made me love everything overall that much more. The only thing I have to complain about this film is that I was the ending was more definite (like the end of Halloween H20, until Resurrection fucked up everything). There are two ways to take it (don’t worry, I’m not going to ruin anything): one way being if this movie was a flop at the box office and they were finally going to stop making these movies, the other way, it’s a huge hit and because greedy Hollywood producers bc money bc why not. And guess what? I’m writing this review after already knowing that this film was a huge hit this past weekend. So you can now probably take the ending the second way of how it is supposed to be when you eventually view the film if you are interested. And if you are a fan of any of these kinds of horror slashers, or maybe just Michael Myers, I completely recommend this film. Michael kills people pretty God damn brutally, I’d say the most brutal I’ve seen in any of the Halloween films. The film is dark, some bits of humor here and there, but nothing to take you out of the film. It’s gritty, filled with some great character moments (especially from Will Patton, Judy Greer and newcomer Andi Matichak) and even has a twist midway through the film that I did not see coming at all, one that I accepted immediately, and thought it brought some much needed depth to the franchise.

The film expertly makes use of practical effects and dead bodies/people getting killed. I think I maybe saw just one CGI knife blood splatter. In showing some of the aftermath of Michael Myers kills, director David Gordon Green goes for a kind of homage to David Cronenberg body horror. That is to say that there is body place here or there on a dead body that is wickedly out of proportion in an almost cartoon like realistic way to show the brutality of Michael Myers’ killings. It was actually quite genius, the make-up effects here are extremely well done to the fact that most of what you see were probably realistic enough movie dummies, covered up in a way that you are supposed to think it is the real thing on screen. Way too much CGI in horror these days to where when you see Michael Myers slam his foot on a characters face mid way through the film, and you can tell it was a hollow dummy head filled with fake brain guts, fake bits of shattered skull, and real fake movie blood, that you can’t help but thank the makers for putting a big giant smile on your face.

And most importantly, Michael Myers is back. He is dark, brooding, vicious, everything you could’ve ever hoped for in this film. The most deadly silent killer. This was easily the best take on the character since the first. Everything in the film flowed together perfectly and neatly for me. There are going to be some die hard Halloween fans that dislike or absolutely hate this film for what it does. And that is perfectly okay. We all have our tastes, dreams, and desires for what we would like to see in a film like this. Fortunately for me, this film checked all those off multiple times. I thought it was masterful. I know all of you will scoff at that word, but I did think that word when leaving the theater. It was exactly the kind of horror film I needed this Halloween, and one of the best, if not complete best, sequels to any gritty horror film franchise (yes, I know about Evil Dead 2, Aliens, Dawn of the Dead, etc., etc. but I’m talking more gritty, completely dark horror films, not parody horror, comedic horror, or action sci-fi sequels). So I loved this new Halloween. Granted, I really want them to stop right here and leave Michael Myers on a high note, but we all know that is not going to happen. So until we finally get that shitty sequel you know is down the line, let us bask in the glory of what we got this weekend. Happy Halloween everyone!