Don't Worry, He Won't Get Far On Foot (*****)

There are areas where I could nitpick the latest film from Gus Van Sant, but ultimately I believe this is one his his most human films - something that should be seen despite potential shortcomings. As a whole, DON'T WORRY is about as wonderful as any movie I have seen this year. Some reviewers may dislike the editing, or the costumes, or this or that... Let me just say that there was not a single moment that didn't ring true.

The movie is centered around John Callahan (Joaquin Phoenix), a cartoonist who became disabled following a horrific car crash. He's partially to blame - Callahan is a raging alcoholic. We discover his binging habits early in the film as we analyze the day leading up to his accident. From tequila to beer and vodka to gin, it's a wonder he made it out alive at all. Following his slow process of acceptance, Callahan learns to use an electric wheelchair, he falls in love, and most importantly - he joins Alcoholics Anonymous and begins the journey to recovery.

There he meets his sponsor and mentor, Donnie (Jonah Hill). He is a meek, flamboyant type who nurtures a band of recovering alcoholics as a means to make up for his own failures in life. The film journeys down many different paths as we learn about Callahan's dark sense of humor as he discovers comics, and his time as a public speaker... At the heart of this film is a relationship between Donnie and John that is a joy to watch and so throughly engaging thanks to two of the year's best performances.

Joaquin Phoenix is on a roll, following another remarkable turn in "You Were Never Really Here" (review pending). Here he is yet again unrecognizable. Despite the film jumping back and forth in time, Phoenix has a way of capturing this character in so many stages... His low point during drunken benders shows a man hiding behind long hair and glasses and using the drink as a crutch. In the hospital, he carries himself so passively, and there are a few scenes in which his dialogue is barely whispered. It's a remarkable transformation, both as an actor and as a character progresses through healing. Similarly with Jonah Hill (who I would bet has a chance of winning a Supporting Actor Oscar this year). From the simple way he carries himself in meetings (weight rested casually on one leg) to a stunning final scene that sees both characters dive deep into some emotional stuff), this is surely one of our best actors working today.

I was not familiar with John Callahan prior to seeing the film, but it tackles his cartoons with an interesting approach involving multiple cutaways to crude animations. Van Sant isn't limited by the "expected" either, as the film is littered with various film techniques as old as film itself. Most films don't look like this, nor would many directors feel confident in presenting a story in such an 'out of the box' way. What can I say? It worked. It paints a picture of this man with broad strokes, and I can't help but commend it all the more for it's attempts. Even then, this is a film that features some of the best acting you're likely to see all year. You owe it to yourself to check it out. 

Mamma Mia! Here We Go Again (***1/2)

I couldn't help but smile at the sheer ridiculousness of MAMMA MIA 2, a sequel to a movie I found boring and tedious. All the same elements (mostly) are here, and in greater numbers. How could I enjoy a movie so blazenly full of cheese? I don't know what happened or when, but by the end credits, this silly little movie won me over in ways I wasn't expecting.

Whether or not you liked the original, it must be agreed upon that Meryl Streep's Donna lit up the screen. She was a trailblazing 70's disco mamma who slept around, drank, and partied with her daughter. What's not to love? This film quite shockingly finds our lead killed off somewhere in between film's 1 and 2. I would say that's a spoiler, but instead it seems to be more of a spoil. Why does this film show Meryl as though she is still part of the gang only for the film to quietly open with characters mourning her loss only a year ago. Problem 1: no Meryl Streep (be warned).

It is also evident that our screenwriters (including director Ol Parker) were working with limited resources - namely Abba songs - to create a captivating story with which to follow the remaining characters. What we are left with is a duel narrative in which Donna's daughter, Sophie (Amanda Seyfried) is working to create a hotel on that beautiful Greek island in memory of her mother - - and a flashback story in which a young Donna (the charming Lily James) first discovers the island after graduation and goes on a spree of romantic one night stands (with three distinct men, no less). Where the original had hits like "Gimme, Gimme, Gimme" and "Super Troopers," this film has memorable songs like... "When I Kissed the Teacher" and "I Have a Dream..." Problem 2: lack of Abba hits.

But why does it work? This is an old-timey musical along the lines of "Music Man" or "Singin In The Rain" in which these characters sing for an unseen audience and perform elaborate choreography out of nowhere. It's saccharine in a way that something like "La La Land" wouldn't dream. When it misses the mark such sequences can be dreadful - but I was surprised to see so many songs that landed. Call me a sucker, but it was certainly fun to watch.

What we lack in Streep-yness we are made up for by an elongated Cher cameo as Sophie's grandmother. Flying in on a helicopter for the film's climax (again, a prominent feature in the trailers, though the surprise would have been more satisfying had we not known her starring role) to sing "Fernando" to a lost lover. It's by-the-book corn - a laughable musical number that still had my audience cheering (including myself).

The cast is a laugh, including the clever choices to portray our heroes in flashback (including Jessica Keenan Wynn as a young Christine Baranski - who may well be her doppleganger). While many of the songs might not be recognizable, you can't help but smile at the overall effect. Sure, the film has awkward edits and transitions, and the Sophie character is about as boring a lead as I can remember, but sometimes movies can be fun by being predictable. We know where it's heading, we know that each new scene will have someone burst into song, we get it. In a time when movies are pushing new boundaries and exploring dark, eye-opening stories, a silly flick like Mamma Mia is a good reminder that movies can be there just to have a good time. I had a great time.

Eighth Grade (****)

I've long been a fan of first-time director Bo Burnham, from his awkward teen piano routines that originated on youtube to his stand up comedy specials on Netflix and his burst into mainstream. To say he is funny doesn't begin to cover his range. To say his debut with EIGHTH GRADE is marvelous is a sign that he is surely in the right medium.

It's the last week of eighth grade as we meet our heroine, Kayla, a shy albeit sweet single child living with her father. Her time is spent as most tweens spend their time: face down in their phones, scrolling through instagram and selecting the best snapchat filter for their selfies. It's a social world that is almost entirely cut off from reality. When Kayla tries to talk to the popular girl and her friend, there's not a single exchange of glances. At the dinner table, Kayla further uses earphones to block out her dorky dad and his "boring" conversations.

The film uses a web series created by Kayla to bookend her journey - a small self-help youtube series that seemingly has no followers and definitely no views. She stumbles through her scripted talking points like "how to be yourself" and "how to be brave," while in reality she awkwardly stumbles by, fantasizing about the hot boys and cool girls that always seem to evade her friend circle. The film doesn't follow a linear plot so much as it charts Kayla's goals: get a best friend, get a boyfriend, start over fresh in high school.

I have to wrack my brain to try and think of other films that deal with middle schoolers, and even harder for ones that do it with such delicacy and grace. For an older generation, this film might reinforce the notion that kids these days are lazy, unmotivated, but for younger people this might be a sort of revelatory glance at what our culture has become and how silly it can all seem. I missed a few chances to view this film with a Burnham Q&A afterwards, and having finally seen it, I might ask him how he came to settle on a female hero, what his grade school life was like, and whether or not he was a social misfit as is Kayla. There is so much truth in the writing and in the way these kids talk to each other. Bo Burnham is either a gifted creator or is attuned to the current generational trends... Or both.

I admire Burnham's use of music to drive the narrative. There are jarring musical cues that reminded me of Alexander Payne's "Election" in how the sound of a familiar theme can invoke laughter. The opening titles are a whirlwind of electronic sounds that are so disjointed and jarring but ultimately feel right when fitting with the themes. The film also uses great visual language and cinematography to capture the mood of isolation among a crowded school. The camera slowly follows Kayla as she roams the halls, framing her as though she is all alone in her head. I was also struck by a scene in the backseat of a car that uses shadow and the unseen so effectively that it became one of the more tense moments in any movie this year.

Perhaps the film doesn't 100% understand how Kayla's mind works - after all she is a shy girl and yet time and again is seen confronting bullies and standing up for herself. It's nice to see a young girl so sure, but I had a hard time believing that she was inspired solely by her own youtube channel. We can feel Bo Burnham's rough style as he is developing a voice behind the camera, but with a debut so strong, I can't help but wonder what greatness he has coming next.

Let me just end on a positive note by touching on the characters of Kayla's father (Josh Hamilton) and Gabe, a boy she meets at a pool party. The film climaxes with a jaw-dropping scene next to a firepit in which Kayla's dad explains all the ways he loves his daughter. Sure, it's beautiful, but another review I read aptly compared it to Michael Stuhlbarg's final monologue in "Call Me By Your Name" just last year. I couldn't help but see the power in both speeches, scene-stealers in every way and all in the quietest of moments. Tell me that this isn't one of the great fathers in recent movies. In such confusing times for a child, having a parent who does nothing but offer their love and support is all the more beautiful. It's the film's best scene by far. Then compare it to this boy Kayla meets, a dorky boy named Gabe. At first, he is an awkward character who challenges her to see who can hold their breath longer, but by the end there is a first date over chicken nuggets that I found as magical and charming and adorable as any adolescent romance I can imagine. For a girl so caught up in her head, here are two guys who clearly see her as one in a million. In the end, that's all it takes. This is a wonderful movie.

*On a side note, this movie is rated R for reasons unknown. To think that this rating will prevent middle schoolers from seeing this movie is unfortunate. 

Three Identical Strangers (****1/2)

It's the craziest story ever told: a boy reunites with his long-lost twin during his first year in college. The story breaks across east coast newspapers, and then another boy recognizes the two as himself. The third boy realizes he is a triplet. The strange story of Eddie, Robbie, and David is covered with remarkable skill in THREE IDENTICAL STRANGERS, a whimsical documentary that takes dramatic and sinister turns. It's one of the more thrilling movie-going experiences I have had all year.

If you watch the trailer (or read the intro), you get the premise. The movie begins with talking heads of the boys as they recount their unlikely rise to fame. From unknown to superstardom, the triplets begin to dress alike, do the television circuits, even cameo in a Madonna flick. We see their interactions in home videos, learn about it from their separate families... They describe their reunion as looking through a mirror. Not only did these boys look alike, but they had similar interests (gasp, they all smoked Marlboro's!).

It was about midway through the film when I began to realize the depths this filmmaker (director Tim Wardle) was willing to go. It turns out New York adoption agency that separated them had done so purposely, and indeed they did it to several identical sets of twins. Logically, the adoptive parents begin a hunt to the truth, and thus the real meat of the film comes to light. What begins as a human interest story quickly grows and expands into a tale of greater morality and the long-posed question: nature versus nurture.

It's hard to describe the film much further without bringing up key plot points - points that I enjoyed all the better for their surprise. Let me just tell you that there is an elderly psychologist in the film, a Swedish woman who was part of the team that separated the boys to begin with. It's all part of a larger study, but this woman's insight (her name I can't remember) into human nature hit me like a shock of lightning. She is one of the most captivating (perhaps evil? Perhaps not) characters in any movie this year. She gives a small speech near the end of the film that just about took my breath away.

This expanded take on the story of these triplets quickly became much more interesting to me than their actual story, although the film does continue to muse over their lives until the conclusion. There is a quick wrap-up in which the director hastily tries to settle that "nature/nurture" debate that felt a bit contrived, but otherwise, this is a fascinating movie that tumbles oh so deep down the rabbit hole. Like last year's "Tickled," this is a documentary that I didn't even know hit me until it was all done. While it's not perfect, sometimes truth is stranger than fiction. Here is living, breathing proof.

The Rider (*****)

THE RIDER is like some kind of poem. It's a beautiful ode to the often-forgotten about side of America. It's also as moving of a story as I can remember seeing in a while. While I didn't review it when I first saw it several months back, this is a movie that has been impossible to shake. I doubt there will be few films as powerful for the rest of the year.

Director Chloe Zhao is a Chinese-born filmmaker who only moved to America during her high school years. It's a stunning portrayal of the cowboy life, and her work is key to this film's ultimate power. The story follows Brady (Brady Jandreau) who is in recovery from a nasty accident following some bull riding. We learn he was quite a good rider, but a fall leaves him with a deep gash in his head and a persistent bout of seizures. He is told never to ride again. The story picks up in this lull - in which we learn more about Brady and his family (a sister with autism and a father who would rather his son not ride anymore). Rodeoing is a dangerous sport, and it's clear that Brady can not keep it up forever.

Brady is contrasted with his friend and mentor Lane. Lane isn't much older than Brady, but met disastrous results after a similar fall off a bull. He lives in a rehabilitation facility, wheelchair bound and barely able to speak. He communicates through rudimentary signs and moans. Perhaps Brady looks to Lane and sees what his future might become. But looking back at his accomplishments, I don't think Brady sees this life as having been wasted.

I found a lot of similarities to Darren Aronofsky's "The Wrestler," another story about lost dreams and a hero who returns to the ring again and again despite the immediate risk of harm. Where Mickey Rourke ultimately finds no purpose outside the ring, Brady is lucky to have friends, to have talent, and to still be alive. To make up for odd jobs, he works alongside horse wranglers to help tame wild steeds. Zhao films these scenes mostly in single shots, and only after the film did I learn that the actor himself is quite skilled. It's remarkable to watch a skinny, slight boy work such wonders on an animal so big and wild. These moments, coupled with some of the most beautiful tracking shots of horseback riding I have ever seen, help elevate the movie to something more profound.

And to continue on with Brady Blackburn, the actor... His father and sister star alongside in what I assume is their feature film debuts. Their chemistry is palpable and so much at the root of what makes this story so emotional. Where Brady is on screen in nearly every scene, never once do I get a sense that this is a man who is trying to act something that he is not. I don't want to use this film to praise another, but there is a closed-off sensibility to Brady that I recognized from Heath Ledger in "Brokeback Mountain." It's credit to Ledger, who managed to capture the deeper nature of a cowboy, and also credit to Blackburn, the actor who lives this life but still manages to bring a fully dramatic part to the role.

This film is so great in the quiet moments, like when Brady is breaking in these wild horses, or when he helps Lane relive the glory years on a makeshift horse. I expected this film to take a dark turn, and in fact up until the finale I was expecting something that would break my heart. It did, but for different reasons. Brady ultimately becomes this hero not because he pursues his dreams, but also realizes when to give up on those that are lost. Where Lane was a hero to him, so does he become this icon to a younger group of boys who want nothing more than to escape the poverty of their lives. Whether or not the rodeo is the best way to fulfill those desires isn't the point. For at least a couple seconds, it gives them something to hold on to.

Won't You Be My Neighbor? (*****)

WON'T YOU BE MY NEIGHBOR is about as good as documentaries get. Maybe it's more impactful having grown up watch Fred Rogers on PBS, but deep down I think there is something much more magical to this quiet, unique man. This is a movie that gets it all right - painting a portrait of a man who only wanted to help children, and through flaws and obstacles, succeeded in becoming one of America's great citizens.

Morgan Neville directs this stunner, a filmmaker who won the Oscar a few years back for another crowd pleaser "20 Feet From Stardom." Why Mr Rogers hasn't been a focus of Hollywood yet is understandable: here was an awkward man with a quiet voice who talked to children as equals. His television program "Mr Roger's Neighborhood" was at one time the longest-running show in TV history, and as one producer reminds us, it had everything going against it. Low production values, cheap sets, an unlikely star...

I was most amazed by the behind-the-scenes peeks we got of the show, and of Fred Rogers himself. There is a thoroughly captivating black and white interview with him sitting by a piano, describing his thought processes on making a show for children in the first place. He talks with such energy, passion for his beliefs... Who filmed it is a mystery, but it provides a candid look at a person we mostly know for zipping up sweaters and changing shoes. The movie mostly follows the chronological timeline of the show, from its first few weeks all the way to his retirement. We meet the show's crew, many of whom were beefy, tattooed men who seem to have no reason to exist in the same realm as Mr Rogers at all. And yet every interview reminds us of the same thing: here was a genuinely caring man.

The behind-the-scenes footage are a great insight, but the more beautiful moments come when we see Mr Rogers actually interacting with the children he came to meet. Rogers became somewhat of a celebrity on the east coast, and we see him having small meetings with a group of children and their parents, with mom and dad filming it all from the back row. We see how gently Fred spoke with these kids, how he used puppets to access their world. There are a lot of cynical people who might view this man as somewhat creepy, but there is such a genuine goodness that radiated from this man that it's hard not to fall in love with him all over again.

Go to this movie if only to be reminded that the world can always use a dose of kindness. In today's political and global climate of fear and divide, this is a wonderfully charming movie about the little things that make all the difference. Fred Rogers certainly didn't set out to change the world, and by the end when PBS called him back to film some segments regarding 9/11, it might even seem like he had given up hope altogether. But keep watching, and we see Mr Rogers give a commencement speech at a college where numerous adults approach him and explain what he meant to them as a child. Or when he filmed a segment with a disabled boy on the program and later reunited with him at the Emmy's 20 years later. It's a tearjerking experience to see someone so kind and so selfless. When I saw this movie in the first few weeks of its opening, the theater was sold out - audience members ranging from children to senior citizens. It was an electrifying experience to watch it with a crowd. Certainly Mr Rogers might have felt like he could have done more by the end of his life, but look at the generations his work has spanned and the joy he brought to so many. To call him inspiring would certainly be underselling his successes.

RBG (***1/2)

RBG isn't a particularly bad documentary, but nor is it some piece of revelatory cinema. Our filmmakers begin their story by broadcasting the comments of brash conservative pundits who call Ginsburg "evil" and "UnAmerican" and the like. From there, it's a movie that rarely lands on solid footing and instead relies on the emotional tug of a real human story to make its mark.

Yes, the movie begins by ominously using the words of RBG's critics who make her sound like some rabid curse upon the American Supreme Court. Hard cut to a frail, 84-year old woman in the gym, lifting weights and doing a set of pushups. We can begin to see her appeal. What makes Ruth Bader Ginsburg so intriguing is perhaps just that: her slight physical stature compared to her towering legal achievements over the course of her professional life. The documentary then begins to flash back - first to Ginsburg as a little girl, and then at Harvard and Columbia where she raised a daughter, cared for her sick husband, all while achieving remarkable grades among the top of her class.

What I like about this film is its portrayal of women in America, the challenges someone like Ginsburg faced as she became a lawyer, and once she was a successful professor, the legal issues that she worked to overcome for gender equality across the country. What I found most effective was the way our filmmakers isolated single legal cases that Ginsburg took on - many of which she argued before the Supreme Court (and before she herself became a member). Using audio clips of her orations as well as interviews from the plaintiffs, it's remarkable to see how far this country has come in such a short amount of time.

Of course, the film feels sloppy, unguided, and the finale is something that feels less like a conclusion and more like the remaining bits of film tacked on to the end. What is this film trying to tell us? Certainly that Ginsburg is now one of the more liberal Justices on the court in a time when Trumpism is threatening a more conservative array of laws for decades to come. That Ginsburg, albeit frail, is still working her hardest and has no foreseeable plans to retire. We meet her grandchildren, one of whom is a lawyer, and her children (who called their mother a bad cook and yet a firmly loving woman). We learn about her husband, a wise-cracking tax attorney from New York. Their relationship, while odd, is perfectly captured in a final note written from husband to wife and read by Ruth herself.

This would have been a more powerful film if the story focused entirely on the legal cases that Ginsburg took on. Documentaries have the potential to be just as engaging as any fiction film, as long as they are told in a captivating way. Use the brilliance of this woman's arguments and dissents in order to show us what kind of woman she really is. We don't need a lot of talking heads and clips of SNL sketches mocking RBG as a wise-cracking octogenarian. We get it. Millenials love her because she is progressive - the film doesn't need to show us countless glossy-eyed teens who eagerly wait to meet Ruth like she's a rockstar. It still must be said that Julie Cohen and Betsy West, our directors, certainly know how to make an effective feature. However, when compared to the other big summer documentary "Won't You Be My Neighbor?" that tackles its subject with much more gusto, it's not hard to see the brilliance of RBG the woman, but the short-comings of the craft.

Sicario: Day of the Soldado (**)

Look no further than my initial review of 2015's Sicario to see what a great film that was. The standards by which a sequel would be compared were so high, but it's not just lack of skill that makes this movie so forgettable - it also misses the mark altogether. It's rare for a follow-up film to surpass the original, but here is a movie that feels like a ploy for more money. Nothing more.

The film logically abandons Emily Blunt's wide-eyed character from the first film, the FBI agent who discovers the world of illegal drug trade at the Mexican border firsthand. In many ways her character served as the audience: asking questions, learning the film's mysteries alongside us, and ultimately discovering that there are no morals defined in black and white. Part of what made Sicario so amazing was Blunt's character and her descent into confusion, all the while a hitman named Alejandro (Benicio del Toro) goes from mystery to the center of our attention. That film didn't end with a pretty bow on top. It left the characters with no further standards as to what is right and wrong.

Enter the sequel, a movie that takes off from the first few minutes with several loud bangs and a new topic: terrorism. Where the first film focused on drugs, here we learn of a cartel's plot to smuggle Middle Eastern terrorists across the Mexican border (?) in order to enact war on the American people (??), or something like that. It's like we are watching a wet dream of Stephen Miller or Donald Trump. Not once do we see illegals crossing the border seeking refuge, but on numerous occasions do these people crossing the Rio Grande smuggle in explosives and weapons. Yikes.

The Secretary of State recruits Graver (Josh Brolin, who has been in a lot of films this year, all of his performances spectacular) to begin a war against a Mexican cartel in order to destroy them from the inside out? I don't know. Graver retrieves Alejandro for one more mission that involves kidnapping a crime lord's daughter and smuggling her back across to the United States... And then bring her back to Mexico... And then bring her back once more to the US for good measure. The film (written by Taylor Sheridan - he also wrote the original) attempts to capitalize on the multiple plots of the 2015 picture but comes out on the other side with an overall boring movie. Without Blunt, there are no characters we can identify with, and to be honest, all the characters here are incredibly drab.

Many praised the first film for it's realism, all of which goes out the window in a magical climax involving a bullet to the head and an apparent Lazarus moment that I did not buy for a second. The film concludes on a bleak note that leaves the audiences with no answers and apparently no questions, either. Remember the film's opening in which illegals cross our border and blow up buildings. There is no resolution to that plot, no insight into why Mexicans might flock to the US. It's a one-sided approach that is quickly ignored and covered up with layers of additional plot in an attempt to make the audience forget what was so repulsive about the film's opening. What can I say? No Denis Villeneuve. No Roger Deakins. No Jóhann Jóhannsson. Sure, this film has a modicum of craft, but it's art that could have been better spent on a better, more tense movie. If you see "Sicario," just pretend that it's a standalone film. "Soldado" doesn't deserve to shine it's predacessor's shoes.