Emma Stone will for sure get a Oscar nomination for BATTLE OF THE SEXES. She is quite brilliant in it. However, something about the movie was off for me where I quite can’t recommend it as the best version of the Billie Jean King and Bobby Riggs tennis match that was so much more than a match. It was probably because the movie tried to focus on another big issue in King’s life than the actual match and what it meant for women around the world, where it feels like two separate movies crammed into one. This power struggle of storytelling gets in the way of showing a little more of Bobby Rigg’s life up to the match and relegates a lot of his antics to montages that should’ve been their own longer scenes. I was really hoping to love this movie and proclaim it a masterpiece, instead, it’s watchable, but I know it could’ve been so much better.

Why could’ve there have been a separate film about the life of Billie Jean King, her struggles with homosexuality, her life after the world found out, could’ve made a great biopic film. With maybe a couple of minutes with this sliced into it. Heck, they could’ve focused on events surrounding this tennis match for this film, and hire Emma Stone again to do a complete biopic tale of King. But the fact that they try to do two movies in one, just makes everything feel…well bloated. The focus on getting ready for the actual tennis match, and the match itself starts in the last 30 minutes of the movie, and the movie is two hours long.

Not that there was anything wrong with the Billie Jean King discovering her sexuality part. It was handled well and acted with perfection, I just thought tonally it was in the wrong movie and should’ve been on its own. I think that because of this storyline being in there it kind of gave the shaft to Steve Carrell and his portrayal of Bobby Riggs. I went into the movie wanting to know more about Riggs, and had questions, and I left the theater with not one question answered. I thought the movie would give equal time to both players, but nope, I felt Carrell wasn’t in the movie all that much. He was even short changed in the epilogue I thought as well. So I thought the something missing from this movie, was Bobby Riggs, even though the Battle of the Sexes match was supposed to be 50% about him.

You could argue that discovering her homosexuality fit in the storyline with women’s lib and the pursuit of equality. I thought the scenes of her basically quitting the tennis league because they were paying men more than they were woman completely belonged and worked in this film, When it which to her realizing she was a lesbian, it just felt tonally off. Like I was watching a biopic of just her, and not of the tennis match that defined a generation and not digging into the persona of Bobby Riggs. Also, the final match wasn’t shot too terribly exciting. Instead of doing some great sports shots directors have been known to get in these films, I felt bored and that I was just watching it on television. Nothing inspiring.

So in essence, two decent short films, but combining them, a feature with a lot of narrative problems. Incredible acting, directing, and the film had that great 70s feel where it feels like it was shot on film. It’s a decent one time Netflix watch, but not the film that it should’ve been. It should’ve been one of the films for feminism to watch, study, and celebrate. Instead, it will be lost in the queue, with other films more than deservedly being remembered for it in its place.

 

I vote Victoria & Abdul the most charming movie of 2017. I’m not saying it is one of the best, I’m saying it is one of those royalty/period piece movies that doesn’t take itself too seriously, it is quite funny, and has a lot of rewatchable value. Thank of The Prince & Me or Ever After: A Cinderella Story. If you’ve seen and love those you know exactly what I am talking about. The movie marketing company has kind of undersold this film. It is quite fun and while has some serious issues, isn’t the snooze fest anti-climatic drama you are probably thinking it is. Judi Dench at this point can act out of a paper bag, and I think she gives one of her finest performances here too, and gets to cut a little loose at the same time.

The movie is based on the real life acquaintance between Queen Victoria of the United Kingdom and her Indian muslim servant Abdul. He goes to India with a companion to deliver this ceremonial coin the the Queen, and when he gives her this coin, he looks at her when he isn’t supposed to, and the Queen gets curious. They become fast friends and she gives him a lot of responsibilities and the other English staff (especially the Queen’s son) doesn’t like what is going on too much. Basically their friendship has to overcome all of these outside hardships. It is a quick hour and 40 minutes of their charming time together.

Like I said, Judi Dench is always great, and will always be great, and this film is no exception. The gentleman who plays Abdul, Ali Fazal, is great as well. And if it weren’t for the chemistry between these two actors, the film wouldn’t have worked at all. Everything else about this film is quite good. The direction, the cinematography of the castle and the land around it. The acting from all the supporting players and the staff that doesn’t like what is going on is great as well. The film is a lot funnier than you think it would be. And it knows when to switch tones when everything needs to be a little more dramatic.

The film isn’t perfect. The narrative is a little clunky and the message is a little frayed when trying to get its meaning across. But this film has a ton of rewatch value. I was surprised how much a liked it. If you like these period piece movies, and maybe even the ones with a little more flair, humor, and fun, you’ll really like it too. Don’t go in expecting Pride & Prejudice, but something more akin to Ever After.

STRONGER features a different side to the Boston Marathon bombing than was featured in the film Patriot’s Day. Instead of the event and the hunting of the bombers, we have the inspiring story of Jeff Bauman, a man that was right by one of the bombs, ended up losing both of his legs in the blast. Here, he is portrayed by Jake Gyllenhaul in another powerful performance that begs the question, “why in the hell hasn’t Gyllenhaul won an Oscar yet?” HE is honestly going to be the new Leo DiCaprio in about 10 to 15 years, where he’ll end up winning one for a performance that is still strong, but less than his previous work.

The movie itself is very decent, although for me there was a little something missing, and I can’t quite figure out what it is. Maybe it is the fact that I didn’t like Jeff Bauman for most of the film, considering him very lazy and too privileged, and only after losing almost everything other than his legs he starts to get his ass into gear. I thought that the story of his ex girlfriend Erin, played fantastically by Tatiana Maslany, was the more inspiring story, on how long she had to put up with his ass acting the way he was. Maybe I was a little bored throughout the movie, and it was just that the story didn’t uplift me as it was probably supposed to.

So although it is a good movie, very good in fact, I wish it was more. But if it was, I have a feeling the movie wouldn’t be as real, as I’m told that the real Jeff Bauman saw the movie and said it was pretty damn accurate. I am glad that the real Bauman turned his life together after being involved in that terrible tragedy. Just wanting to live the next day after that takes courage in and of itself. I don’t think that anything missing was any of the screenplay or direction by David Gordon Green’s fault, I just think it would make a more interesting hour documentary than a 2 hour character study.

But it is like I’m saying the movie is bad, which I’m not. Most of you will find that missing something in it and love the heck out of this film. Everything about the movie is top notch. I would probably revisit this on Netflix but it isn’t something I would buy or something I would watch over and over again. I honestly think that out of the two Boston Marathon bombing films, that Patriot’s Day is still the more harrowing of the two. It’s the performances here that does take the movie out of mediocrity, as Jake Gyllenhaul can basically spit on anything and make it about 20% better.

Well, I don’t know what to tell ya. I have no idea how the hell you are going to see this movie or when you are going to see it, considering it was just in theaters for one night and that night was last night, but I’m going to review it anyway, so that when it eventually pops up in that $5 Blu-Ray bin, or is available to rent from a streaming service, or available as part of your Netflix subscription, that you might want to leave the first and second films as a good distant memory, and pretend JEEPERS CREEPERS 3 never even existed.

When you have a third film in any kind of franchise, you usually have to go all out, even in horror, where you know there are several sequels yet to come. Scream 3, Dream Warriors, Child’s Play 3, Friday the 13th part 3, Saw III, Paranormal Activity 3, even though we know there are still more sequels to come, the films double down on its hand just in case there isn’t. There are certain rules, one must abide by in order to successful create a sequel to a horror film, and continue the franchise. It still has to follow horror film rules in general. Jeepers Creepers 3 breaks every single one of these rules, and then some.

I think we should go over some if not all of these rules shall we? Should make for an interesting and different review:

Horror Rule Number 1: Never, ever, show your monster in the daylight.

And that is all that Jeepers Creepers 3 does. I don’t remember the Creeper at night until the very, very end of the film. There is a reason for this which breaks one of the horror rules mentioned below, and this could’ve been completely unavoidable is this whole plot was scrapped, but they went with it, so the creeper is only shown during the day. What’s the problem with this? 99% of the time if your monster is shown during the day, it isn’t scary. The 1% of the time goes to IT and the original Halloween, because with IT the kids being out at night wouldn’t have made a whole bunch of sense (wait until they are adults, it will just be midnight scary madness then) and Halloween works because we needed to see Michael Myers stalk these babysitters on the way home from school. But the Creeper, being almost completely at night in the first two films, is in complete daylight here, and isn’t scary at all, and unfortunately very comical.

Horror Rule Number 2: DO NOT EVER make a third film where the story takes place between two others.

You can go all the way before, or you can go all the way after. If you go all the way before,  or if for some reason you fuck up this rule like Jeepers Creepers 3 does, you have to reveal vital information on the monster/situation at hand. Final Destination 5 went all the way before, and it’s plot twist worked. Paranormal Activity 3 went back to when the terror started for the sisters, and it worked because it gave us new information. Jeepers Creepers 3 takes place in between films 1 and 2, which is why it is set mostly during the day. The movie seems like it is about to give us new info (like the original of the creature and how to really kill it), but it never does, it just hints at it and instead it gives us a very stupid cliffhanger that promises all will be revealed in #4 when the timeline finally goes back to after part 2. Stupid. Because of this story, we get the creeper in full daylight, making him not frightening at all. Plus, if you have the film between two others, you know that the menace likely survives, so all your would be tension goes straight out the window.

3. Horror Rule Number 3: Keep it simple, stupid.

Controversial writer/director Victor Salva, who helmed the other two, tries to put in way too many characters, and hints at way too much lore about the Creeper that is ultimately never revealed, making everything too confusing for the audience to care. With horror films, unless you are a film like Saw. Keep it simple, even when you actually have a plot, keep it simple. Scare your audience, not confuse the shit out of the them with too much crap put in. There are so many characters in this, none of them had any development whatsoever. And there are backstories hinted at, that are never truly revealed, which is a big no no here. I don’t care if you think there is going to be a #4, reveal what you hint at or promise. Or at least reveal most of it, and then it would be okay to keep a few things for later. Prometheus had that problem of asking too many questions and not answering them. Jeepers Creepers 3 literally tells Prometheus to hold it’s beer.

You can tell this film was cheaply made, in my eyes it is not even worth a Netflix release. This is straight up Sharknado, Sci-Fi channel only territory. Part of the fact is probably that Victor Salva had a small as fuck budget and this is the best he thinks he could’ve come up with. I disagree, I’ve seen some even cheaper Sci-Fi channel shit that had more heart than this. This was just lazy. Long takes to make the film longer than it needed to be. Horrible, terrible, CGI that was painful to watch. Terrible, laughable acting around every corner. The only good part of the film was that the Creeper’s truck was outfitted with some cool booby traps that would’ve looked fantastic with a huge budget. With what they had…it all looked terrible.

In the end, it completely looked like a student fan made Jeepers Creepers film. And with the original writer and director on board, no matter how controversial he is, is a big, big, no no. This movie was absolutely terrible and definitely one of the worst of the year. I bet the film Friend Request had more balls than this film (even though I am not going to see Friend Request until it hits a free market). My theater was packed and sold out with Jeepers Creepers fan and every face coming out of there told me that they were extremely disappointed by what they saw. Jeepers Creepers 3 makes Jeepers Creepers 1 and 2 look like The Exorcist and A Nightmare on Elm Street. If there is a 4th, Salva will have to try extremely hard to get more peepers, including mine, interested in ever seeing it.

BRAD’S STATUS is a quirky little dramedy that is one of Ben Stiller’s best performances and decent movies in awhile. It is also screenwriter’s Mike White’s best film in awhile too, considering that I hated the film that he wrote earlier this year called Beatriz at Dinner. In fact I related to this film quite a bit, not that I’m having a mid life crisis or anything. But the movie gives certain thoughts to, what is it to be successful? Does money make us successful or is it who we are, or a little bit of both? What do we truly value? Granted many films have done this, and to judge a film like this now you would have to consider the journey and the way the film tells the message. And for the most part it does a really good job.

I’m not saying this film is a masterpiece, far from it, but it is a very very good Netflix watch. The film is about a dad, played by Stiller, who takes his 17 year old son to college campus’s including Harvard, seeing where his musical prodigy son would like to go. Along the way he has a minor mid life crisis, finding out who is really is, what friendship truly is, and what is his purpose. The film, throughout the whole thing, has a very calm and insightful narration by Ben Stiller that really drives the movie. If it didn’t have it I don’t know if the movie would’ve been as good. The conversations that Stiller has with his wife, son, himself, and others feel real, and feel like we could be having them with the people we know, which is always a good thing in any movie.

Throughout the film, Stiller wonders why he isn’t as successful as his successful and rich friends played by Michael Sheen, Luke Wilson, Mike White, and Jermaine Clement. All of these roles are mostly glorified cameos, but each does a good job with what they are given, especially Luke Wilson who has displayed more emotion in a phone call with Stiller than he has in his last 5 films. The one that gets the short straw is Jenna Fischer, however not because of her performance, which I have a feeling that if it were expanded she’d be the most interesting character in the film, it’s because she isn’t given that much to do. Which is a shame because I really like Pam and think she could do great things beyond The Office.

The films is short, just over 95 minutes, and doesn’t overstay its welcome. It doesn’t try to wrap everything up in a nice bow either, which I usually always appreciate. I wouldn’t buy this at all, however I would put it as background noise again, or watch it again with someone that actually is having a mid life crisis, and whose life isn’t so bad as they think it is. So the status of this film for me? Good. And sometimes good is all you need.

The first thirty minutes of THE LEGO NINJAGO MOVIE plays out like The Lego Movie and The Lego Batman Movie. Zany fun, with some dry humor, huge sight and sound gags, and very smart storytelling. Then when that thirty minutes is over, it skids into a tad boring film that is less about ninjas and what they do into a cliched parent neglect and redemption story. A story you’ve seen a thousand times before done by better films. If the Lego humor was still there, it could’ve worked, but ultimately, it was a little disappointing. I think if it would’ve entirely focused on Ninjas with an actual Ninja like storyline, instead of the father son thing while trying to take over a city, it might’ve been another Lego hit. Instead, it is my least favorite of the Lego movies, and one that will probably never enter the Blu ray player again. But I have a kid now so I might have just eaten my words in three years.

The voice acting in this is incredible though. Dave Franco and his team of Ninjas played by the likes of Abba Jacobson and Kumail Nanjiani, all do great work in this. So does Olivia Munn as Lloyd’s mom and Jackie Chan (who is in the flesh here as well and is just as charming as ever) as their Ninja master. But it is the villain, Garmadon, voiced by Justin Theoroux, who steals absolutely every scene he is in, making the best Lego villain yet, unfortunately in a film that doesn’t equal the characters potential. It is the voice acting and the first 30 minutes, especially with a awesome cat gag, that save this movie from ultimately being completely boring and unwatchable.

When a movie is called Ninjago, I expected an awesome Ninja storyline with Ninja sights, sounds, and gags filling every minute of the screen. They still could’ve put the dad and son storyline in the movie, but it be a Plot B type of thing while have a Ninja quest plot A.  But it focuses too much on the dad and son storyline, and I knew how it was going to end, and even the journey to get there was not inventive enough, leaving me unimpressed. Plus, this needed more Jackie Chan. The Lego animation is still incredible here, but the humor after the first 30 minutes kind of disappears and the movie plays it too straight. It should be 100% zany Lego fun. Not 35%.

Hopefully this is just a misfire all the franchises have and they take their time making The Lego Movie 2. I feel like Ninjago might’ve been a rushed product after the success of the original first movie, and rushed it into production without much of a script. Since the first two movies were so enjoyable, I can let this one slide. But if the next movie almost puts me to sleep, there could be fast franchise fatigue on Lego’s hands. The saddest part of this film? I probably would’ve rather watched a kid play an hour and 30 minutes with his Lego’s than have ever watched this. This should not happen.

 

Did mother! leave a lot of bad tastes in critics mouths where the toxic waste from the film last week carried over into their screening of KINGSMAN: THE GOLDEN CIRCLE? I mean, these reviews from mainstream “critics” are confusing to say the least. Not that they truly hated it but a lot of people are automatically giving this thing sequelitis and calling it ‘meh.’ I personally loved it. I thought it was fun, entertaining, and has extreme rewatch value, just like the first movie. Is it better than the first movie? Of course not, but just like 22 Jump Street, it came extremely close. You can’t go wrong if you are looking for an adult action entertaining romp where its long 2 hour and 20 minute runtime is done within a snap of your fingers.

Not that I don’t have some complaints about the film. For instance, Matthew Vaughn tries too hard to duplicate the church scene from the first film in every single action scene in this one. A lot of the CGI location shot look kind of phony and some of the scenes go so over to the top bordering on cartoonish. And the fact that they bring back Colin Firth from the dead was a little bit weird and wrong. Colin Firth dying in the first film was a huge shocker that took the movie in an unexpected direction and this movie undoing his death to me was sort of a cheat. Granted they do make up for it by doing multiple expected deaths in this film, but none of them truly hit home like the first one did. But Colin Firth is so good in this series and the reason why he is still alive makes sense in the bigger picture so all that was completely forgiven quickly.

Especially since this sequel was so much fun. Taron Egerton as Eggsy is as great as ever, I can’t believe he isn’t a big star yet. I loved the fact that he and the anal Princess from the first film were still together in a very committed relationship. Their story arc was really cute here. Mark Strong, just like Colin Firth, is the heart of the series here too. Even though Channing Tatum and Jeff Bridges aren’t in the film all that much they are really good here. Hopefully we see Tatum in the third film more. Halle Berry was good. And a lot of critics didn’t like her, but I loved Julianne Moore as the villain Poppy. I thought she played it to her strengths making the character quirky, weird, yet ruthless. And I loved her evil lair. Definitely as memorable as Samuel L. Jackson as Valentine from the first film. Unfortunately she doesn’t have a memorable sidekick like Sofia Boutella was with her sword legs in the previous film.

And uh, yeah singer Elton John is in this film and he is the funniest and best part about it. Just something about a celebrity you don’t see cursing much, cursing is hilarious to me. I don’t know why. The action I thought was kinetic, and even though each scene tried to replicate the church scene from the first, I was highly entertained and was never bored with it. The plot is better left unsaid, but while highly predictable was also unique and fun.

I really loved Kingsman 2. Just like the first film I feel like I could watch this over and over again. Was highly entertained and that’s really all I ask sometimes with the movies that I go and see. There is a balance to the force in movies I think. You get really really really shitty film like mother! (yes, I’m still on that, the whole damn movie was do you get it? No? Well let me shove you obvious bullshit in your face for you to get it) and then movies like this come out the next or same week where it completely lets you just get lost in what you came to see. Where mother! is the disease, Kingsman The Golden Circle was definitely the cure.

REVISED: Wrote this review originally last weekend but website was down. Thought about the movie even more (I guess that was the point?) and have added just a few more coherent thought about why all the allegory, symbolism, ideals stuff didn’t work for me

I saw mother! yesterday and have had more time to think about the film with all its allegory cocktails, symbolism surprises, and imagery ice cream sundaes, and I still fucking hate the movie. Sorry, it just isn’t for me. If you like bullshit by Terrence Malick or Paul Thomas Anderson, this film is right up your alley. Now if this was a Paul Thomas Anderson movie, you’d be reading this saying, “well no shit Sherlock, the only thing you marginally have liked of his was Boogie Nights, you are completely biased.” Well yes, to him I am. I think PTA ruins everything he touches. *shrugs* But this is Darren Aronofsky, and I have liked every single one of this films (yes, including Pi), except for The Fountain, which I didn’t really hate, but I thought it was an ambitious failed attempt at creating something artistic and unique while also catering to my cinematic senses. mother! is just bullshit at every twist and turn. It’s one of those many, what I like to call “artsy fartsy” films, that fail to grab me narratively, coherently, or sanely but at the same time it is beautifully shot and acted. Beautiful nasty, garbage that completely falls out of its stinky bin and all over the pavement and your shoes in it’s bizarre third act. An insane twisted sadistic third act where a truly messed up event happens that effected me personally, where I just wanted to get up and leave the theater. But I implore you, it wasn’t the last string cut to make me hate the film, it was just severely beating and maiming a dead horse that I had already hated about 40 minutes earlier.
****minor spoiler hint alert**** If you are about to have a baby or have just had a baby, I encourage you to not see this film until time has passed a bit. It is still jarring, this scene, but it might not make you as upset as it did for me ****end of minor spoiler hint alert**** This movie is completely polarizing. You are either going to like it, or extremely loathe the existence it lives on. I am not trying to convince you at all not to see this movie. I think you should see each and every movie you are interested in. I’m just here to give my opinion on what I thought. And I just hated, hated, HATED this movie. And I got everything in it when I saw it. I don’t need a second viewing to “get it.” There is this great article that I posted on my Facebook page that explains everything about mother! and what this and that means. I got it from the very, very beginning of the film that is kind of a spoiler in itself. And I still hated this film. I think narratively and sanely it could’ve portrayed everything it was trying to tell in a more satisfying manner, not to the point where the film is so boring or jarring that it gives you a headache and you just want to take a pen and stab your eyes out from ever having to see one more frame of it.

The symbolism and allegory stuff didn’t work for me. I don’t think it did it in a very original way. This movie was about the allegories, instead of being a unique story that happened to contain some semblance of symbolism. Since every single one of the people have symbolism, allegory, something something religious behind it, I couldn’t really identify with any of the characters or cared about them. And instead of trying to be very sneaky and trying to hide a lot of the references or make people think about the movie harder to get them. EVERYTHING IS IN YOUR FACE. It is like Aronofsky is screaming, “SEE?! DO YOU GET IT?! DO YOU GET IT?!” on everything that hits the screen. It wasn’t subtle, I was being spoon fed every piece of the garbage, and I was full of it from minute 15.

Yeah, I’m still being harsh. But I do not hate Darren Aronofsky, even though he is dating Jennifer Lawrence, which makes me upset. I just think he’s…misguided. I think mostly he is what Paul Thomas Anderson is so trying desperately to be…but horror-wise. I loved Black Swan, I loved Requiem for a Dream, both movies you could consider to be horror. And what he was trying to tell absolutely worked in both of those films on so many levels, it was mesmerizing. To me, mother! does not work on one single level other than the acting and cinematography. You are probably waiting for me to tell you what this movie is about, but honestly, I really can’t. To tell you what it is about, you would not believe me, think I’m nuts, or you wouldn’t get it. I can tell you the basic set up is a man and woman live in this abandoned home that she is trying to rebuild from ashes…and they start getting guests, played by Ed Harris, Michelle Phieffer, Domnahall Gleeson, and Kristen Wiig, that starts to rock their very existence. Even then, that isn’t want the movie is about, if you ever see this, you’ll know what I am talking about.

Everyone in here acts in aces. Jennifer Lawrence is incredible as always. Javier Bardem is incredible as always. Ed Harris….incredible as always. A much missed Michelle Phieffer…incredible as always. The only person that took me out of the film would happen to be Kristen Wiig, who I just can’t take seriously, other than the film The Skeleton Twins. And the shots in this thing are beautiful. For most of the film Darren Aronofsky follows Jennifer Lawrence is long takes around the house, where she is going from one room to another to figure out what is going on and to find a little bit of sanity, and those long shots work and are very impressive.

But I hated this film. It is the worst film of the year for me (beating out contenders 9/11 and Fifty Shades Darker) and it is one of the worst films I have ever seen (just behind Halloween II ((Rob Zombie version)) and Dude, Where’s My Car?). If you like it, that’s fine, there is nothing wrong with you, it’s just that what the film brought to the table, it worked for you, and you played with it, where as what I saw on the table, made me kick it over and set it on fire. It’s a huge misstep for writer/director Darren Aronofsky, and if he keeps going in this direction, which for the love of God I hope he doesn’t, probably won’t be his last. I wish I could get 2 hours of my life back.

9/11, a new drama with Charlie Sheen (yes, THAT Charlie Sheen), has to be the biggest slap in the face to all the victims, first responders, and heroes of 9/11 since the awful twist ending in the film Remember Me. What is also so bad is that this film doesn’t even know that it is disrespectful. It’s disrespectful in terms of the acting, the production value, the cue card at the end of the film dedicating the  movie to all the victims and first responders of 9/11, when the first responders aren’t even featured in the film for more than 5 minutes. This movie is so bad I don’t think even Lifetime would air it due to the fact of how disrespectful it is. Even mediocre 9/11 films like Oliver Stone’s World Trade Center treated the events with respect, care, and made sure to show admiration for those affected by the tragedy. This film has Charlie Sheen being a more calmed down but still same version of Charlie Sheen, with 5 other people stuck in an elevator, and somehow they dragged poor old Whoopi Goldberg into this. 9/11, while one of the worst tragedies to happen in human history, is now one of the worst films since the turn of the century, let alone the worst film of 2017. Yes, that’s right, even worse than Fifty Shades Darker.

It’s also disrespectful to cast Charlie Sheen in your 9/11 movie, when he is in fact part of the controversial Truther movement. But I’m here to review a film, not get into politics. This film is based off a stage play called Elevator, and I have a feeling the stage play is quite riveting and emotional and characters played by truly inspirational and aspiring believable actors. It’s hard to care about character when you see someone on screen and just keep repeating the word “Winning” over and over in your mind. Sheen’s acting in this is truly laughably bad, to where he needs to be nominated for a Razzie this year and win.

It was also weird seeing Luiz Guzman in a film like this, considering that he is mainly in comedic films, and some of the stuff he says also took me out of the film, obviously he meant his dialogue to come off as dramatic, but it is boderline comical. Gina Gershon is there to look like a coke head and literally just whine and not act the whole time, and Whoopi Goldberg plays a elevator operator supervisor that tries to talk the passengers in the stuck elevator on the Twin Towers into finding a way to escape. She is the only decent part of the movie, and the only one that seems like she wants to act accordingly.

I never felt emotional during this film, and the point is I should have. I should have felt bad for these people stuck in the elevator, and rooting for them to get out. The acting was just nowhere near getting me to care for any of the characters other than Whoopi. The film basically only has three locales, in and right outside of the elevator, the basement where Whoopi Goldberg is trying to help them escape, and the final act takes place right inside the lobby of one of the Twin Towers. It is in this final act that the production value is just so so so bad, it was hard to believe any of these people were actually there. Isn’t that the point of the movie? To make it seem you are at the locale of where stuff happens, especially in films based on true events?

When it touches the lobby, with the smoke, and ash, and all that raining down on victims heads, the film looks fuzzy, green screenish, and cheap. There is so much fog and smoke, that you know they just piled it on, otherwise you would definitely know how shoddy their production budget was. And like I said before, the title card of dedication at the end bothered me. It is find if you dedicate it to first responders of the tragedy, but you should show them in your film more, not just Charlie Sheen bitching at things for 95 minutes.

My thoughts are with the first responders and victims of 9/11 today. I will never forget and this nation will never forget. There are no words to completely convey how much we feel for the victims and first responders of this terrible tragedy. My heart aches for the families of the victims as well. One thing I know for sure is that this film should’ve never been made. It was a stage play? Fine, but leave it at that, don’t hire D grade actors on a shoddy production budget if you are hoping to make a legitimate film about a story that took place on that day. Or if you have to make it into a feature film, treat it with some respect, and try and make the best film possible. This was not even trying.

 

I would not go so far as to call Reese Witherspoon’s new movie HOME AGAIN, good, great, or even bad…I would ultimately probably use the term “harmless.” I didn’t think it is a re watchable laugh a minute riot fest, nor did I think it as a comedic disaster. It is just there. It is just there to casually leave on television when you are tidying up your house one afternoon. It’s a airplane movie to distract you from the fact that you are in a vessel miles in the air. It has it’s moments, but then it has it’s “really?” moments as well, and it once again proves that Reese is way too good of an actress to pick up and participate in this kind of material.

The movie has a somewhat interesting concept where a famous screenwriter/director’s daughter turns 40 and is recently separated from her husband, moving with her two daughters to L.A. who “happens” to run into three young male Hollywood dudes (one a director, one an actor, and one a screenplay writer) who are trying to break bank with their short film becoming a full length feature. One of the boys in his mid-20s falls for Reese. They get kicked out of their hotel for not having any money and Reese’s mother likes the boys and suggests that they live in the guest house for the time being. The three young boys then inject themselves into her lives but then once the separated husband comes to L.A., bag in hand, people have to figure out what is the best in life for them.

I mean, yeah, it’s a little interesting. The plot relies really heavy on insinuating circumstances, and the fact that all the planets and stars lines up for them perfectly. There are some charming moments, and there are some chuckles, and Reese Witherspoon is always fun to watch whatever she is doing, but ultimately this film is “harmless,” yet ultimately forgettable. It’s like when you run into somebody from high school that wasn’t mean to you, but wasn’t your friend either, but was nice to you all the same. You say hello, what you’ve been up to, and then you leave, forgetting what happened in 24 hours. That’s this film. A casual meeting never to be remembered again.

The acting is good but I feel like the other actors in this film are wasting their time as well, especially Nat Wolff (who plays one of the boys, not even the romantic interest, and this is the guy that completely stole the show in The Fault In Our Stars) and Michael Sheen, who looks depressed after Master of Sex was cancelled. Both of these guys are way too good for this film. Candice Bergen, who plays Reese’s mom in this screams from the hilltops “paycheck.”

I was satisfied with the ending however, going to a place it needed to go and didn’t try to wrap everything up in a nice bow. But yeah, I’ve already forgotten a lot about this movie from seeing it two days ago. But the fact that I didn’t hate it, after seeing the masterful IT, says something. It is possible this movie just wasn’t for me, and that young women and women in general might laugh and love this movie a whole lot. So in the end, I might not be the best person to review this. I would totally recommend for girls out on the town, but for everyone else, you would drive home again from the movies, with this film never making another blip on your brain radar.