OUR RATING SYSTEM
(*****) = do NOT miss! This one is as good as they come.
(****) = Fantastic - It's worth the price of the ticket (and then some).
(***) = Average - Nothing really bad, nothing really spectacular...
(**) = Perhaps you should find another movie to see.
(*) =
The bottom of the barrel. It would be hard to find something less entertaining or more unworthy of your time.



Maureen
(Mo) holds a PhD in marine geophysics (Dr. Maureen, to you) and works for the U.S. Geological Survey in Santa Cruz, CA. Maureen enjoys the outdoors (skiing, swimming, hiking, camping), dogs, cooking, singing, getting into (and out of) uncomfortable situations, and most importantly, watching quality movies. She makes a point of seeing as many Oscar-nominated films as possible each year and (correctly) predicting the winners. Her role on this blog is primarily as an advisor, collaborator, and "chime in"-er.

John (Jo) holds a Bachelor's Degree in Nursing, as well as a Bachelor of Arts degree in Film Studies. He currently lives in Chicago, Illinois and works as a nurse. His one true obsession in life is movies... The good, the bad, and everything in between. Other than that, he is busy caring for his cat, painting, writing, exploring Chicago, and debating on whether or not to worship Tilda Swinton as a deity. John is the master and commander and primary author of this blog.

Monday, October 22, 2018

Halloween (**)

HALLOWEEN was being touted as a great film by early reviews - a return to form for a series that has only seen poorly-made sequels to the infamous (and still suspenseful) 1978 classic. How great the anticipation was, and how great was the thud when I realized that this sequel/reboot/thing was just as bad as everything that came before it.

It was a curious but maybe inspired decision to pen this as a direct sequel to the original film. No longer is Laurie Strode (Jamie Lee Curtis) the estranged sister of Michael Myers. No more nieces and nephews and pagan cults and Tyra Banks and the like. This was a fresh start to continue a story that ended when a masked killer disappeared into the night after killing a slew of horny teens.

Strode has grown up tormented by the terror of that night when 3 of her friends were killed. She has built a life around defense, training, learning how to fire guns, and training her daughter (Judy Greer) and granddaughter to fight as well. Her house is a militarized base on the off chance that Myers returns to Haddonfield. Well what do you know...

The film begins on a sour note when we meet two podcasters journeying to the prison (or asylum) where Michael Myers is held. What might have been a suspenseful scene ala "Silence of the Lambs" as we journey deeper into this prison, we instead have an awkward scene in which the journalist presents Michael with his old mask and then the other prisoners in the vicinity begin to giggle with anticipation. I forgot, is the mask some sort of spiritual item that Michael has lost? Why is this scene filmed with such staccato editing and rousing music? (Or is it just a cheap halloween mask he stole from a store to conceal his identity all those years ago... Answer: it's just a mask.) The whole film begins to feel like that - something more profound than it really is. Even the opening credits recreate the famous pumpkin, only this time with very jarring CGI.

What do you know, Michael is due to be transported to another facility on October 30th, and the bus breaks down (if you are smart you might be able to figure out what happened to the driver). Off goes the killer with a stolen truck to wreak menace once again. His first series of kills are carried out in a long take (about 2-3 minutes maybe) where Myers wanders through trick-or-treaters and sneaks in back doors to violently slash single women at home. Notice how the scene plays out: with the Halloween theme blaring over the images. No longer do we have the quiet stalking of the original film - the director is basically forcing us to understand something: MICHAEL MYERS IS BACK!

It doesn't take a brain surgeon to figure out all the flaws in this film's ill-advised script. Not only is the connection between Laurie Strode and Michael Myers explored (the doctor at one point says something along the lines of "what is the bond you two share??"), but the whole motive of Myers is astoundingly backwards. In the first film ("the night HE came home"), we see Myers has camped out in his childhood home, only to begin stalking Laurie once she comes knocking on his door. That's it. Now 40 years later, we are supposed to believe that he still wants to kill the one that got away. Give me a break. Another item of fascination is how random these characters are, and in so many different places, yet Michael Myers always manages to walk his way to the right victims at any given moment (including stumbling upon Laurie Strode's granddaughter no less). What a small town!

While the original film lacked some levity, it made up for with tone - that ominous music, the drawn out pace... The success of John Carpenter's original is in the build up - the victims go about their night, unaware that their every move is being watched from the shadows. It's a stroke of genius for pacing. This sequel seems not to care. Kills are overly-violent, astonishingly frequent, and met with some of the most out of place humor I can think of. One kid (who is indeed funny with several one-liners that made me laugh) walks in on his babysitter being stabbed. Instead of screaming or running away, the little boy all but says "oh Hell no I picked the wrong night to go to bed early" complete with the Three Stooges *womp-womp-womp* sound as he runs off in a trail of smoke. Another egregious sequence shows two police officers discussing sandwiches and brownies. It's clear this scene was included for a laugh. How highly, highly humorous.

I will admit the film's final 30 minutes are what kept the movie afloat with 2 stars. It's a well-constructed sequence in which Laurie Strode hunt for Michael in her own home. As silly as the motives are and as unlikely as the story leading up to this moment, it's still effective in it's absence of music, dark shadows, and mounting tension at every turn. Still if you think about it, this is a similar story to "H20" in which Laurie Strode faces Michael Myers after all these years and becomes empowered to fight back. I'm going to say it - that film had a much better conclusion, too.

I want to keep venting, if only because this film promised so much and left me so thoroughly upset. I want to complain about the doctor, who makes the most unlikely decision midway through the film that nearly ruined it all if not for his sudden departure from the story. I want to complain about the countless teenage characters who have no purpose, no motivation, and no clear contribution to this film. I can't even remember Laurie Strode's granddaughter's name, or her boyfriend, or what her motivation was... No matter. Even John Carpenter's score (how great that the original director, writer, and composer returned to do the music?) feels phoned in and mostly rehash of the 1978 version. The film is meant to conclude on a moment of finality - but how dumb are these characters that they think Michael Myers is dead? He's been shot, burned, blown up, fell down a well, and burned some more... The screenwriter should have taken a couple notes from "Halloween H20"... Watch that film's conclusion to understand why.

Sunday, October 7, 2018

A Star Is Born (****)

There's the famous story how Judy Garland was due to give birth to her son on the night of the Academy Awards. Cameras were on standby as it was believed she was the frontrunner by a mile for her rendition of "A Star Is Born." Of course, Grace Kelly beat her out, and the camera crew surreptitiously snuck out to leave Garland in the dirt. There have now been 4 incarnations of the "Star is Born" story, and though Judy's version might be the most acclaimed, here comes an unexpected duo to give her a run for her money.

I remember when this project was first announced, Clint Eastwood would be the director and Beyonce would be the star. How much it has changed, but I can't imagine any cast reaching the success of Lady Gaga and Bradley Cooper (who writes and directs as well). The story is essentially the same dating all the way back to the 1937 original with Janet Gaynor and Fredric March. Our hero, Ally (Gaga) is a poor nobody with barely a dream of becoming a star. By chance, she has a run in with Jackson Maine (Cooper), a country/rock star who fans constantly stop in the streets. Their first encounter is detailed in the first 30 minutes of the film, one long night of talking, drinking, singing, and driving around the quiet LA streets. Jack is a charming drunk, Ally sees him as a man, not a celebrity. The two hit it off.

The movie's most successful sequence comes when Jack calls Ally to fly out to one of his concerts, and despite hesitation, she makes the journey to watch him from the side stage. He calls her to stage to perform an arrangement of a song that she concocted when they first met, and voila, she is instantly a star. It's Gaga's best moment as an actress - her fear of the stage, but her firm belief that all she needs is a break to make it big. As she sings the lyrics, she covers her face, she shies away from Cooper and his charm on the guitar. You forget that this is a woman who has sold out arenas for years. As she's singing this song ("The Shallows," one of many great songs in the movie), you can't help but see this character living and breathing.

If you've even heard a bit about the story, then you know the whole movie. The two fall in love, get married. Jack continues drinking himself to destruction. Of course Ally gets a record deal, and her music is overly-produced and shallow. She sings about how good a guy looks in his jeans, and dances on stage with choreographed backup performers in shiny tight outfits. It's somewhat of a meta-commentary for Gaga herself, though I would argue that her music up to now has been a bit more thoughtful and personal. It reminded me of many recent movies, mostly "La La Land" in the way we see a musician sell out in order to get ahead. At times it's a bit heavy-handed, and rolls easily into the classic melodrama that all the original incarnations embraced. Does the idea of artists selling out still work today? Maybe, but it's definitely not as potent the 4th time around.

As much as the acclaim is going to Lady Gaga for her breakout performance (her first leading role, and it reminds me of when Cher broke away from poop songs to star in "Silkwood" and "Moonstruck," for which she won an Oscar), I really think the star is Bradley Cooper. He's made the transition from comedy to drama, and with 3 Oscar nominations for acting (soon to be 4), it's hard not to see how greatly talented he is. I don't even mean his singing voice, which is very good, but the subtle way he transforms into this southern man on the verge of destruction. He adopts an accent that is meant to mimic his on-screen brother (played by Sam Elliott, who is very good in his few scenes), and he travels from extreme highs to the lowest of lows, oftentimes in the same scene. Could the Oscar go to anyone more deserving?

It's a well-made film that isn't for everyone but I'm sure a lot of people will enjoy. For a first-time director, you can feel Cooper giving it his all. There are certainly pitfalls in the story (the relationship between Bradley Cooper and Sam Elliott certainly feels washed over, barely there) and the long sequences without music made me wish we could cut back to Lady Gaga at the piano that much sooner. For what it is, this is still a showstopper that hits the ground running. The first 45 minutes up until we hear that first duet is magic. I only wish the rest of the film could have kept up the pace. Will Gaga become the critical darling and compete for an Oscar? I don't know. The track record for "A Star Is Born" winning Oscars isn't great, but this feels like one that could change all the rules.