Jurassic World: Fallen Kingdom (1/2 star)

JURASSIC WORLD: FALLEN KINGDOM
Try this new and improved Hollywood blockbuster recipe on your own to experience that zing of nostalgia your life has been missing! A great recipe for a beautiful summer day that will surely dampen your spirits - or - to gently remind you how painfully inept Hollywood films have become. Enjoy!!!


Ingredients:

1. 1 Hollywood hack script that lifts most of its material from an original, better film (in this case, "The Lost World." If you are running low, even "Jurassic Park 3" will suffice)
2. 1 director with limited experience in making a big-budget blockbuster. Preferably one known more for quirky indie flicks. (If your film begins to feel like it's using CGI to mask a lack of story, then you are on the right track)
3. A heaping cupful of references to the original, more successful trilogy (mainly "Jurassic Park") to remind audiences that nostalgia is an adequate substitute to originality 
4. Characters who constantly fight for dinosaur rights (but make sure that 99% of the dinosaurs are soulless blood-thirsty monsters that murder humans like flies! It's a monster movie, after all!)
5. One painfully thin love story because, well, you gotta have that in there..
6. One annoying character who screams too much and whose purpose is entirely unneeded (consider also adding a child in your film to raise the stakes when your dino's attack)
7. One cameo from an original cast member (Jeff Goldblum, if possible). Even if it's just for 15 seconds, it's exactly what your fanboys will want!
8. A newer, biggerer, more lethal dinosaur (who wants an Indomidus rex anymore?? BORING). Give it laser tracking and vampire claws to make it more scary. Oh, and it should be black, because black is scarier. 
9. A hack villain who is only concerned with money, regardless of 4 previous films proving that dinosaurs can't be contained. 

Recipe:

1. Preheat your youtube trailer to at least 25 million views. 
2. Take the basic plot line from "The Lost World" and filter it through 2-3 untalented screenwriters. Make sure your heroes spell out the movie's themes in broad, emotional monologues. This is important. 
3. Shoehorn your characters back together no matter how unlikely the reasoning. 
4. Remove all craft behind the camera. Also remove all talent in front of it.
5. Disregard all sense of logic and reason. (Remember, this is science fiction! Don't be afraid to put your heroes within 5 feet of an exploding volcano, or performing dino-blood transfusions in the back of a moving ship, or narrowly escaping the jaws of a lethal dinosaur several times per scene. Audiences don't expect logic! They want hungry-hungry dinosaurs!)
6. Remember, audiences don't want a simple action movie with well-written characters and clear action. Make sure to incorporate lofty plots about the weaponization of raptors, selling dinosaurs to wealthy foreign buyers for sport, etc. Make sure the scientists are still trying to genetically engineer more deadly animals!!! That's what audiences want! More plot points = good. 
7. Use editing to cut back and forth between drastically different scenes (ie, a girl playing games in her house and a woman performing surgery on a velociraptor. Repeat as often as possible). More editing = good. 
8. Continue tacking on ingredients in no discernible order until the film is over 2 hours long. Longer runtime = good. 
9. Make the ending scary so that the audience won't remember how boring and awful the rest of the movie was. Preferably in a big mansion with no lights and long, narrow hallways and screaming little girls. Yeah, that. 
10. Conclude with the little girl spelling out the overall theme of the movie in one or two sentences. Reshoot until her acting makes your eyes roll back in your head. Top it off with a voiceover by Jeff Goldblum that is nearly verbatim to the final lines of "The Lost World." Voila!

Remove from oven once box office reaches $300 million domestically! Excited for the sequel? We didn't think so, either. Happy cooking!

Incredibles 2 (****1/2)

It's been a while since I saw the original "The Incredibles," that 2004 super hero flick that thrust Pixar into the action genre and delivered their first entirely "human-based" cast, as well as one of the company's most accomplished stories. While I had always thought a sequel would have been more welcomed than, say, "Cars 3," the film comes 14 years later and reminds audiences why the original was so much fun to begin with.

It opens just as the original film closed - 'the Underminer' strikes at a grade school track meet, and the Incredibles don their freshly-pressed supersuits and get to work. The story reminds us that 'supers' are still illegal, and the Incredibles fighting crime ultimately cost the city more money than if they had done nothing at all (think of all the criticisms of movies like "Avengers" or "Man of Steel" in which entire cities are destroyed amidst the chaos). The family is again put into hiding but are soon met by a philanthropist named Winston Deavor (Bob Odenkirk) and his sister Evelyn (Catherine Keener) who have started a political movement as a means to raise public support of supers and pass laws to allow them to fight crime once more. Sounds pretty dense, right?

Deavor recruits Elastigirl (the always-marvelous Holly Hunter) as the face of his campaign. He supplies her with a micro-camera that she wears on her chest while saving lives, the video planning on demonstrating the benevolence of super heroes and elicit public support of their efforts. While Helen is off fighting crime, Bob - aka Mr Incredible - is selected as babysitter for their three kids. This is where the film finds a nice stroke of humor, as Bob needs to help Dash with his math and Violet with her boy problems - all the while as their baby Jack-Jack is developing an array of super powers on his own.

The film works so well in this back and forth. The comedy comes largely from Jack-Jack, a scene stealer in every way (maybe the cutest child Pixar has ever created?) as he transitions in and out of dimensions, turns to jelly, and erupts in flames as he suspects a neighborhood raccoon is actually a criminal worthy of a fight. The first film lightly touched on the baby's powers, but I was reminded that none of the Incredibles actually find out what skills he has actually developed. When Bob realizes the potential danger, he works again with Edna Mode to design a suit that has the ability to contain such unlimited powers (the scenes with Edna are once again a highlight).

I have seen so many computer-generated films, but INCREDIBLES 2 has got to be one of the more beautiful ones I have ever seen. Can an animated movie be nominated for Best Cinematography?  The action scenes are hands down some of the most visually-engaging sequences I can remember in a while. The colors are so bright (as when Elastigirl and her motorcycle chase down a runaway train against a setting pink sun) and the framing is so clever that I found myself leaning forward even closer to the screen, eager to drink it all up. Every detail is there. I noticed individual threads on Bob's nightgown and the way Violet's cheeks blush when she sees the boy she likes. This is incredibly detailed work that shows Pixar's passion and sets the animation apart from anything else out there - period. We are reminded why Brad Bird (who wrote/directed this film and its sequel, as well as the criminally-underrated Ratatouille) is such a skilled director, and why his talents have worked in terms of visual storytelling. This is an exciting movie that is kinetic, fast, and gripping - everything a superhero movie needs to be.

The film has a few small faults, largely with its villain (who I saw coming a mile away) and an overly-elaborate plot regarding that character's motivations. When it comes to Pixar's villains, they rarely reach the greatness of their heroes. Likewise for the film's aesthetic. The original was so seeped in 1960's nostalgia with a strong visual style, and while this film has its moments, there were many sequences where I might have believed it to be modern day. These are tiny flaws in an otherwise wonderful movie, a sequel that nearly reaches the towering greatness of the original. It's not a high-concept movie like "Inside Out" or a heart-tugging fantasy like last year's "Coco." This is an action-packed roller coaster from start to finish. I can't wait to go back a second time!

Hereditary (*****)

There's a lot of hype surrounding HEREDITARY, hype which I largely dismissed prior to its release. Horror, after all, is such a subjective genre. Where I find "Blair Witch Project" to be utterly chilling, many more say it's 'boring' and 'predictable.' What can I say to convince you of "Hereditary's" greatness, then? This needs to be said upfront: it may be the scariest movie I've ever seen.

The film is somewhat cryptic in the way it tackles the main story. If you saw the trailer which was full of stark images and horrific clips, you might be hard-pressed to explain what the movie is about. Simply put, we have an artist named Annie (Toni Collette), married with two children (a high school pothead and a creepy tween). Her art deals with miniature sets and doll houses which aim for realism in detail and setting. The film opens with Annie speaking at her mother's funeral. To say their relationship was rocky is an understatement. We learn so much about the family dynamic in the first few scenes.

At a support group for those who have lost loved ones, Annie struggles to explain her feelings about her mother, and yet soon after is diving deep into a psychological history of mental disorders and violence. Whether or not her husband is aware of this past remains to be seen. Immediately, we have a portrait of a mother who is anything but stable. Around her, in an idyllic country home, her family functions with a relieving sense of normalcy: her son is into pot and girls, and her husband works a quiet office job and praises her progress.

While the scares in this film take their time to build, they do so with such a deliberate hand, that there isn't a wasted moment nor a quiet scene in which a "bathroom break" is acceptable. First time writer/director Ari Aster (is this even possible?) steps into feature films with a masterful hand as to film language and visual storytelling. So often is there a slow-panning shot where we, the audience, cower as to what's around the corner, and other times some maleficent force is just off screen. Blink, and it's gone. To be innovative, films sometimes need to borrow from the greats. I defy you not to see the resemblance in story to "Rosemary's Baby," or the dread of "The Shining." It's not a cheap rip-off either. This is a movie that dives deep into the world of horror and leaves no stone unturned.

So often to 'genre' actors get overlooked, but there is not a chance that Toni Collette in a career-best role gives anything less than the year's best performance (yes, and it's only June). From playing a sympathetic mother in another supernatural flick ("The Sixth Sense") to the absolute mania she presents here, this is a role that is so dangerously close to farce at every moment, that it's almost impossible not to applaud. From deep sympathy to fear and then an almost possessive demonic persona (and oftentimes all in one continuous shot), this has got to be a defining performance in the horror genre. To mention her for Oscar consideration is an understatement - the award itself doesn't even begin to do justice to such an unforgettable part.

The 'horror' itself doesn't come from the cliched smash cuts or bursts of loud music. This is something more subtle, played out in slow shots and shadows... A face in a dark doorway that you aren't sure is there, but as the camera dwells you begin to understand that it's all the more real. I can't even explain the fear I felt when, say, a glass slides across the table, or a voice comes from Toni Collette that is not her own, or her son's face becomes disfigured in a moment of violence... This is a film that could easily be spoiled, but part of the scare comes from that sense of the unknown and what is around every single corner.

And the same for Aster, the writer/director who debuts with a scream and builds tension nearly to a breaking point. Wherever you think this film is going, you are wrong. The climactic scenes in this film are so unbelievably horrifying that I was jittering by the time the credits began to roll. So rare is is that a film can leave such an indelible mark, and I think I can count on one hand the number of theatrical films I have seen that made me full of such emotion by the end of it. Even now, hours later, I am venting my feelings with all lights on and the blanket pulled over my head. I can think of many reasons why this movie might strike fear into a viewer, and probably just as many might dismiss it as "weird." See it for yourself. So much of the film benefits from knowing little. What starts off as a slow family drama will ignite in front of your eyes into a movie you might never be able to shake. This is easily the best film of the year so far. Heck, this is the best horror movie we've seen this century.