Zach Zany Movie Reviews: SPREE

SPREE is the most bizarre film of 2020. Easily. Not to say that it’s bad, it was quite entertaining for its short 90 minute run time, but it’s balance of tone is the most head scratching thing for me this year. Well, no, that’s not true, COVID-19 and our nations way of handling it is the most head scratching thing, but this is a close second. Speaking of our nation handling situations, Spree has something to say about social media, followers and fame that is pretty dead on with the times right now. Remember the movie Infamous I reviewed not too long ago starring Bella Thorne? Spree was what Infamous should’ve have been. Infamous was about a duo that went and robbed a bunch of places, killed people and Bella Thorne would live stream their crimes on an Instagram type app to get followers and fame. Infamous didn’t work because it took itself way too seriously (absolutely no satire in it at all), Bella Thorne gave one of the worst performances in a movie this year, and it was boring and not entertaining in the slightest. Spree, on the other hand, in some ways, is on the opposite end of that spectrum. Stranger Thing’s Joe Keery’s performance is actually quite good, the movie is actually decently watchable, didn’t have any lag, but the movie was too much satire…there was too much comedy in it…it didn’t take itself seriously at all. But thinking back on it, maybe that was the point? If it was, the tone just didn’t quite work for me but could for someone else. I wonder if we’ll ever get a movie about social media that balances satire and tone perfectly? Maybe. Spree will do for now though as I am recommending it for how dead on its messages and themes of social media and fame are, and because I’ve seen people online that are exactly like Joe Keery’s character.

Per IMDB, Spree’s log line is: “Thirsty for a following, Kurt Kunkle is a rideshare driver who has figured out a deadly plan to go viral.” Yes, that deadly plan is killing people if you were wondering. His Instagram-like page hardly gets any followers, not even in the double digits, and he has been trying and playing by the rules for quite a long time. He suddenly gets an idea: he sets up cameras all over his car, and starts killing people in different ways (it’s not just running over people when they get out of the car thank God) if those people deserve it. But a semi-famous comedian is about to get into his car and divert Kurt’s night into something strange and not according to plan. But will Kurt’s follower count and live stream audience rise like it never has before? Oh wow, I actually expanded upon a log line and made it my own. Haven’t done that in awhile. Anyway, it’s a great concept, it’s just executed a little weird, especially the very, very end. It plays like a desktop/phone movie, where the footage you are watching is coming off Kurt’s live stream or through security cameras in the area. It’s like Searching or the Unfriended movies, but more accessible and at more locations, like found footage movies such as Cloverfield. It’s just a wacky, wacky entertainingly good time. My only problem is that with all the horrifying things Kurt is doing to people, it doesn’t take itself seriously at all. Way too much satire. The violence mostly cuts away to Kurt’s reaction once everything is said and done, which was a bit disappointing. In those moments, it could’ve gotten very, very serious, then gone back to satire and the movie could’ve been the next great balance of two very different tones, like American Psycho, but alas, it was not meant to be.

But in its weaknesses are some strengths, and like I said, it has something crazy dead on to say about how addicting social media is and how deeply disturbing it can make some people with a weak frame of mind. This is writer/director Eugene Kotlyarenko’s first feature I have ever heard of, and it seems he did his homework and studied social media behavior while writing and directing this film. Kudos on that good sir. Now you just need to work on balance of tone, mood, and atmosphere and your next feature could be masterful. Joe Keery is great in this and his performance is dead on to some of the shit I’ve seen out there on the net. But he isn’t the only recognizable face in this. Mischa Barton turns up in a very bit part as one of the passengers. SNL’s Sasheer Zamata is the comedian in the wrong place at the wrong time…or is it the right place at the right time. And Scream’s David Arquette plays Keery’s father. All three do a entertainingly good job here and keep the fast and frantic pace of the movie going and don’t drag it down at all. When the camera goes outside the confines of the ride share vehicle, it works and is realistic enough to not make you roll your eyes. The movie even has an answer as to why Kurt’s phone doesn’t drain of too much power over the night (charger in a car). I’m just a little disappointed, because when I read what the movie was about, in my head, the concept was just much more balanced. In my head, I saw everything be deadly serious in one moment and then completely flip the switch and it work better for the film. Oh well, if I want that great balance of flavor, I should probably just pick up the candy of the same name right?

Zach’s Zany Movie Reviews: PROJECT POWER (Netflix)

PROJECT POWER is only a half realized film and it feels as though it was rushed out to market too fast, when the “completed” story and script felt like it was still in its developmental stages at best. It is a 1 hr and 50 minute movie, where 10 minutes consist of just the end credits, the 1st hour feels like the first act of a movie with no 2nd act, and the last 40 minutes is just a very ho-hum by the book auto pilot climax. And was is so disappointing is the fact that it has a pretty neat premise that wastes a lot of its potential. Per IMDB: “When a pill that gives its users unpredictable superpowers for five minutes hits the streets of New Orleans, a teenage dealer and a local cop must team up with an ex-soldier to take down the group responsible for its creation.” The possibilities are endless in that description. What the description doesn’t tell you is that the premise doesn’t challenge its audience with any deeper way of thinking. What would be the real ramifications if such a pill existed? Instead, it is a very generic story about a father taking down the people that kidnapped his daughter, a cop that uses the pills even though he wants to take down the group responsible for it, and a kid that is a dealer of the pills because she needs the money for her and her poor mother. Everything is spoon fed to you, the viewer. There are no sit down conversations on the ethics of the pill, or any dialogue about the ethics of a good cop using it but still trying to do the right thing, nothing. It’s a one time watch action movie with some neat special effects and solid performances by the three leads. Nothing more, nothing less. If this were a school project, it would barely get a passing grade from most teachers. In my world those teachers would be casual movie goers. Me? With my obsession and knowledge of film I would be more of a college professor in this instance, and I would maybe…MAYBE give them another chance at a do over, but I certainly wouldn’t let them hand in what they already have.

The main problem with the movie is that the first hour feels like act one of a movie, then they completely skip the second act and go straight to the third. The movie isn’t terribly hastily edited like 2016’s Suicide Squad was, however they share one thing in common: there are too many introductory scenes. All set ups, and absolutely no gradual pay offs. There is no second act, there is no turn. It’s like when a teacher at school is giving the class a ‘following instructions’ lesson where they present the students a maze and tell them to “draw a straight line from the beginning to the end of the maze.” Those that don’t follow those directions try to solve the unsolvable maze instead of just doing what the teacher told them. She didn’t say solve the maze. She said ‘draw a straight line.’ The 2nd act of any movie would be solving the maze to get to the climax. This movie is just one of those ‘following instructions’ lesson. There are scenes 40 to 60 minutes into this movie that feel like they should’ve belonged in the first 15 minutes. Each of the three leads, played by Jamie Foxx, Joseph Gordon-Levitt, and Dominique Fishback get their own introductions, and then we they meet up one by one, they get yet another set up scene. For example, Fishback’s character, in her introductory scene, let’s us know that she is an aspiring rapper, and she’s really good. But when she finally meets Jamie Foxx’s character, she tells him and does what we already know she can do, because we saw it ten minutes earlier. When she raps to him, THAT should’ve been the reveal that she was a good rapper. THAT should’ve been a pay off to a previously established intro. But her introductory scene involves a teacher getting onto her for failing his class in front of her classmates and then proceeds to tell her he will give her a C if she can prove she’s a good rapper right then and there. So she raps, and you think she’s successful, but then it’s reveal it was all in her head. The movie should’ve cut out imagination sequence out and saved that reveal for when she meets Foxx mid film.

And while the other introductory scenes (other than that one I just described, they are mostly action packed introductory scenes) are well acted, look good special effects wise, and fun (because we get to see what different superpowers all these people get for five minutes), it’s not anything we haven’t seen before, specifically from the X-Men franchise. Plus, the action scenes in (most of) those films had twist or turns mid scene. None of the action scenes in this challenge the audience or the characters. Sure, a lot of them set their watches to 5 minutes, but instead of the script throwing the characters a curve ball in the last couple of seconds of having superpowers, all of the characters seem to be smart and just shrug off the fact that their time is up after their watch beeps at them. Also, this movie is kind of supposed to be a detective story, yet instead of the characters doing any detective work to find this organization responsible for these pills, they are handed everything on a silver platter. They just “run into” what they need to take them into the next scene, which is forced plot progression. None of this film is complicated, it is 100% predictable. Will Jamie Foxx find his kidnapped daughter? Will the three leads survive the film? Near mid film, when everything still felt introductory, Foxx reveals that he took the pill before and it almost killed him…so do you think he takes another pill by the climax? I’ll give you a hint, all three answers to those three questions are all obvious, and they are all the same answer. And the movie doesn’t even really have a central interesting villain. 300’s Rodrigo Santoro is set up as one, and without really revealing much, he is disappointingly not in the movie that long, even less screen time than he got in the third season of Westworld. His character is completely uninteresting until he takes one of the pills, and even then that is short lived and anti-climatic. Other than his character, there are two women characters that are supposed to be these distribution type government drug “bad guy” bosses, but they are barely in the film to even matter.

So let me ask you this: how do you expect to be a superpower/superhero like movie without a central supervillain? Answer: YOU CAN’T. That’s why this movie ultimately falls flat on its face several times throughout: there is no interesting threat, you feel like the protagonists will end up saving the day with only a brush off their shoulder to get rid of the minor debris. Even though there is no threat, Jamie Foxx, Joseph-Gordon Levitt, and Dominique Fishback all do a fantastic job acting to make you think like maybe there actually is one. Before going into this, I thought the direction was going to be the problem. Project Power is directed by Henry Joose and Ariel Schulman, the duo behind movies like the barely watchable Nerve and Paranormal Activity 3, and the unwatchable 4th movie in that franchise. The only decent film they have done is 2010’s Catfish, which as you know, coined that now famous phrase and sparked the television show of the same name. No, this isn’t their fault, as this is probably their best shot film, with some cool sequences such as Jamie Foxx fighting people around a tank, Joseph Gordon-Levitt’s introductory scenes, and certain parts of the climax. The problem is ALL script, written by a man named Mattson Tomlin who not only doesn’t have much writing experience but who…oh God no…who is also writing The Batman movie that stars Robert Pattinson. At least Project Power isn’t as bad as it could’ve been, it just isn’t a fully formed idea. And at least he’s not the sole writer of The Batman, but is co-writing it with director Matt Reeves, who is a more experienced filmmaker. With a solid resume, Mr. Reeves could help Mr. Tomlin fully form a fantastic idea and premise. So I’m not too worried. As for this film though, it’s just a mindless and unmemorable one time watch Netflix action-er that will be lost in the pile in the coming years. This project produced enough decent sparks to get going, but in the end had as much power as a typical assembly line machine, doing the same thing over and over again, nothing different, and with little effort.

Zach’s Zany Movie Reviews: I USED TO GO HERE

Ah, the awkward nostalgia trip “hang out” movie. We’ve gotten a lot of those the past decade haven’t we? There aren’t that many that have not been done before: lost loves, old party houses, old school mates, drugs, diners, drive-ins, and dives (yes, pun intended on that last one). I USED TO GO HERE is not an exception to the rule. So when you aren’t an exception, you gotta make the movie at least entertaining when you are surrounded by predictable elements, and in that, it succeeded for me. But it might not be very memorable down the line. Produced by The Lonely Island guys, I Used To Go Here stars Community’s Gillian Jacobs and per IMDB, “Following the launch of her new novel, 35-year-old writer Kate is invited to speak at her alma mater by her former professor. After accepting the invitation, Kate finds herself deeply enmeshed in the lives of a group of college students.” The movie does go down the familiar path of where the protagonists work is not that successful and most of the jokes surround her taking the criticism in a different dumber of ways, but thankfully Gillian Jacobs innate ability to turn those predictable narrative threads and react to them in her own unique way make them a little bit fresher than normal, is what is part of this film’s small charm. Jacobs thankfully isn’t just playing Britta from Community here, and more of an “aw shucks I just take everything in stride and am just along for the ride” type character.

The movie really succeeds starting in the last half hour, where she goes spying on one of her old professors, played by an almost unrecognizable and more clean cut Jermaine Clement, with some college kids she just met that are staying at her old college house. This film works on entertainment value alone, but don’t expect anything too deep in terms of allegory or theme. It’s just a simple hang out movie, where the story takes place over a night or two, one where the characters share a little heartache, a little remembrance, some passion and laughter, they learn a couple of lessons, but their experience might be hazy or not remembered at all in several years down the line in their lives. Which is exactly how I’ll be with this movie in time. If it ever comes up in conversation or I ever happen to remember it again, I’ll remember it for Gillian Jacob’s aw shucks cute as a button performance, yet not much else. I am not familiar with writer/director Kris Rey’s work, but she is definitely an actor’s director, getting realistic performances form all. I just wish there was a little something more from the movie. It felt just like a much more likable Holden Caulfield type hanging around his old school for a couple of days and maybe learning a lesson or two. But this worked for a one time watch, but in about a decade I’ll probably be saying, “oh yeah, I used to remember that movie, from what I can recollected, it was fine.”

Zach’s Zany Movie Reviews: BANANA SPLIT

BANANA SPLIT just happened to be a random find while cruising Netflix. When looking it up, it was certified fresh on Rotten Tomatoes, the premise sounded interesting, and it was released back in March of 2020 (even though it was made two years ago and played at film festivals for a bit until then), so here I am, able to review it. And I’m glad I did, because this was actually a decent little teen comedy that didn’t treat the audience as if they were morons. Witty, fun, yet crude dialogue that made our two protagonist characters hilariously funny. Combined with their undeniable chemistry ended up making this film a breeze of a watch, especially that it is also only an hour and 28 minutes long. It doesn’t drag once whatsoever. It’s one of those R rated coming of age tales that in no way shape or form would’ve made any kind of money whatsoever in theaters, due to the fact that while the two leads have been in a bunch of stuff your teen children could recite off the top of their heads, I only knew them from things when I looked up their names on IMDB. Streaming is the perfect platform for this movie. And it thankfully isn’t a Netflix original film, I looked it up and found that you could rent or buy cheap on other VOD apps like VUDU or FandangoNow for anyone interested that doesn’t pay for the big subscription streaming platform. Speaking of IMDB, it describes Banana Split as such: “Over the course of a summer, two teenage girls develop the perfect kindred spirit friendship, with one big problem: one of them is dating the other’s ex.” The reason why I probably enjoyed this film the most is that the two leads reminded me of two good friends of mine that act the same way toward each other, although neither of them has dated the same guy…thank Christ for that.

Halfway through the film, I started thinking to myself, “man, some of this dialogue is so crude and rude there is no way that a woman wrote this.” If the reveal had been a guy I probably wouldn’t have liked it as much. How am I supposed to know if what was said and made me laugh was authentic from a woman’s perspective? Well, it is authentic, as I was surprised to find out that the co-writer of this screenplay was the film’s main star Hannah Marks. She co-wrote it with her frequent collaborator Joey Power, which makes me want to check out their 2018 indie After Everything, which has similarly gotten good reviews. Her and Liana Liberato are fantastic here. Their friendship based off rules of not talking about the latter’s current boyfriend and the former’s ex felt genuine and realistic. Granted, it does go into some predictable territory by the film’s end, such as the audience knows the leads are eventually going bring up their feelings of jealousy and get mad at one another, but to give the film’s credit, it doesn’t wrap up everything in a nice and neat bow. There are a couple of threads left dangling, and the film does that on purpose, as the story is just about the resolution of these two’s relationship and their relationship alone. We have a couple of side B plots involving the boyfriend, played to the best of his stone face ability by not Jughead Dylan Sprouse, and his red headed best friend, and while a couple of things happen that are interesting, the movie knows it doesn’t need to focus on them as much as other teen comedies would have. Focusing on them too much would’ve bogged down the narrative.

The movie isn’t revolutionary in terms of the teen comedy or the crude sexual content comedy, it’s just a fun little flick that mostly works because of the fast, witty dialogue and the chemistry between the two leads. It was quite refreshing to not have a teen comedy go directly into the toilet within the first five minutes of the film, it had a natural progression that set things up as need be, and then the pay offs, although some of the predictable, didn’t try to do anything too outlandish. Hannah Marks should keep on keepin’ on writing. and unlike Ben Affleck, she’s a pretty good actress where I’d say she could star in her own stuff and it not seem like too much at one time. I’m really curious as to if maybe these two girls are actually really good friends in real life, but I don’t have the energy to do that much research on such a little film. Judging by their Instagram’s, I don’t think they are, which they could’ve fooled me as all their interactions in the film feel very realistic. I really don’t have any complaints about this film. It is a decent couple of times watch teen comedy that got quite a few laugh out loud moments from me. A movie like this isn’t meant to be studied or held up on a pedestal, it isn’t supposed to make you think or be nominated for any awards, it is just meant for escape and to have fun with it, something different than the bullshit movies on Netflix like Feel The Beat or Work It. Something worth your time and you can pay 100% attention to and not have your mind split over other activities on your phone or computer. It was a nice little indie treat.

Zach’s Zany Movie Reviews: RETALIATION

I don’t think U.S. marketing knew what to do with RETALIATION, considering that this movie was just released recently in the States, but back in 2017 overseas and under a different (and more sensible) title, Romans. If you look up the movie on popular streaming services like VUDU, FandangoNow or Amazon Prime Video you will see Lord of the Rings’ Orlando Bloom’s face front and center, all beat up, holding a hammer and the hand holding it all bloody, with a look of…well… revenge and retaliation on his face. Per IMDB.com, it describes this movie as such: “An adult victim (Bloom) of childhood sexual abuse confronts the horrors of his past.” To expand just a tiny little bit on my own for you to understand the point I’m eventually going to make in terms of being marketed incorrectly, this childhood sexual abuse is from a priest that raped him when he was 12 years old. Believe it or not, IMDB has the better description of this movie (not to mention it correctly lists it as a 2017 film). Let’s take a look at VUDU’s description: “Malky, a demolition worker whose life receives a seismic shock when, out drinking with friends at a local pub, he sees a disturbing figure from his past: the man he holds responsible for a traumatic childhood incident. Fueled by anger, Malky sets out on a path of vengeance–and discovers that no one can escape the consequences of their sins in this taut thriller.” Thriller…pfft. So combine that brief description with the visual marketing to get you to rent or buy the movie, No go and watch the trailer. I’m serious, go and do it, this might be the only time where I recommend you do before diving head first into a movie. You’ll thank me later.

Done watching the trailer? Okay, so now, combine VUDU’s description of the film, the visual stupid direct to U.S. video on demand image of Blood beaten up and holding a hammer, as well as the trailer you just watched. What movie does it seem like it is going to be to you? A revenge thriller where Orlando Bloom goes all “crazy” and kills a bunch of pedophile priests? WRONG. It is not that movie, but here’s a twist you didn’t see coming, I knew that going in. So this review isn’t going to be how my expectations were damaged because of false advertising. No, I’m determined to give you different expectations before you watch this movie (if you watch it) so that you don’t hate it after you view it or if you’ve already seen this and hated it, why you shouldn’t hate it that much because it isn’t the movies’ fault. For me, Retaliation is a hard to watch, half way decent, one time viewing featuring Orlando Bloom’s incredible, best performance to date. The movie is hard to watch because there are a couple of self mutilation scenes that make make you gasp and/or stomach churn. However, they are necessary as it correlates with the themes of the movie and make sense with the protagonist’s plight. At first the movie makes you think it is going to be a revenge type thriller, but quickly pulls a 180, being more of a very slow burn character piece that is much more juicy narrative wise with a pitch perfect ending. I’m glad it took the 180 route, because if it hadn’t, and it was just a straight tale of revenge, then my disappointed feelings with The Last Of Us Part II would’ve effected by critique greatly.

But it doesn’t! Just expect a lot of characters talking to each other, some love and friend mishaps, ‘mommy issues’, several long (and very well written) monologues where Orlando Bloom vents his frustrations about what to do with his thoughts and demons, followed by an earned final 10-15 minutes. Don’t expect ‘Kill Pedophile Priests: The Movie.’ The film doesn’t overstay its welcome at a lean hour and 35 minutes and to watch Orlando Bloom powerfully and emotionally steal every scene he is in was an acting treat to behold. He’s never ever ever been this good. If this was a normal movie, released under normal circumstances, he probably could’ve been considered for Awards at some point. Alas, maybe something else down the line, he’s still young. I can’t get into the writing and directing history of the filmmakers involved all that much, because I’ve never seen any of their other work, but I can say that the dialogue was believable and true to the subject matter, and the direction was dark, moody, and the shots looked good. Look, I’m not a religious person at all, I just admitted on social media that I’m an Athiest (especially in part with the whole priest sexual abuse allegations that have been going on for quite some time), but that doesn’t mean I’m not going to respect the source material if it happens to be in a movie. Far from it, as after watching this I wish it would’ve been released in the U.S. under its original title, Romans, the film being centered on that part in the Bible that talks about enemies and forgiveness. That title makes so much more sense, especially near the end. I don’t know who the fuck came up with ‘Retaliation’ but they need to be crucified.

Zach’s Zany Movie Reviews: AN AMERICAN PICKLE (HBO Max)

Well I’m certainly not in a pickle, I easily can tell you that I very much enjoyed the new Seth Rogen original movie, AN AMERICAN PICKLE, that just premiered today on HBO Max. There are a lot of critics and normal folk out there thinking that this movie is just mediocre or okay at best, but I have a feeling that they might just be sour (pun intended) about no new great and big blockbuster movies being available in theaters for awhile, the pandemic finally getting the best of their opinions. Sure, it is another “fish out of water” story, a plot thread we’ve seen in many a film, including one of my favorites, the original Rush Hour, but this movie has a something bit more to say than just “that’s not how we do it where I’m from.” Instead it turns it into “that’s not something we can say, do, or think about because of the times.” Sure I would’ve liked the movie to be longer as the things it says feel a little cut off too quickly because the films’ length, but since the pacing was near perfect, it is easier to ignore my minor complaint. It is a tightly woven, no filler, one hour and 29 minute cute little PG-13 comedy that uses the often used recurring plot thread to say a little somethin’-somethin’ different about immigration, religious beliefs, sexism, social media, and cancel culture that I haven’t seen done in a film of its genre as of yet. Combine that with Seth Rogen easily giving the best performance of his career since ’50/50′ and you have something that is a little more special than just okay or mediocre. You have something a little more kosher. Again, pun intended.

Per IMDB, it describes AN AMERICAN PICKLE as: “An immigrant worker at a pickle factory is accidentally preserved for 100 years and wakes up in modern day Brooklyn.” To expand upon that description, he is preserved for 100 years in pickle brine, a ridiculous and impossible concept, one that the movie manages to make a rather clever joke about. I found myself either chuckling or laughing out loud every couple of minutes in this movie. Maybe I just appreciated something a little simpler from Seth Rogen instead of the R-rated, boob, dick, curse, weed, and fart jokes I’m accustomed to watch in every one of his films. This movie contains smart, well written jokes that make you think a little bit. It makes fun of Twitter and it makes fun of cancel culture in a series of ridiculously funny gags that don’t take one side or the other. It comments and pokes fun at sexism and the immigration process while also saying something heartfelt yet funny about genes, family, and religion. After you watch the movie, if you think about it, it toes a pretty perfect line. I don’t know, if you end up hating the movie, you could probably just say that I was in a desperate state of wanting anything to even be 50% better than most the drivel we have gotten since late March. But I encourage you to have an open mind when watching this movie. Dig a little deeper than just thinking its another Seth Rogen comedy at the surface. Read between the lines into what it is trying to say.

If anything, watch the movie for Seth Rogen’s performance. Or shall I say performances’s. Seth Rogen plays two roles in the movie, Herschel Greenbaum, the guy that falls into and is preserved in the pickle brine for 100 years, and he also plays his great grandson Ben Greenbaum, who reluctantly takes Herschel in as the only family he has left in his generation. While Rogen’s performance as Ben is somewhat familiar as a more quiet and subtle Seth that we’ve seen in other films, it’s his accent and mannerisms as Herschel that makes his performance soar. I was constantly laughing at Rogen’s facial expressions and anything blasphemous flying out of that character’s mouth. And while the movie is quite predictable plot structure wise, I still had fun with the journey. Writer Simon Rich, who has written for Saturday Night Live and did some additional story treatment for Disney/Pixar’s Inside Out, has written here a heartfelt story that has a little more to say than most in this comedy category. When watching the trailer, it looked very standard, but thankfully they saved all the good stuff for the actual film. This is director Brandon Trost’s first big directing gig, as he has been a cinematographer on several Seth Rogen films, and his direction is crisp and clean, with no tonal problems whatsoever. That’s another thing, critics complained about drastic changes in tone, which I very adamantly have to disagree with. Usually I feel those, and if I did miss any, it was probably because I was enjoying this enough to ignore it. I kind of relish this movie. To me, there was never a dill moment.

Zach’s Zany Movie Reviews: RADIOACTIVE (Amazon Prime)

Is it just me, or is it odd that what is supposed to be a biography celebrating Nobel Peace prize winner Marie Curie and her findings, she discovered polonium and radium with her husband, turns out to be a scathing piece of how her discoveries hurt the world more than it helped? RADIOACTIVE doesn’t know what kind of tone it wants to have, completely nose diving in its second half narrative wise when the first half was somewhat enjoyable. The only constant this movie has is a wonderful performance by Rosamund Pike as Curie, probably her best performance since Gone Girl and A Private War. The film is mostly told in a linear fashion but is continuously disrupted by a flash forward to where her discoveries ended up costing the lives of millions, such as the bombing of Hiroshima and Chernobyl’s meltdown. To top it all off, when doing actual research into what really happened in Curie’s life versus what I witnessed play out on screen, a lot of it is very, very inaccurate. Not only inaccurate to her character/personality depiction, but also with historical and scientific events. What this all boils down to is that you can’t use this film an educational or biographical source. So then what can you use it as? A piece of entertainment? No, because the pacing and lack of focus in the second half of the film made me droopy eyed. Can you use it as a uplifting yet cautionary tale on science? No and that is why the movie ultimately doesn’t work, there are so many mixed messages in this that it ends up pointing to nothing.

Per IMDB, it describes Radioactive as: “Pioneer – Rebel – Genius. Radioactive is incredible, true-story of Marie Sklodowska-Curie and her Nobel Prize-winning work that changed the world.” After seeing this movie, doing some research and then reading the description, I scoffed and laughed when I got to the word ‘true.’ In the film, it depicts Curie as advising her daughter Irene (a minor background role wasting actress Anya Taylor-Joy’s talents) against a career in science, when in fact she encouraged her daughter in the subject, welcomed Irene into her laboratory, and even started an experimental school for her in which Curie ending up teaching lessons on physics. Also, in the film the both Curie and her future husband almost laughingly meet in a classic rom-com manner. Marie literally runs into him on the streets of Paris, and he notices what she’s reading. In reality, Marie and Pierre met when a Polish professor of physics introduced them, because he knew Marie was looking for laboratory space and thought Pierre would be able to provide it. Also in the movie she constantly blames her sickness on her studies in radiation when there is no historical proof that she ever really truly acknowledged the dangers of her career. Yeah…I don’t want to say it because I hate the man that coin phrased it…but this movie is in fact, “fake news.” That is just a few examples, but believe you me, this movie takes many, many liberties with what really went down during that time.

I understand that ‘true story’ films from Hollywood always take some liberties, it is just that this movie took several too many when it could’ve easily adhered to the facts and made the movie much more interesting in the process. Historical and personality inaccuracies aside, it’s the tone, messages, and pacing of the second half of the film that make it almost completely unwatchable. At one moment the film was trying to celebrate her life in how hard she worked to achieve her goals and make discoveries, and the next minute the film was like, “look what your findings ended up doing, you bitch!” It’s as if the movie was trying to do a very straight adaptation on the subject, and in the middle of it, while you are watching it at a theater, suddenly a Karen stands up, pauses the movie, and starts pointing and yelling at the screen about how much she is triggered by what she is witnessing. Disgracing the audience for feeling for Marie Curie and her family when her discoveries did more harm than good. The film couldn’t pick a tone, and it constantly had a bunch of time lapses that ended up being hard to keep track of. To sum it up, I got bored and I didn’t care what happened anymore about 55 minutes into this hour and 49 minute movie. Things get even more confusing right before the end credits with title cards detailing how great her discoveries were, with X-Rays during World War I and such. It didn’t know whether it wanted to praise or condemn her, and in doing both, muddled everything it was trying to say and gave its audience a surreal experience that I never want to take part in again.

I don’t blame director Marjane Satrapi, as the imagery and shots in this are better than average. The real person to blame is the screenwriter, Jack Thorne, who unsurprisingly also co-wrote the very historically inaccurate 2019 film The Aeronauts, whose first half was much better than its second as well. Maybe he needs to take lessons on how to better construct the second half of the stories that he writes. Maybe instead of taking liberties with the material he is trying to adapt, he should take lessons on how to accurately portray events and still make them interesting on screen, instead of making shit up, and still having the final product come out tire-some, boring, and sloppy. His too on-the-nose writing with characters ceremoniously announcing the film’s themes and their personal motivations as they go along, makes the film completely by-the-numbers drivel that will be forgotten about in one month’s time. It’s no wonder that Amazon Prime quickly snatched this up after its theatrical premiere was cancelled due to COVID-19. It was probably really cheap to do so as the studio probably had no faith in it. Only if you are a Rosamund Pike performance completist can I recommend this film to you. She’s stunning and really good and the only part of the film, save for some of the first half, that works. I’m going for the easy last sentence sum it up pun joke here, so forgive me, but just like radium itself, you should stay far away from Radioactive.

Zach’s Zany Movie Reviews: INFAMOUS

Everyone involved in INFAMOUS should be ashamed of themselves. And no, I’m not talking about the popular videogame made awhile back, but a new movie that stars former Disney channel star, now more of a social media mogul with one directorial credit in a PornHub short film (I shit you not, look it up), Bella Thorne. I follow Ms. Thorne on Instagram for kicks, she is actually entertaining even though you could say that she is something that rhymes with ‘attention s’more.’ A lot of women and other adults think she’s a bad actress and kind of a word that rhymes with smut, and while I’d argue with the 2nd statement, because if you follow her she has had long term relationships, and not that many of them, I can tell you that the first opinion is 200% fact. Bella Thorne is a terrible, terrible actress. But surprisingly, she’s only the second main thing to bother me about this movie. The main problem I had with Infamous is that it treats its audience as if we were morons. Per IMDB, it describes the movie as: “Two young lovers rob their way across the southland, posting their exploits to social media, and gaining fame and followers as a result.” So you can probably put two and two together: they are a modern day millennial white trash social media Bonnie and Clyde. And the film desperately tries to get you to believe, in this day and age of triggered offended young people, that people that can’t pick their heads up for their laptops and phones would love that these two criminals are going around killing innocent people and robbing them of money. Not only is this film offensive in mind but in soul, and writer/director Joshua Caldwell needs to quit the business before he tarnishes it any longer.

This film is groan a minute worthy. Starting with cringe inducing acting from Bella Thorne (surprisingly everyone else is not that bad), the movie just keeps not only getting dumber with what it is trying to get you to believe and say about social media fame, but also in terms of narrative and common sense. Bella Thorne’s character, Arielle (don’t you dare pronounce it after the mermaid!) posts almost all of their crimes and exploits on an app that looks like either Instagram or Facebook Live. And the news on television talks about their crimes almost immediately after they happen. There is no fucking way in hell that they would’ve been able to get away with as much as they did for so long. The app would’ve done the responsible thing and either A. shut down her account and/or B. work with Feds and the cellular company to track down her phone and arrest their asses before they could even start their next crime. Writer/director Joshua Caldwell doesn’t even try to give a reason for them getting away with it in a one or two sentence throwaway line, the movie just expects you to gloss over the whole situation. There is not one likable character in this film, and the movie had the opportunity to do it with the male lead, played by Jake Manley. Bella Thorne is the one that kills all the innocent people to the climax, and at times it just seems like his boyfriend character is only along for the ride and starts to not want anything to do with it. But instead of tapping into that sympathy, to get the audience more involved with his downward plight, his character is written so poorly, that he’s just mentally THAT dumb and decides to keep following her because he ‘loves’ her and has had his dick in her mouth (in the movie, not in real life).

This movie was only a couple of scenes of stupidity away from beating my #1 shittiest film of 2020 so far, John Henry. The only reason why this doesn’t quite reach that level of abysmal is because John Henry had a very weird collaboration of different tones that failed on every single level. The tone here at least is consistent with the dumb ass white trash stupidity of the two lead protagonists. And there are a couple of decent shots in the movie, but writer/director Joshua Caldwell will not get out on a technicality with me. This movie is in every way imaginable, unwatchable. It even breaks Screenwriting 101 rules with having the end of the film be at the beginning and then we retrace their steps, leaving absolutely no tension into the fate of the two leads. Caldwell also must’ve been obsessed with Leonardo DiCaprio’s look in Romeo & Juliet because the male lead’s clothing in this was Leo’s main outfit from that film (Hawaiian over shirt) in almost each and every scene, even Leo’s hair from that movie, and it wasn’t just an homage, it was a blatant rip off. And don’t get me started on the implausible last scene of Infamous, as there is no way any real life event would’ve ended like that. Which makes me think, was this film supposed to be a satire of social media life and fame? Because if it was, it really needed to work on the satire part. Even if they wanted the satire part to be subtle, Caldwell should’ve watched Spring Breakers to see how it is correctly done. But I have a feeling that wasn’t the intention at all, that Infamous was all along supposed to be super serious. And in doing so, the movie will now be infamous for being abysmal and one of the worst ones of 2020.

Zach’s Zany Movie Reviews: ARCHIVE

Nothing can ruin a solid, solid movie other than its last act. Plenty of movies have been absolutely destroyed by them, whether it be Repo Men, Knowing, The Village, to name a few. I’m sure if you thought hard enough you’d come up with a list of 10 to 20 in the next couple of minutes. I being a huge movie buff, these kinds of films manage to break my heart all the time. Some more than others. In the case of the new direct to video title ARCHIVE, starring Divergent’s Theo James and Nymphomaniac’s Stacy Martin, it’s only the movie’s very, very last minute reveal (last 3-4 minutes of 1 hr 49 minute run time) that made me groan a little bit. I don’t want to give anything away, but it has an ending similar to one of the three movies I’ve mentioned above. It did a better job of hiding this so called “twist” (even though I knew it was coming and was praying only 10 minutes into it for me to be wrong), but I could still think of a handful of other ways it could’ve ended and been much more satisfactory in a storytelling stand point. The rest of the film is so so good though, and I have a feeling that upon a re-watch this twist might make you see everything in a different kind of light, that I’m ultimately going to give it a decent recommendation. It is a sci-fi drama sort of thriller in the vein of those you might’ve seen before like Moon or I Am Mother, but with much more meaningful undertones. The movie runs along as such a brisk pace even though it intentionally only slowly gives you bits and pieces of information throughout to put together what is going on and doesn’t just spoon feed it to you all at once. It’s very well made, shot, acted, etc. But I don’t think I can ever forgive the last 3-4 minute ending, it’s unfortunately permanently archived in my brain.

Per IMDB, it describes Archive as such: “2038: George Almore (Theo James) is working on a true human-equivalent AI. His latest prototype is almost ready. This sensitive phase is also the riskiest. Especially as he has a goal that must be hidden at all costs: being reunited with his dead wife (Stacy Martin).” For this being a low budget movie, the special effects are top notch. They kept it simple, which is always the healthiest way to go if you don’t have a lot of money to spend on a film project. The robots (humans inside of them obviously) look and act realistic, the inside and outside of the lab where George is working on his AI is the perfect display of futuristic dystopian imagery. The make up on the more human looking of these artificial intelligent beings are extremely well done. Theo James easily gives a career best performance (not too hard considering the other bullshit that is on his resume, but still appreciated), Stacy Martin is great, and the direction is crisp, fluid, and engaging. The themes, motifs, and messages are dramatically poignant, especially in this time of our real life isolation because of COVID-19. Everything in this film is near perfect. If it just wasn’t for that damned ending. Fuck, I really want to spoil it so I can vent my frustrations better. But I know that I can figure out a way to relay my true feelings without ruining things if you have any interest whatsoever in discovering what I’m bitching about. The film’s ending unfortunately breaks the Screenplay/Storytelling 101 of what not to do with an ending, because better movies have already done it with much better results.

It is too similar to the ending of a 2 word movie whose last word rhymes with Madder. If you’ve seen the movie I’m alluding to, you know what I’m talking about. That film did it so much better, really the blueprint of what this movie tries to do but kind of fails at the last minute because of how invested we are in everything that came before. But I’m ultimately giving this a solid recommendation, because the 1 hr and 44 minutes before the ending were just too damn good to ignore. It made me think a lot of the movie Moon, by Duncan Jones, and when doing a little more research on Archive, low and behold, its similarity isn’t that surprising. Archive’s director, Gavin Rothery, was part of the art department for Moon. He doesn’t blatantly rip it off, it’s more of an homage, so I’m not going to bitch about how similar they are. Rothery does make it is own and since he has never written or directed anything at all before, I’m absolutely shocked with how much he learned in that department to become as skilled as he is here. Maybe if he can direct a film with a better ending, he could wind up being a masterful sci-fi director like Ridley Scott or Denis Villenueve. He just needs to hone in on his screenplay writing skills, but hey, this is a start and shows lots of potential. This movie is better than 9/10ths of the straight to video shit we are getting because of the pandemic (that 1/10th being Palm Springs), and that ain’t bad. It’s just every time I think about the ending I cringe, just a little bit. It makes me curious if this had any alternate endings, as I would’ve loved to see how other conclusions had worked with the rest of the solid 9/10ths of this film. If there were none, some should’ve been conceived and archived.

Zach’s Zany Movie Reviews: HOST (Shudder)

Does it really count as a feature length film if the movie is only 58 minutes long? I’m thinking more like a short film, right? But when looking it up (funny how I haven’t done that until now), HOST, a new 58 minute Shudder original movie, does in fact count as a “feature length film.” The Academy of Motion Picture Arts and Sciences, the American Film Institute, and the British Film Institute all define a feature as a film with a running time of 2,400 seconds (i.e. 40 minutes) or longer. Who’d have thunk that huh? With the movie having a surprising short as shit runtime, my review will probably also be short as shit, because if I talk about it a lot, I’ll end up ruining the scares and surprises. One surprise I can ruin, because it has nothing to do with the plot or twists, is that Host was actually just filmed a couple of months ago during the pandemic and lock down phase of it. Which was itself kind of cool that they were able to produce a half way decent film with all the limitations and time constraints. Per IMDB, it describes HOST as: “Six friends hire a medium to hold a séance via Zoom during lock down – but they get far more than they bargained for as things quickly go wrong. When an evil spirit starts invading their homes, they begin to realize they might not survive the night.” So essentially yes, it is another “desktop/laptop thriller” in the realm of other movies such as Unfriended, Unfriended: Dark Web, Searching, etc. Searching easily being the best of those. HOST ultimately works because of its very effective scares during the 2nd half hour of the film, although fans of this genre, like me, still kind of groan at the set up we have to endure before said scares.

This film isn’t written or directed by anyone you know, and it doesn’t star anyone you know. The acting though is very believable for its genre. The only thing that you’ll have to suspend your belief on is when the six friends either take their phone or laptop around their room and/or house when shit starts going down. Thankfully though, when they end up doing that, the scares are so damn effective that you completely forget about that little detail. The only real problem I had with the film is that none of these films, other than Searching, produce a great hook of a set up to get us engaged at the very beginning. It took be approximately about 15 – 20 minutes to me to get into these kinds of movies. Yeah, I understand that it is supposed to feel real, with these friends hooking up via Zoom one by one and spouting off stupid normal life shit that doesn’t really interest us, there’s just gotta be a more interesting way to do it. Other than that little nitpick, past the 15-20 minute mark, everything is smooth sailing. The scares that hit, they hit hard, and don’t ever let up, even when the end of the film has an actual fucking countdown to the end of the Zoom meeting (and you can easily guess what goes down when it hits :00, still made me jump though). To be honest, I maybe would’ve liked to see about 20-25 more minutes of added on effective scares like they had in the film, but then again, its runtime is about perfect, and adding anything else might have lessened the impact of the other frights. Considering I didn’t like Shudder’s other original film, The Beach House, and turned off Scare Package before that film’s half way mark, Host is the best thing Shudder has to offer right now. A decent one time watch. Still not enough to get me to pay past a free week trial though. Having to pay $5 a month for this service gives me the shivers in general.